![]() The storyline simply lacks depth or any sense of urgency. ![]() Unfortunately, this villainous improvement falls by the wayside when the plot (sort of) comes into focus. I look forward to seeing him again in a more substantial capacity later on, assuming he is the villain in subsequent entries. At one point, during a torture scene, we get to see how especially evil his character can be. Throughout the film, we do get a clear sense of his intellect and his desire to match wits with Sherlock. As an antagonist with clearer motivations, Moriarty becomes a mostly superior villain to Lord Blackwood from Sherlock Holmes. The ending is quite cute and fun, and even manages to reference a bit from the first part of the film that wasn’t quite as amusing the first time around – but Ritchie takes his time getting there.Īnd then there’s Professor Moriarty. It is in these last few scenes that I started to have faith that RDJ’s Holmes series was not dead in the water, but it also helped me better assess why the first hour or so was so off. It is not until the last 10-20 minutes of the movie that it even begins to echo the whimsy of the first film. Movie goers will likely make the inevitable comparisons to the first Sherlock, which unfortunately further detracts from A Game of Shadows. In short, although I have nothing against Guy Ritchie per se as a director, the studio and the producers of the film should really examine their choices on the next go-round and see if he is still the best fit for the franchise. While some scenes were truly beautiful in spite of this, the falling scene being the most obvious example, it is upsetting to imagine what might have come from the director had he thought outside the box. What is almost more frustrating is that throughout the movie, there were plenty of opportunities for really amazing artistic choices that Ritchie didn’t seem to want to take. His propensity for sticking this time-dilation gimmick into every action scene begins to wear thin on the audience before the grand finale even starts, which is a shame because the finale is when that particular technique feels most appropriate. When it comes to big set-piece action sequences, he’s the man to do it in style – but when it comes down to it, the original Sherlock Holmes stories were about the character and the mystery, and not about wood splintering in impossibly slow motion. The primary issue with the direction is that Ritchie is a one-note pony. The first Sherlock was a fun film that benefited from Ritchie’s knack for witty banter and big explosions, but if the series is to succeed, we really need a director to step in who is willing to emphasize the other aspects of the Sherlock universe. First and foremost, I think it is safe to say that Guy Ritchie should probably find some other franchise to work on. ![]() Unfortunately, not even the fondness I have for the chemistry between the leads can keep the sequel film, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, from succumbing to its most glaring issues. When the sequel was announced and the issues I had with the first film were purportedly to be fixed (most notably the meandering plotline) I was quite excited to see Law and Downey, Jr. While it was admittedly not a terribly faithful adaptation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s novels, I thought the interplay between Watson and Sherlock was quite fun and I enjoyed their interpretations of the characters. Sure, the movie suffered from a lack of plot direction and overall muddled storyline, but I very much enjoyed the style of the film. I was very excited coming out of the movie theater when I saw the first Sherlock Holmes starring the nearly-always likable Robert Downey, Jr.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |