Sherlock Holmes: Holmes for the Holiday

Sherlock Holmes... you know, for such a good movie, a director like Guy Ritchie seems like an unlikely suspect, his last movie being RocknRolla which earned a less than impressive $5.7 million. Never having even directed a movie that made much more than $30 million, you would expect his next venture to,putting it lightly, suck. Not so fast. Despite Avatar's undisputed prowess over the action-hungry box office, Sherlock Holmes managed to earn a quite respectable $207.9 million. Why is that? Elementary, my dear Watson: it's just plain good.

From the first time I saw the trailer for Sherlock Holmes in the summer, I patiently waited for it to hit theaters. Ignoring the wake Avatar had left behind, I ventured to try to see it opening night, which just happened to be Christmas. Almost needless to say, I was unsuccessful, but the first chance I got to see Sherlock Holmes, I fell in love. This being the second time I saw it, I was no less impressed, and quite possibly more intrigued than the first time.

Guy Richie's filming style is intuitive and precise, without seeming abstract or forced. This is what millions of filmmakers around the world are trying in vain to attain: shooting from the waist, and hitting dead center. What makes this movie stand out is his unique perspective, the way he frames characters, creates moods, and provokes emotions. If every director in the world could direct like Richie did, every movie in the world would be worth seeing.

However, even with Guy Richie's genius at work, it was Hans Zimmer's masterful score. No amount of angles, lighting, or performance could match the effect a score as wonderful as this one holds over this movie. Zimmer himself has managed to attain a remarkable variety in his works. Although he was made famous in his work in Gladiator, Pirates of the Caribbean, Perl Harbor, and the Batman franchise, his extensive resume includes movies such as Shark Tale, Frost/Nixon, The Simpsons Movie, Kung Fu Panda, and It's Complicated, and that's not to mention his part in the influential London band, The Buggles. A master at his craft, Zimmer creates a world so vivid, that visual information hardly needs to be seen in order to understand what is happening.

Ok, it's time for me to bash the bad stuff: why detective books such as Sherlock Holmes (which, by the way, the movie didn't adhere to whatsoever) are so much fun, is because the reader gets to try to solve the mystery. it's like a puzzle that is gradually being solved, and the viewer can realize what it's a picture of before all the pieces are in place. This movie didn't allow the audience even a sporting chance to figure out the mystery. Although the more major twists and plots could be anticipated, no logic could possibly be involved. Most of the various mysteries involved chemicals and specialized substances that are far outside of the spectrum of common knowledge, and while the grand scheme of things could be guessed at, no reason was involved whatsoever.

The bad news: while Richie, Downey, and Zimmer deliver an almost perfect movie, I can't help but wonder if it was a lucky stab into the dark, or skill on all three accounts. The good news: we can expect a sequel sometime in 2011. You should go see it as soon as it comes out. I'll see you there.

Oh, and one more thing: am I the only person that thinks Mark Strong (Lord Blackwood) looks strikingly like Steve Carell?