Elementary my dear

I went to see Sherlock Holmes yesterday. Being a huge Conan-Doyle fan, having read each and every one of his published works and quite a few of the "continuations" of Sherlock Holmes, I fully expected it to be a typical Hollywood massacre (think The Two Towers.) However, I was pleasantly surprised. Was it as faithful to the original works as Jeremy Brett's "Holmes" series of the late 80s-early 90s? No. Was it still a fun movie that was not completely unfaithful to the spirit of Holmes? Yes.

Without spoiling too much, the movie started with severe occult content. I myself was not bothered by the occult content (I've been to Wiccan and Luciferian Covens for crying out loud) but rather that it was present in Holmes. Holmes stories do NOT have the occult in them. However, this concern was addressed wonderfully at the end of the movie with a typical Holmesian explanation-complicated and far fetched, but wonderfully conclusive. Every single bit of "magic" is nicely addressed and attributed to science. A couple of the scientific devices border on Steam Punk, but not badly enough to draw a sneer.

Also impressive to me was the characterization of Holmes himself. Unlike any other portrayal except Jeremy Brett, Robert Downey Jr. pulls of the Holmes of the books and not of the movies-an ass. Holmes is completely self-centered ass. While his Cocaine addiction is not addressed in this movie (that would be *gasp* a negative role model) he is still shown abusing substances in typical Holmes fashion. His fighting skill is also shown in a light that no Holmes adaptation has done justice to yet. In the books, Holmes lived a rockstar lifestyle, drugs, fights, and women only for sex. The latter is not blatantly addressed, but there are a few nods to it. His fighting style brings out the Wing Chun Kung Fu that Downey practices (the same style I practice) as well as some good old bar room brawling. The lively Dubliners' "Rocky Road to Dublin" accompanies the fight scene. Holmes assinine tendencies are demonstrated quite nicely, showing his almost homophobic relationship with Watson, unable to show affection, and unable to cope with the idea of Watson having a relationship with anyone else. One criticism I have of this is its resemblance to House. True enough House is based on Holmes, and the relationship of House to Wilson is based off of Holmes to Watson, but the particular relationship of House to Wilson is reflected too clearly in Holmes to Watson. Yes House comes from Holmes, but it is still unique enough and "Sherlock Holmes" seems to be drawing some inspiration from it.

My only other major complaint is Irene Addler's presence. Irene Addler in Conan Doyle appeared only once, and was not a criminal, but rather a simple woman trying to undo a mess she had found herself in. She was a woman seeking marriage, not a criminal. The re-imagining her for the film, while it works in the plot of the film, annoys the heck out of those of us who enjoy the original Conan Doyle. However, at least the "faux-Adler" is used to good effect. The surprise injection of Professor Moriarty was enough to shock even me, simply because I would have assumed Moriarty long dead by the time of this movie's setting, yet seemingly he and Holmes have not met. Moriarty is not seen fully, only a faceless figure and pair of hands, but still enough to amuse us.

So "Sherlock Holmes" is not true Conan Doyle. Oh, it amuses, but it lacks the real meat of the real thing. However, for anyone looking to see an amusing detective flick, or even Conan Doyle fans who wish to see a well-done characterization of Holmes, the movie will entertain, and after all, that is the primary purpose of movies. If you wish to see more accurate representations of Conan Doyle's characters, I'd advise looking up Jeremy Brett's "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" and the subsequent series "The Return of Sherlock Holmes." If you want a good movie, just go to the theater.