Do you know what "nemesis" means?
A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent.

Which means that Guy Ritchie had better watch his arse after what he did to Sherlock Holmes.
( Wanderer, Mon 3 May 2010, 21:03, 24 replies)

oooh, I didn't read about that in the Sun...
Was it pervy?
( BrokenCoccyx doesn't mind if you grope on, Mon 3 May 2010, 21:29, closed)

I would classify it as obscene.
They pretty much dug up Holmes's corpse and bum raped it and wiped on Doyle's stories.

Irene Adler was NOT an action heroine. Mary Morstan did NOT throw wine in Holmes's face. Holmes was NOT known for his way with the ladies, but was an ascetic.

Bah.
( Wanderer, Mon 3 May 2010, 21:39, closed)

"Ascetic", is it?
1) a person who dedicates his or her life to a pursuit of contemplative ideals and practices extreme self-denial or self-mortification for religious reasons.

2) a person who leads an austerely simple life, esp. one who abstains from the normal pleasures of life or denies himself or herself material satisfaction.

3) (in the early Christian church) a monk; hermit.

Which one of those definitions of "ascetic" allows for a heavy-duty cocaine and morphine habit?
(gordonjcp, Mon 3 May 2010, 21:53, closed)

Doyle was the one who labeled him that.
I don't recall anything on morphine, but the cocaine habit was mentioned specifically as his way of dealing with boredom.
( Wanderer, Mon 3 May 2010, 22:03, closed)

That would be number 2.
Holmes doesn't accept more money than he needs to live for his work when he could easily command a fee of millions, he chooses his cases by their interest not by their ease or benefits, he does not socialise except for Watson and they seem to mainly socialise when working on a case, he lives alone in his flat without a partner, he is never seen to have a lover although he does fall in love.

Despite his cocaine addiction I think it's fair to say Holmes denies himself material satisfaction and abstains from the normal pleasures of life.
(Hippo_of_Doom, Tue 4 May 2010, 2:37, closed)

True that. Especially considering his "addiction" usually disappears the moment he gets a new case which interests him.
(Captain Skippy pooed in a bag and left it on your doorstep, Tue 4 May 2010, 6:56, closed)

Sounds like the behaviour of an aspie to me.
To be fair to Guy Ritchie, what kind of person other than someone with Asperger's Syndrome has the kind of eye for small details that Holmes displays? No one I know.
(Vlad the Inhaler forgot his password, Tue 4 May 2010, 8:04, closed)

Not so much
I actually thought the film did a rather nice job of getting some elements of the stories in there, though I was unconvinced by RDJ as Holmes. Not tall and thin enough.

On the Aspergers bit though, it's pretty clear in the stories/novel that Holmes is capable of deep emotion and also of expressing it in times of need (The Three Garridebs spring to mind) and that his way of thinking and logicalness have been imposed on himself and he has trained himself. It never sounded like Aspergers to me, more like a sort of mania, or alternatively some sort of trauma
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Tue 4 May 2010, 12:18, closed)

Yeah, and Watson seemed more in awe of Holmes and less flustered
although the books do mention his frustration. I never understood how evenly Watson took Holmes appearing after being dead for three years. I would have expected a few more epithets, or perhaps a nice jab to the nose like the movie.

Artistic license, I suppose.
( BrokenCoccyx doesn't mind if you grope on, Tue 4 May 2010, 15:59, closed)

It's a creative re-imagining of Sherlock Holmes
but it's the same sort of creative re-imagining that leaves you walking funny for a week and too tender to wipe your bottom properly.

I wouldn't mind hearing about a freak accident with a pneumatic drill and an 18" strap on with herpes creatively re-imagining Guy Ritchie.
(StapMyVitals wouldn't mind a bit of that, Tue 4 May 2010, 0:59, closed)

You have actually read the books, haven't you?
There's not that much creative re-imagining going on. A lot of it is all there to begin with.
(Captain Skippy pooed in a bag and left it on your doorstep, Tue 4 May 2010, 6:51, closed)

I was thinking that as well
Anyway, complaining that a filum isn't the same as the book shows a artistic immaturity in the complainer rather than a fault in the movie.
( Ring Of Fire A petty, drooling belming butthurt retard., Tue 4 May 2010, 7:39, closed)

Perhaps I was being a bit vehement
But my problem wasn't that it didn't slavishly follow the story and characters of the books, I'm aware two different media should do their own things, but for me it just didn't have the same sort of feel of what made the books enjoyable. I mean, it wasn't a disastrous film, it just wasn't what the title promised either.
(StapMyVitals wouldn't mind a bit of that, Tue 4 May 2010, 10:31, closed)

Hardly.
Imagine if they made a version of Romeo and Juliet where at the end they pulled out their madd ninja skillz and Mercutio joined them (because he secretly had on armor under his clothes and was waiting for the right moment to re-emerge) in an epic battle against those who opposed the star-crossed lovers, and maybe threw in a plot involving a strange looking bomb under the Vatican that they had to defuse. I tend to think that people who were familiar with the original would be rather disgusted by that.

The same applies to making Holmes into a fighting machine who plans out his blows about seven moves in advance and then pulls of a martial arts move to take down his opponent. Doyle said that he was skilled in boxing and made a reference to something called "baritsu" to explain how he defeated Moriarty at Reichenbach Falls (Doyle only brought Holmes back from the dead because of public outcry, so he had to come up with something), but otherwise he never uses his fists.

I still say that the resulting film was crap. Even taken on its own it was irritating to watch.
( Wanderer, Tue 4 May 2010, 16:12, closed)

This.
Sherlock Holmes is meant to be a bit mad and live on the fringes of society. He wears fucking dearstalker in the middle of a city for God's sake; that's not the behaviour of someone who is taken into the bosom of polite society. He was meant to be a rogue and a bit of a scoundrel. If he were the kind of erudite gentleman that actors usually portray him as, he'd be a police officer not a private detective. Private detective has never been what you'd call a respectable profession in any era.
(Vlad the Inhaler forgot his password, Tue 4 May 2010, 8:01, closed)

Did you know
the deerstalker was never explicitly mentioned in the stories? It was just an illustrator later decided that might be the sort of hat he wears - I don't mean that to sound condescending, I just found it interesting when I found out.
(StapMyVitals wouldn't mind a bit of that, Tue 4 May 2010, 10:39, closed)

What?
You mean making the first ever Sherlock Holmes movie that protrays Sherlock Holmes the way Sir Arthur Conan Doyle intended him to be? What a scum bag.
(Vlad the Inhaler forgot his password, Tue 4 May 2010, 7:59, closed)

It's nothing like the original.
I've read all of the original stories. So far the Jeremy Brett version is the only one to really capture the essence of Doyle's writings. Ritchie took existing characters and changed them drastically.

Had he made all new characters for Holmes and Watson to interact with it would have been a far better movie than this steaming pile.
( Wanderer, Tue 4 May 2010, 12:25, closed)

I agree
that they should have left the original characters (Mary Morstan, Irene Adler etc) alone, but apart from that, and the fact there was too much action I really rather liked Jude Law as Watson (and I really dislike Jude Law) and I reckon that if they make a sequel and manage to cut down on the pointless romance, it could be rather good
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Tue 4 May 2010, 12:33, closed)

^ THIS.
Brett was wonderful. There are some books and films/telly adaptions that really are enjoyable and true as each other, even if in different ways, and the adaption with and portrayal of Holmes by Brett was fantastic.

This movie was NOT the adaption truest to Doyle's stories! Not by any means! It was an alright film, but by god it seemed pointless! Shooting for the stars and falling short by miles behind a telly adaption.
( vix0r was not Matthew on, Tue 4 May 2010, 16:17, closed)

Maybe you are Guy Ritchie's nemesis...
Are you the one who set him up with Madonna? If so, this is his payback.
(The Kwyjibo A big, dumb, balding North American ape., Tue 4 May 2010, 12:10, closed)

I'll say.

( Wanderer, Tue 4 May 2010, 16:45, closed)

I FEEL LIKE CHICKEN TONIGHT, LIKE CHICKEN TONIGHT

( Richard Shitheels, Wed 5 May 2010, 19:04, closed)

Snape kills Dumbledore!

( BrokenCoccyx doesn't mind if you grope on, Tue 4 May 2010, 15:47, closed)