A Writer's Perspective

My pal and fellow JU Dolphin Harley Ferris (a published poet and all-around knowledge-aficionado) recently shared his thoughts about the new Sherlock Holmes movie on Facebook. Because he is a friend and I love him to death, I'm stealing it and posting it here to share his always insightful perspective. I present Harley Ferris in "Holmes, Sweet Holmes":

...or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Film

I approached the new Sherlock Holmes film with trepidation. Gabi and I love the Holmes mythos. Admittedly, I’ve only read a few of the actual stories, so most of our love comes from the teleplays and movies. Basil Rathbone is brilliant, Jeremy Brett is inspired, Matt Frewer is, well, Max Headroom, unfortunately, and will always be so. Still, we love Robert Downey, Jr., and I was eager to see what he would do. The main concern I had from the previews was that Holmes seemed emotional, irrational, and most-grievously, dependent on Watson for rescuing. So last night, we plunked down our money and gave it a go.

The first thing that struck me was just how enjoyable it was. If you’ve seen other Guy Ritchie movies—even that BMW commercial with Clive Owen and Madonna—you know he stylizes everything he does with a certain flair, and the Holmes movie was no different. The fight scenes were reminiscent of Brad Pitt’s boxing matches in Snatch, and Ritchie actually used the technique to illumine the character of Holmes. The set design was terrific, revealing the dirty sky and filthy back streets of turn-of-the-century London. Costuming seemed to take a few liberties, though not so much as the new BBC Robin Hood (sorry, it’s not Robin of the Hoodie).

As to the character of Holmes, specifically regarding his weaknesses, the trailers skew his frailty a bit. From the previews, I was expecting a womanizing, depraved, hotheaded Holmes that needed Watson’s calm, calculating caretaking to prevail. This is hardly the case. I would daresay Jude Law is my favorite Watson. He is certainly the most capable partner to Holmes, and partner he is. Far from the bumbling idiot Watson of Nigel Bruce, Law is more than the oft-portrayed assistant, nearly matching Holmes step for step and proving invaluable more than once. Additionally, rather than a token heroin addiction, Downey shows a Holmes that descends into near-madness when his mind is not wrapped around a case, depicted by a range of symptoms. But most surprisingly, mainly because he actually pulls it off, Downey delivers the most human Holmes to date, in my opinion.

When detective stories first appeared, the reader sat back and watched Sherlock Holmes, Father Brown, Ellery Queen or Hercule Poirot solve crimes with dazzling intellect, boundless knowledge and sly intuition. Over time, however, crimesolvers became less and less the unmatched wit and the reader/audience was invited into the mystery to participate in hunting down the villain. My opinion is that as culture changes, stories evolve, and the heroes of the past adapt to accommodate contemporary society. How, then, does one present the loved character of Sherlock Holmes in a way that not only delights but also endears? I think Ritchie & Co. pull it off nicely by keeping Holmes a step ahead of the audience, just barely in front of the baddies, coming out on top at the end of day. He is smart, strong and funny, but fallible. Watson is helpful, stoic, courageous, yet endearing. The movie’s execution is masterful, and the last ten minutes set up Sherlock Holmes 2 without any question. Will purists add it to the canon? Never. Will it revive the other incarnations of Holmes to young moviegoers? Possibly. Will you enjoy it? Probably. Will it be on my shelf when the DVD hits stores? Elementary.