SHERLOCK HOLMES (2009) - Guy Ritchie

Sherlock Holmes is one of the world’s most famous fictional characters. He’s iconic and has been the subject of many films. But since it’s the 21st century, the powers that be in Hollywood have decided that the famous detective deserves a reimagining. And who better to do this then Guy Ritchie, director of such cinematic greats as the remake of Swept Away and Revolver? Who better? Probably a lot of people. Anyway, Sherlock Holmes is Holmes for the MTV generation.

The film opens with Dr. John Watson and the London Police racing through the streets of London, on their way to some operation. They’re loading weapons, looking focused and ready to kick ass. On the roofs above, like some sort of X-Man, Sherlock Holmes runs, leaps and rolls his way towards the same goal. They’re on their way to break up some satanic ritual and human sacrifice conducted by the mysterious Lord Blackwood. And they succeed. Holmes retreats into 221B Baker Street and isn’t heard from for months. The day before his execution, Blackwood requests Holmes’ presence, during which he warns Holmes that the game is most definitely not over. Blackwood is then executed. But it would seem Blackwood’s warning is real as it appears that he escapes his own grave. So Holmes and Watson leap onto the case and try and stop Blackwood’s nefarious scheme.

Holmes is an interesting character. In Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s stories, he’s a brilliant investigator who constantly outwits not only his nemeses, but also the police. I’ll admit, I don’t have a great insight into the character. So Guy Ritchie’s film could very well be the greatest depiction of the character put to screen. But approaching it as just a stand-alone film... it’s not very good. There are great elements in the film. The production design is brilliant. It’s not perfect. The team seems to have hummed and hawed over whether the film should be steampunk or not, and decided it shouldn’t. And this is a shame. There are steampunk elements to it, but not enough. Robert Downey Junior and Jude Law have a great report in the film, and certainly seem to be having a good time.



And yet despite these things, the film falls flat. It’s packed full of stylistic camera shots and bits of editing, and while I’m a huge fan of really different cinematography and direction, I found the constant slow-mo and sped up footage incredibly annoying. The style is definitely Guy Ritchie’s, but I don’t think it works in the context of the film and events, and really bogs down the film. And with a story that really doesn’t resonate, this is a real problem for the film. I just didn’t care what was going to happen. It’s a strange case (heh), because some of the choices, I liked. The dirtiness of old London, the violence that didn’t feel subdued, the sense of history surrounding the city, all great. And yet something was missing. And once again, this missing element boils down to poor writing when it came to the story.

Robert Downey Junior has been doing some great work recently. He was incredibly entertaining in Tropic Thunder, and was perfectly cast as Tony Stark in Iron Man. And yet, for some reason, he feels miscast in Sherlock Holmes. It wasn’t a terrible choice. Downey’s definitely got the cockiness they were going for in the character, but again, something felt off. Maybe it’s because they made Holmes too much of a rogue, I’m not sure. But there is something not right about this Holmes.
Jude Law is perfectly fine playing Watson. In fact, the choices they made for that character certainly felt more right. Watson is a war veteran, and carries the injuries associated with that. But it also makes him tough as nails. I’m not sure if this is an accurate depiction of the character, but next to the Holmes of this film, it did feel right. Mark Strong’s Lord Blackwood, however, was not a well-written character. Strong’s a great actor, but he’s all sneers and bellowing vitriol here. There is absolutely no depth to his character. And as I’ve said before, a hero is only as good as the villain he’s up against.



Overall, Sherlock Holmes misses more times than it hits. It’s not awful. And certainly isn’t the worst film Guy Ritchie has ever directed. But it’s a great disappointment. In bringing the character into the 21st century, it feels like the crew spent far too much time concentrating on making the film look modern, without giving him a modern context and decent story to justify the modern direction. It’ll keep you mildly entertained for 2 hours, but it’s not in any way a great film. Maybe the teasing introduction of Professor Moriarty will provide a decent antagonist for Holmes’ next adventure. We’ll have to see.

6/10

BODY OF LIES (2008) - Ridley Scott

Ridley Scott was once, and still is to some respect, one of the greatest directors working in the industry. In the seventies and eighties, he created some of cinema’s most iconic worlds and directed some classic films. They were few and far between, but when a Ridley Scott film arrived in the cinemas, people sat up and paid attention. However, in recent times, Scott’s output hasn’t really matched his earlier work. In between some pretty decent films (Black Hawk Down, American Gangster), Scott’s films just weren’t didn’t seem to live up to his status. The films became more frequent, but the quality was up and down. Body Of Lies, released this month unfortunately follows this trend.

Roger Ferris is a CIA agent stationed in Iraq. While on assignment, Ferris uncovers evidence linking terrorist leader Al-Saleem with a series of bombings in London. Ferris devises a plan to infiltrate Al-Saleem’s network using contacts under his superior Ed Hoffman, stationed in CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, and Jordanian Chief of Security, Hani Salaam. However, as Ferris gets drawn into the case, he finds his loyalties divided, and his life at risk. Things go from bad to worse as Ferris finds himself falling in love with Iranian nurse Aisha and his case puts her too at risk.



A thick and politically-charged plot, two stellar leads in Leonardo Di Caprio and Russell Crowe, and director Ridley Scott at the helm, Body Of Lies has all the elements for something great. So why does the film feel totally underwhelming? Firstly, Ridley Scott is a master of creating worlds. Alien and Blade Runner are so visually unique and have rarely been matched in terms of style and production. And yet, here in Body Of Lies, it feels like the Ridley Scott who created these worlds is nowhere to be seen. Sure, it’s a slick movie. But films with high production values and a talented director are always going to be slick. Comes with the freedom of cash. There’s nothing outstanding about the film and even the action scenes, which are few and far between aren’t that outstanding.

The performances are rock solid. You can’t really fault them. DiCaprio separates himself even more from the teen icon status he achieved with the truly awful Titanic. Despite his youthful looks, DiCaprio can pull badass off, and he does so here. Russell Crowe does that thing he does every so often to get into a different, non-butch role. He piles on weight. Fat Crowe is just as good as trim Crowe, so it baffles why he feels this is necessary. His Ed Hoffman is a pretty unlikable guy. And I suppose if Crowe feels the belly helped him get into this role, so be it. But the stand out performance is by Mark Strong as Hani Salaam. Strong’s been making quite a name for himself recently, and he excels here. His Salaam is slick and charismatic. But you know underneath his slick exterior brews a creature of real danger. We rarely see this side of him, but we don’t need to. Strong makes sure we know how dangerous a guy he is without needing to resort to stereotypical evil twitches.



The story in Body Of Lies is pretty intricate. There’s a lot going on, and plenty to keep your brain ticking over. Yet at the same time, it’s nothing outstanding. If you took out the stars, and took away Scott’s slick direction, it’d just be a pretty standard thriller. It just feels like an average film with really big names attached. And a huge let-down is the ending. The film seemed to be going in a bold direction, setting up something quite shocking. But at the last moment, it took a u-turn, letting what had just happened down and confusing plot elements that had taken place earlier in the film.

It’s not a terrible film, but I do feel Body Of Lies could have been a lot more. Take out the stars and there wouldn’t be much. Ridley Scott’s recent output hasn’t been groundbreaking, and this film certainly doesn’t buck the trend. Nothing terrible, but nothing particularly special either. Letter to Ridley Scott’s parents- Ridley must do better apply himself more.


6/10

ROCKNROLLA (2008) - Guy Ritchie

Guy Ritchie's Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrells kicked off the sub-genre of London gangster films. Films about geezas, right royal hard bastards. After the success of the film, innumerable imitations, rip-offs and Ritchie's own follow-up, Snatch, the genre got tired and dull. Ritchie himself tried his hand at something different, and made two films so poorly received that people began to wonder if Ritchie had actually lost his mind. He returns to the genre he's most comfortable with in the film RocknRolla, released this week.

RocknRolla follows the same old formula as Ritchie's other gangster films. We have an artifact of some sort. This time, instead of a pair of shotguns or a diamond, it's a painting. The artifact is in the hands of a 'godfather' of a London gang, Lenny Cole played by Tom Wilkinson. The painting is knicked and a whole slew of gangsters, cheekie chappies, hard-nuts and whatever other description you want to use for these character are charged with getting it back before the claret flows. Cole's stepson, rocker, junkie, and suspected dead-man Johnny Quid has stolen the painting and everyone must get use their contacts on the streets, fists and guns to return the painting to Cole so he can complete a deal he's making with a Russian football-club-owning billionaire.



If you've seen Lock, Stock and Snatch, then you've pretty much seen RocknRolla. Which is actually unfair to the previous two films, because they were actually pretty entertaining. RocknRolla is more of the same old, same old. There's very little subtlety, character development or story. There's a voice-over which just seems to be a cop-out in terms of letting the story tell itself, and the snazzy camera flourishes just distract from what is a simplistic and brainless plot. Instead of developing characters, Ritchie just gives people hats and kooky names which are never explained and never seem to describe the characters they're attached to.

The acting isn't really up to much either. Tom Wilkinson is awful, and I do mean awful as Lenny Cole. Wilkinson seems to have overdosed on The Long Good Friday and is regurgitating Bob Hoskins' role from that film. Gerard Butler breezes through proceedings with a wry smile. But it doesn't take much to do that. The rest of the cast is filled with a couple of familiar British faces, two small roles for Jeremy Piven and Chris Bridges playing the token Americans, and Thandie Newton who adds nothing to the proceeding other than a female face. The only really notable performance is from Toby Kebbell as Johnny Quid. But it's not really the fault of the actors that none of them have much to do. The film is just written that way. I wouldn't be surprised if the character description in the screenplay consisted of 'he wears a trilby hat' or 'he has a Scottish accent.'



1999 called and it wants RocknRolla back. The film is part of a sub-genre that has long ago run out of steam. It has elements that relate to London today. Especially the addition of a Russian billionaire who owns a football club. It's that kind of ham-fisted subtlety that is all over RocknRolla. It's neither original nor innovative. Just a step-back in Guy Ritchie's career. It seems that he cant even make a decent version of a genre piece he once was the poster-boy for. It's not rubbish. But it's not particularly good. And it feels a helluva lot longer than 114 minutes. I weep for Sherlock Holmes.*

*Guy Ritchie's "Awight Guvna', It's Right Royal Sherlock Holmes" coming 2010.


5/10