amethystwings32

(2013-05-21 01:09:38)

best rendition ever

I saw this movie in the theater, and it was worth it ! With all of theaction scenes, which made it more entertaining. And a total creativetwist to the classic Detective suspense stories. Not to mention thatwas the best looking , Watson and Holmes duo. Which made it moreappealing to us women viewers! Jude Law and Robert Downey Jr. Were theperfect team as the Doctor and Detetctive their chemistry was superb! Iloved it and wouldn't mind watching it again. This is my daughter'stake about this movie.I have read every story that, Sir Aurther ColinDoyle;has ever written. And I have seen every movie and TV version ofhis work. But never like this,the movie was even better than,any of theolder movies.I really liked this one a lot,I also thought that the twomen that did this movie did work together very well. I too could watchthis movie more than once.

sarkkjo

(2013-05-20 12:43:29)

Disapointmet to the max

ADHD, ADHD & ADHD. This might be be a very nice movie to the recentgeneration, but a huge disappointment to the friends of Sir ArthurConan Doyle. Lot's of action but non of the brilliant thoughts of Sir ACD. Only action and non of the genius plots. The previous part was an OKexperience, but this was made on the terms of younger audience. So if you're expecting some of the mind thrilling moves of the TRUESherlock Holmes, please don't expect too much. It was OK to watch, butnot OK to enjoy.! Please be drunk before watching, it surely helps...

Prince AJB

(2013-05-19 18:34:32)

Honeymoon in Brighton? Not today.

So what's been happening lately?There has been a series of bombings and assassinations across Europeand if these activities continue, war will erupt and Europe will becomea field of casualties and devastation. And our favorite detectiveSherlock Holmes suspects Professor James Moriarty as the mastermindbehind all these events. Meanwhile, amidst the bombings and destruction which are ravagingEurope, Sherlock Holmes's partner, Dr. John Watson is finally gettingmarried with his fiancГѓВ©e Mary. After being engaged in the first film,they are finally getting married and a short funny wedding scene hasbeen reserved in the film. They're even going for a honeymoon inBrighton. Or they were supposed to go for a honeymoon. The train the couple boarded was filled with Moriarty's henchmen and aloud, explosive battle ensues eliminating any hopes of an upcominghoneymoon. Even though Watson had been planning to retire fromadventuring with Holmes after his wedding, he reluctantly becomesHolmes's partner one more time while his wife is taken care of byHolmes's brother, Mycroft. And the duo will receive an additionalmember to form a trio: the mysterious gypsy Madam Simza. Together, theytry to stop Moriarty from continuing his cruel schemes and Holmeslearns about Moriarty's plan to start a war in which he will personallybenefit from.There are lots of action scenes that keep the film exciting and keepthe film running in a constant, fast pace. The action sequences arelouder, much more explosive, and much more energetic than the onespresent in the predecessor. They are very loud, operatic, andexuberant. But some of the battle sequences are surprisingly quiet,such as a simple chess game held between Holmes and Moriarty. While youthink a chess game would be boring, Guy Ritchie filmed it as if it wasa grand battle. The sounds, the atmosphere, and the dialog adds anotherlayer of tension and makes the chess game scene more atmospheric.Not only the action scenes, but the humor here is outstanding. Most ofthe jokes and humor come from the titular character himself. Hisbizarre behavior, regardless of his intelligence add a layer of comedyto the film. His trademark hobby, disguising into several unexpectedpeople is just purely entertaining. If it weren't for Robert DowneyJr., the humor here would have collapsed and become a disaster.And of course, the acting and performances by the cast were brilliantand outstanding. Robert Downey Jr. is just brilliant in portraying thetitular detective. He is admirable and he is really a man of talent.Don't worry, Jude Law also plays the role of Dr. John Watson perfectly.Together, they form an excellent chemistry. Also worth mentioning isNoomi Rapace as the mysterious gypsy Madam Simza, who not too long agoplayed the role of Lisbeth Salander in the original version of "TheGirl With the Dragon Tattoo". Stephen Fry plays the role of MycroftHolmes to perfection.I'd like to take some time discussing the character of Professor JamesMoriarty. He is a very compelling villain. His professional life as acriminal mastermind is hidden beneath his profession as a professor inthe University of Cambridge. He is much more intelligent, much morecunning, and much deadlier than Lord Blackwood of the previous film.While Holmes seems to be a detective that can do no wrong in theprevious film, here, he will make mistakes. Here, he will feel pain.Moriarty is just a very powerful villain and a very suitable opponentfor Holmes. (And remember the slow-motion scenes where Holmeselaborates his fighting strategies in his mind, Moriarty can do ittoo.) And to further compliment this is the performance of JaredHarris. While he may not look suitable as an antagonist, he actuallymakes a perfect choice. However, the film uses too much slow-mo effects. This is largelynoticeable in one particular scene which has an extensive use ofslow-motion. I know the effect is mainly used to make it look morestylish but there is certainly too much of them. Running at a durationof 129 minutes, it could have been shortened if some of the slow-moeffects have been removed. Not only the slow-mo effects, but this film seems to have lost itstrademark element of mystery that is present in the first film. Eventhough there are some mystery present here, they are not as mind-boggling as the ones present in the first film. In the first film,there are just so many questions that popped up and Holmes really hassomething to work on. But here, it's not mysterious. You know the fulldetails immediately. Nevertheless, "A Game of Shadows" is a pleasant experience and a wholelot more fun than the original film. Its operatic action scenes willentertain the audience and its comedic scenes will add a layer oflaughter. With powerful performances from the cast, this film is onenot to be missed in this movie season.Final Verdict: "A Game of Shadows" is a stylish, fast-paced, yetcomedic adventure which improves upon its predecessor in severalaspects, and surely a highly recommended film.Rating: 8/10 Thanks for reading my review on "Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows". Ido hope this review is useful.

chaz-28

(2013-05-19 10:45:51)

Holmes vs. Moriarty exchanges are captivating; the same cannot be said for Holmes & Watson

Even though there are now two films in Guy Ritchie's version ofSherlock Holmes, I am still getting accustomed to the athletic, streetfighting Holmes as opposed to the merely cerebral genius who used tochase suspects by horse and buggy rather than bash their brains out inback alleys. In Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, the villain is moreformidable, the action consumes more screen time, and the jokes aremore cringe inducing. Sherlock (Robert Downey Jr.) has noticeably uppedhis drug habit with side references to cocaine and routinely drinksembalming fluid rather than boring old brandy.Why the sudden surge for uppers? First, Sherlock is matching wits withProfessor Moriarty (Jared Harris). Moriarty appears to match Holmes manto man intellectually; however, he has follows no moral code ordisplays any hint of empathy whatsoever. This makes his the mostdangerous man in Europe. I will not divulge any plot points concerninghis evil deeds because that is half the fun of a Sherlock story,following the trail as he discovers clues which lead him to the nextlocation. Second, Dr. Watson (Jude Law) insists on going through withhis marriage, a prospect Sherlock frequently reminds him will destroyhis manhood and shatter his well-being.Sherlock's interactions with these two characters, Moriarty and Watson,define the high and low ends of this film. When Sherlock and Moriartyshare the same room, real tension emanates from the screen. Theirverbal sword play is a credit to the writing and the actors who joustfor tactical advantage just by using metaphors. Two scenes betweenthese men jump to mind. Early on, Sherlock analyzes Moriarty'shandwriting while Moriarty warns Sherlock of the dangerous path he isfollowing. I will not describe a later scene between the two gentlemen,but it is the most effective in the film as they mentally assail oneanother.The low and tedious end is Sherlock's interactions with Watson. Therelentless double entendres about their 'relationship' lead theaudience to question whether or not Sherlock is homosexual. For awisecrack or two, this would provide levity and amusement.Unfortunately, the script persistently wails against this dead horse ofa joke. A homoerotic double meaning pops up about every 30 seconds whenSherlock and Watson share the screen. It soon grows dreary and began totest my patience, especially during an extended sequence with Sherlockin drag.What always ends up bringing the script back on track is what Sherlockis known for, his fascinating method of deductive reasoning. Before hemakes a move, the script may flash forward as he meticulously plans hisnext position in a street brawl or it may flash a few minutes back intime to show the audience just how he set up the bad guys to fail.Sherlock is always one step behind Moriarty who regularly seems to bethe smarter of the two; however, if you are the individual planning theexecuting the scheme, those following you will always appear to belagging behind you.I slightly recommend this new Sherlock mainly for the enjoyment of theSherlock vs. Moriarty moments and the fascinating moments when Sherlockpauses to explain the situation to someone (usually the audience) as towhat and why he is taking a particular course of action. I hesitate tostrongly recommend this film because of the awful dialogue betweenSherlock and Watson and because of the standard Guy Ritchiecinematography style. Guy Ritchie is known for inventive and momentumshifting action scenes. Sometimes bullets fly faster than the speed oflight and then shift to 'Matrix' time sothe audience can watch it pierce someone's clothing. Shifting betweenfast and slow motion in action sequences is helpful to determine theplacement of good and bad guys, but after a particular amount of time,these shifts become significantly noticeable where instead they shouldbe only slightly perceptible. When the third or fourth action sequencebegan, I was prepared and expected the momentum shifts which instead ofdrawing me into the scene actually had the opposite effect and took meout of it.There are certain expectations and pitfalls a second film in a seriesruns into. Will it have the same mood and presence as the first film?Is it just there to take up space to make it a trilogy? In A Game ofShadows, Sherlock's character is a bit more interesting because of thedrug habit and especially because of the villain; however, Watson isbeginning to draw eye rolls instead of applause as the sidekick.

MaximumMadness

(2013-05-17 15:10:37)

"Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shaodws" starts off on a sour note, with a weak first act, but once the pace picks up, the Finale makes up for it!

Guy Ritchie's 2011 sequel "Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows" is a bitof an oddball film. I adored the 2009 film, and thought that Ritchieand his stars (Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law) did a great service tothe character- delivering a fresh take on it, at least in comparison toprevious films, while still maintaining a classic mystery story.However, 40 minutes into this one, I was ready to fall asleep. Thefirst act of the film has its moments, but felt extremely sloppy andthrown together. I actually hated it, and that's quite a feat, as Igenerally love films, and am very hard to not please.However, I am glad to say that once the film hits the halfway point,something happened- the pace picked up, the characters fell back intostride, and everything seemed to fit together much better. The piecesof the puzzle fell into place, and the film worked darned well. I fellin love with the characters again, and in particular, the finale wasamazing. So, I am happy to report that despite a shaky beginning,"Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows" ended up being a good, fun film.Not quite as good as the first, but still a lot of fun.The plot is a bit hard to follow (mainly due to the somewhat-sloppyfirst act), but the plot boils down to this- Sherlock (Downey Jr. isperfect... 'nuff said) finds himself in a battle of wills againstProfessor Moriarty (Jared Harris in a chilling performance), whom ishatching a scheme of some sort, which may lead to a worldwide war fromwhich he would profit. It's pretty basic- Sherlock must stop thevillain. It's simple, but it works, mostly. (Although a few subplotsinvolving Moriarty's henchman, and other aspects of his plan seemslightly convoluted.)The acting all around is marvelous. Like I said, Downey Jr. is perfect-when is he not? Jude Law is a lot of fun as Watson. Jared Harris makesa great foe for Holmes, and comes off as someone you both despise andadmire. Kelly Reilly as Mrs. Watson is fiery and fun. Noomi Rapace asthe gypsy woman is interesting, though a little under-utilized. StephenFry as Mycroft Holmes was hilarious, though a bit over-the-top. I evenliked Rachael McAdams in her cameo of Irene Adler. (I'm one of the fewpeople who didn't hate her in the first film, although this just may bethe fact that I have a massive crush on her.) The acting is all solid.The action was a step up. From a fun chase sequence involving anassassin at Watson's bachelor party, to a massive sequence where Holmesmust outrun artillery fire from an army, it is all magnificent.Although I must complain slightly about the use of "Holmes vision" inthis movie. I am referring to the "slow-motion" moments in the firstfilm where we enter Sherlock's head, and hear him plan out his moves.It didn't seem to work as well in this movie. In fact, the first timeit happens, I wasn't sure what was happening, as it was stylized a bitdifferently in this film. I wish they had stuck with the way it was inthe first film.The film was shot beautifully, and the music was all suitablymagnificent. From a technical standpoint, this is a very well-madefilm.So I am going to go back and address my initial complaint a bit more.That is, the sloppy first act. Something about this film just felt alittle forced. It felt like the director and writers knew that therewas a quota and formula for films like this, and just followed thebasic outline. It didn't have much heart for the first 40 minutes. Icould have sworn Ritchie was running down a checklist: "Uh, I guess weneed a small pre-credit fight sequence... check. A first act chasescene, I guess we can throw one in. Make the humor more blatant.Check." It was too sloppy and formulaic.However, like I said, the film does reach a point where, all of thesudden, everything started to fall together. And once it picks up, Iwas able to forgive a lot of the mistakes of the film.I'm giving "Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows" a 7 out of 10. Thefirst part of the film kinda sucked, but once it picked up, it became atreat, and fit right back in with the fun tone of the original. Ifyou're a fan, go see it!

badajoz-1

(2013-05-17 13:57:38)

Jolly Japes

Yes, it is Panto season, and there is one on the big screen - thisfollow up to the rather dragged out first outing for Downey jnr and Lawwith Guy Ritchie helming. Not bad - a good frenetic, joke-laden, buddybuddy, effects heavy romp that is the norm for today's entertainment.Not heavy on intellect or memory, but watching is enjoyable in thedarkened movie theatre. The best bits are undoubtedly the interplaybetween the two male leads - apparently involving some improv on set -and the worst bits (as in the first movie) the overlong, overdoneaction sequences, particularly the escape through the woods under firefrom some nasty German heavy howitzers (unfortunately the explosiveshocks barely travel more than ten yards!!!!). Many minor characterssimply are pushed aside when they appear, but Jared Harris puts up arather good 'professor' as opposed to the usual miscast villains inaction movies. OK for the occasional blockbuster, but it all will needrebooting soon, if repetition is not to set in.

Ravi Shekhar

(2013-05-16 07:10:14)

A Masterpiece..!

When we go to a theater to watch a movie, there is one desire thatalways crawls our hearts. The desire that the movie comes out to beentertaining. But this one, I assure, will raise that desire to newheights for the movies yet to release in your lifetime. It is not an"entertaining" movie. It is a creation of a Masterpiece. I have notread the Sherlock Holmes books. So may be, many would disagree with meon the thought that no movie could have justified the character ofHolmes better. But my friends, I have seen more than a couple ofthousands of them. And that perhaps grants me the ability to praise onewhen I feel like. I will give the movie 9.9. 0.1 deducted, because theword "Perfect" is not heard in this world. Call it fate, I could notwatch the movie when it came to theaters. I got the chance just acouple of hours ago. And I am glad that I got this pleasure on a daywhich had not been very good for me. Hats off to Robert Downey Jr. fora performance even he himself will not be able to forget in his life.And special gratitude to Guy Ritchie for crafting the Masterpiece outof a great character. Looking forward to July, when my love,Christopher Nolan, would present me another masterpiece as "The DarkKnight Rises".

deeviousgenius

(2013-05-15 07:49:15)

Another bombastic adventure captured at 1000 frames a second...

I was a huge fan of the first and went in with high hopes for thesecond. I was not disappointed. As a fan I might add. The big sets arestill here, the frenetic chases through the streets, Holmes trade markpre-fight slow mo sequences and a forest chase that is sure to delightthe action hungry audiences.Personally, I absolutely love the new take on Sherlock, dismissing themore traditional Sherlock was for some, a huge disappointment. In fact,I'm more than well aware of the more die hard Sherlock fans who werenot happy to see a masculine Holmes barreling his way through dozens ofthugs, swinging his fists and kicking his way through doors.Some may also be disappointed by the fact the "mystery" didn't reallytickle the intellect. I would agree as well. That I do think thedetective side of Sherlock didn't really shine. Sure, Sherlocksbrilliance was shown every so often, but not in the novel way we wouldlike to see in a brilliant detective. The mental battle betweenMoriarty and Holmes was great, but could've been better. Maybe givensome space to breath in between all the machine guns and explosions.The same cast is there, and the witty banter between Holmes and Watsonwill often bring a laugh or two. The dialogue still as entertaining asthe first. The female plays a more slightly up front role in the film,but it is still a film for the fellas. Needless to say though, NoomiRapace's role does not disappoint but nor is it stellar. Moriarty isplayed by Jared Harris who died a fine job in depicting a timelessvillain.Really, all you really want to know if it's worth seeing right? Yes.Yes it is. It's an action film. A fun film. Don't go in for paradigmshifts or mind boggling puzzles, but enjoy the visual roller coasterGuy Ritchie has created for us. There are some wonderful camera shotsand angles he employs that are sure to delight. Some of the older ormore "stiff upper lipped" movie goers may be a little disorientated bythem however. The phantom shots are great, Guy has a bit of a love forthese sequences and they are shot well, giving a wonderful new pace tothe action.What you get one you shell out the money for your ticket is a wild rompin the park with Sherlock. Brilliant action sequences and well playedcharacters. Sherlocks brilliance is somewhat overshadowed by theaction, but the film still stands as a fun, fast paced movie whichshould delight many viewers at almost any age.

Shayan Bhattacharjee

(2013-05-14 11:04:40)

Sherlock Holmes is back

Sherlock Holmes a game of shadows...i have been waiting for seeing thismovie for a long time, n at last i got the chance. the first movie ifound boring in some stages but overall that was not so bad.in factthat movie was good enough to make me look forward to the sequel..Robert Downey Jr. has been developed as Sherlock Holmes,and hischemistry with Jude law is really good to watch and this time they areworking together to solve a case which is one of the biggest caseSherlock has ever had.They are now after professor James Moriarty.Jared Harris as professor Moriarty played his character in a nice wayand convinced me as a good opponent of Holmes.Rachel McAdam's role asIrene Adler is reduced in this movie. Noomi Rapace as Madam Simza Heroni didn't like as a gypsy women.Stephen Fry shines as Mycroft HolmesPaul Anderson Paul Anderson does quite good as Colonel SebastianMoran.Kelly Reilly does well in her short role as Mary Watson.thismovie is full of actions,,for me i found the action sequences quietentertaining. the visual effects r great as well but few effects waswas of no needs. but what disappoint me is the director Guy Ritchie,hedoes not do the justice to the characters which are originated by SirArthur Conan Doyle. he makes me feel like Sherlock Holmes is like asuper hero because some deeds of him seems to me quite supernatural.and he has a lot of chances to make this film great but he failed.what so ever, Sherlock Holmes a game of shadow is an entertaining movieand it has a exiting climax n also has a nice ending?

IllusionOfLife

(2013-05-13 20:29:07)

Lacks the Spark that Made the First Film Great

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows was a bit of a disappointment. Whileby no means a bad movie, it just didn't have the spark of the original. The point of Sherlock Holmes has always been the fact that he reallydoesn't care about much other than solving his latest mystery. That'swhy he has no friends aside from Watson, what few romantic relationshe's had have always been a bit screwed up, and he's addicted to drugs.While the first movie didn't quite capture those elements to the degreethat they could have been (see the TV series House if you want the bestversion of Sherlock Holmes ever put to screen) they were still presentand the film understood Holme's character. This movie doesn'tunderstand Holmes. It tries to play him off as a heroic figure, whichwas never the point. Holmes doesn't solve crime out of moral obligationor a sense of heroism, he does it for the thrill of solving a newmystery, it's a game for him and one of the few things he truly enjoys. The story this time around was solemn and heavy-handed and didn't allowitself to be fun like the first film was; the mystery was not verycompelling and, in fact, hard to follow for most of the movie; butperhaps the biggest issue in the film was the wasted presence of one ofliterature's most well-known villains. Professor Moriarty, while playedvery well by Jared Harris, was a let down as a villain. Until the endof the movie, his conflict with Holmes didn't feel like two of thegreatest minds of all time locked in a battle of wits. You weren't evenreally sure why this guy was supposed to be a villain outside of thefact that the movie told you he is. I noticed that this time around there was a different writing team forthe film which makes sense because the flaws in the movie felt likethey came from the screenplay. The cast was just as good as last time,the direction was fine, but the focus of the story just wasn't there. Iwould definitely give this film another watch and suspect I'llappreciate it more the second time, but I can't recommend seeing it intheaters. Pick it up at Redbox when it comes out on Blu-Ray. In themean time, go see Mission: Impossible or The Muppets again. C+

Vezon123

(2013-05-13 03:18:03)

The End?

Wait, wait, wait, I think it's one of those rare cases where thecontinuation of the original better. In defense of the painting in 2009I can only say that it was the first and presented to the audiencemodernized Sherlock Holmes. What we will show today? Watson married,Professor Moriarty wants to unleash the First World War, and Holmes ison a diet of coffee, tobacco and coca leaves.Scenario - a great chess game between Sherlock Holmes and ProfessorMoriarty. But right on red. As you must remember, a professor in thefirst part of a system of wireless detonators stolen and used it inthis part, rather obviously did not apply, you can invent things. Inthe "Game of Shadows" Dr. Evil, he who tries to knock their headsagainst the two powers, I will not name names, but I will say that onecountry spoke French, and the other in German. It would seem, whyshould he? Yes, just part-time professor and another "Lord of War." ASherlock acts as a catch-up - to calculate the great professor ofmathematics - mission impossible.The visual component - Guy Ritchie, getting the budget by about a thirdmore than in the first part, so turned around that ... in short it mustbe seen. The scene in the woods, in my opinion, generally the mostbeautiful of those I've seen this year. Slo-mo, explosions, scatteringtrees, the big guns for the last time so I cut off the brain, only athird of "Transformers." Winter blockbuster, but with a firm sense ofhumor and a director Ritchie. At least a gypsy camp ...The actor - ... (hello, "Snatch") and wait for what is now the sceneBrad Pitt is out, and goes "Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" Numi Rapas.No, this is not a film about which you're thinking. The charming youngfortune-teller seeking his brother, who is the key to a great mysteryof Dr. Ha ... Holmes. Vasily Livanov before the release of the firstpart said: "All the bad guys!" When he was invited as a consultant inHollywood. Later, Robert Downey Jr.. refuted this statement, creating adistinct character. The second part of the missing spark in his eyes,but the game is also good. You can not say about Jude Law - replays. Ofcourse, Guy Ritchie puts everything in such a way that at first glanceit is not noticeable, distracted by the beauty, the passions, specialeffects, but for now, promatyvaya again, these scenes in your head, younotice - something was not right.Finale - "bomb disposal" - all, the audience leaned forward. Theatmosphere was tense to the limit, the pawn on e4, elephant elephantbeats, the Shah, who watched "Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson: MortalCombat" or read a book, understand what it's all over, I'd add thattouched to tears, but at 2014 has already announced the third part ofRobert Downey Jr. adventure. So what? This is not the end?

Criticman12

(2013-05-12 11:14:08)

Fun and action-packed sequel

The film is about Sherlock Holmes, Dr. Watson, and a gypsy trying tocapture Professor Moriarty.Pro's: The film has some really great action sequences.The acting is still great you have the original cast (except for MarkStrong) returning and you have Noomi Rapace as Madam Simza Heron andJared Harris as the villain and they both did a great job as theircharacters.Con's: The film dose not have that many thrills from the first film and thefilm feel's pretty rushed especially at the beginning of the movie."Sherlock Holmes: A Game Of Shadows", is still a fun movie to watch andit still has some nice thrills.

kosmasp

(2013-05-08 11:38:46)

A fine game it is

While we have new ingredients (= actors/characters) such as the girlformerly having a tattoo and a new bad guy, we also still have ourbeloved Holmes/Watson duo. And by that I mean the same actors in therole. Jude Law and especially Robert Downey Jr. having a lot of funagain and it shows.Some other characters return and we have the "vision" mode in the movieagain (at least that's what I call it and I'm sure you know what I meanif you've seen the first guy Ritchie Holmes). Making the Holmes moviesis not easy. There is not only a rich written history but also quite afew movies. I have to admit that I wasn't thinking of either. Ritchiemanaged to create a world (especially with the first entry into hisHolmes saga), that can be seen as standalone.So if you liked the first one, you will like this one too. Even if youthink you might be fed up by some of the neat tricks he's using or evenif you expected Rachel McAdams to be back "big" in this movie too.

the-eyes-have-it

(2013-05-08 01:05:58)

diluted sequel

What a lackluster plot which down grades the positives. The story isbasically ineffective and a few artistic liberties about the gamespeople play don't compensate a general lack to proceedings.But Robert Downey Jr as updated Sherlock Holmes, and Jude Law as Dr.Watson are delightfully witty together with several comical momentspleasing and the fight action is sheer visceral pleasure. The play onreality and illusion is fun for a while, like enjoying lifecomplimentary of a blustery escape from reality, but it is too much andsays nothing more about it, a gimmicky conceptual idea that doesn'tmake a lot of sense and when it appears to blur good and evil that'salmost going too far.

gary-444

(2013-05-06 08:31:43)

A Shadow of What It Should Have Been

I thoroughly enjoyed the first Sherlock Holmes and approached thissequel with optimistic anticipation- only to be very disappointed. Abudget that had doubled, multiple locations, and the confidence of awell received first instalment should have proved a solid platform forfurther success. Sadly, Director Guy Ritchie lost his way.As a pairing, Holmes, played by Robert Downey Jnr ,and Watson, by JudeLaw, worked first time around. This time , Jude Law saves the pairingfrom disaster. I can run with Holmes as a cocaine snorting eccentric,but his eccentricities are so overwrought in this outing that hiscredibility as a formidable intelligence becomes unconvincing. AlthoughI am happy to see historic capabilities rewritten and reinterpreted,his ability and acumen at street-fighting place an emphasis on thevisceral, rather than cerebral which takes the character, for mytastes, far too close to Jean Claude Van Damme and Vin Dieselterritory. Those thoughtful deductive powers eschewed in favour ofoccasional machine-gun analysis.Rachel McAdams role is reduced to a bit part, and is a peripheralfigure. Noomi Rapace instead supplies the glamour in a tentativeperformance as Gypsy Madam Heron which doesn't convince. The Villain,Prof Moriarty, is played , uneasily, by Jared Harris whose visuallikeness to Richard Stilgoe does not help the cause. Yet all is notlost. Stephen fry is excellent as Sherlock's brother, Geraldine Jameshas pitifully little screen time as housekeeper Mrs Hudson yet delightswhenever she appears, and Kelly Reilly does well in an underwrittenrole as Dr Watson's new wife.The plot is a noisy mess, and is largely threadbare. Swooping camerashots, fast editing and slow motion have their place but quickly theaction becomes all, and the law of diminishing returns quickly comesinto play. Which is a shame, because when Ritchie gets it right, it canbe very good. This time an escape from an arms and munitions worksshines as an ever escalating armoury of weapons is employed againstthem. Indeed it is such a good scene that the final reel, an attemptedassassination, becomes an anti-climax.In summary, the familiar Director's curse of too much money, too weak ascript/story, and indiscipline, with no-one around to say "Guy, No!,"strikes, which is a shame. Ritchie can write good, funny dialogue (see"Lock Stock, etc")but it is not much in evidence here, he can alsohandle a good action scene (the dry dock fight in the first film). Buthere he tries to reinvent the Holmes legend again, but only succeeds inlosing the good bits and failing to improve with what he attempts inits place.

steve_ford53

(2013-05-05 10:10:49)

This film will not disappoint you

Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) is on the trail of a case that ifleft unsolved could lead to a world war. His arch enemy, ProfessorJames Moriarty (Jared Harris) is in the process of striking fear intothe general public and creating political tensions between France andGermany to hopefully start a world war. As he puts it in the film,mankind is prone to fighting and it is inevitable that the world willcome to blows...he just wants to own the bullets and the bandages.A gypsy fortuneteller's brother has been recruited by Moriarty toassassinate a prominent government official in hopes that thisassassination will be the final straw in a long drawn out plan to moveFrance and Germany to war. Sherlock Holmes, enlisting the aid of hislong time friend and colleague, Dr. John Watson (Jude Law) and thefortuneteller, Madam Simza Heron (Noomi Rapace), set out to foilMoriarty's plot and put an end to his reign of terror.I actually enjoyed this film more than the first "Sherlock Holmes"released in 2009. The balance of action and humor are excellent and thechemistry between Downey Jr. and Law is excellent. Jared Harris is verygood in his part as the evil Moriarty. The film, although 129 minutesin length, moves along at a great pace. The use of slow motion during ascene when our heroes are fleeing a most dangerous situation isexcellent.I recommend this film even if you didn't see the first one you shouldenjoy installment #2. I have a feeling there may be a 3rd iteration inthe coming years.

Hellmant

(2013-05-03 20:08:42)

Maybe not the way a Sherlock Holmes adventure was originally intended to play out but still a lot of fun!

'SHERLOCK HOLMES: A GAME OF SHADOWS': Four Stars (Out of Five) Robert Downey Jr. reprises his role as, the most famous detective fromliterature and movies, Sherlock Holmes (created by Sir Arthur ConanDoyle). Jude Law returns as his partner Doctor Watson and Guy Ritchieonce again directs (2 years after the immensely popular updatedoriginal). Rachel McAdams reprises her role as Sherlock's lovesinterest Irene Adler, in a cameo, and Jared Harris, Stephen Fry andNoomi Rapace (the original 'GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO') also join thecast this time around. The movie is complete chaos and extremely hardto follow but it's also got a lot of great thrills and energy. I can'timagine this new Sherlock Holmes being very faithful to the original(which I know little about) but these movies are definitelyentertaining in their own right.This chapter is based on Conan Doyle's 'The Final Problem' but onlyloosely. It revolves around the marriage of John Watson to the love ofhis life Mary (Kelly Reilly). When Holmes learns that his archenemyProfessor Moriarity (Harris) might try and harm Watson and his newwife, to get back at Holmes, Sherlock must of course involve the gooddoctor in his adventures once again. The two team with Madam SimzaHeron (Rapace) who's on a mission to find and save her brother, Rene(Laurence Possa), who's involved in a international conspiracy to starta world war with Moriarity (in order to gain a profit from it). It's upto Holmes, Watson and Heron to save Europe and the rest of the world.There's so much going on in this movie and it's so fast paced that it'salmost impossible to keep up with. This left me a little frustrated, tosay the least, for a large percentage of the movie. Still Downey andLaw are once again fantastic, as well as the rest of the cast, andRitchie's directing is at it's stylized best. Even though I didn'tcompletely know what was going on for most of the movie I still enjoyedit. It's definitely very funny and action packed. Maybe not the way aSherlock Holmes adventure was originally intended to play out but stilla lot of fun.Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_lBzdmfUfA

Muhsin80

(2013-05-03 07:54:33)

Sherlock Bond 006

Author: unbekannternutzer from Switzerland this movie is a(nother)disappointing proof of the impression that most of the money in moviebusiness is in the hand of the wrong people.this has nothing to do with anything anyone would associate with thesherlock holmes that has been main character of real literature. thereis no connection visible whatsoever to that kind of clever developedcharacter.dialog is stupid, unrealistic and scripted to a point that makes itunbelievably disappointing that the makers obviously think that theaudience is completely dumbed down and wont recognize a pile of verbalgarbage that is desperately modified to sound good.characters are completely unbelievable, shallow and exaggerated in away one would expect to see in a comic movie. with the difference thatin those movies the components fit together to create somethinginteresting at least. this movie fails miserably there. it's a mess.story is non existent, calling it an excuse for the action scenes wouldgive it too much credit. they are not even trying to do that.the action scenes you would expect from a super-hero movie. and that'swhat it actually is. it's iron man in medieval times without that metalsuit trying to do some kind of parody of sherlock holmes. this is theonly point of view that would make it work somehow.the actors are trying but it's a pointless effort with this directionand script.there is a lot more that is just wrong about this movie. i don't havewords for it at the moment. it feels like the mess that they call moviehas left my brain in a similarly messed up state.i am actually shocked to see this average rating it has at the moment.it cant be right. it just cant.---> This is just what I was thinking op the movie when it finallyended, James Bond the previous century!!! Nothing of Sherlock Holmes,Sherlock Holmes that isn't using his brains but brute power to stop thebad???

tomster65

(2013-05-02 01:26:36)

this is not a sherlock Holmes movie

this is an OK movie for goof ball action. it even might be a bitintelligent. some mega critics said that its inevitable that Sherlockshould be modernized with action. i disagree. we have Indiana Jones,star wars, aliens etc of action that fits its ORIGINAL story line.would anyone love an Indiana Jones movie where he played in the parkwith his young son, a nice feel good family movie? they might but notif you called it an Indiana Jones movie, he is an action hero. superman needs to fly, the hulk needs to rage, Sherlock Holmes needs tosolve mysteries. were we given any clues so we could play along? didWatson try to solve the clues on his own and always get them wrong?well, i don't remember much of that.go ahead and make your action movies full of explosions, fights and theend of the world. when done with some smarts and common sense, they aregreat. i love them.but when it comes to being Sherlock Holmes, stay with Arthur ConanDoyle character. he was original and deserves the credit for creatingthis character by leaving him the way he was born.a few have said that this is what the new movie should be, that he hasevolved. get a life please, there are a great many smart andintelligent movies made in the mystery genre that are very successful.so why mess with that formula? why? greed, the ignorant masses don'tcare and like being dumbed down by exploitation of action while smartermovies don't make as much money. having a familiar BIG character, BIGstars and BIG action makes BIG money. even if its not fair to thehistory.well, its not like Hollywood from what ever country they film in caresabout history. its one of Hollywood's biggest flaw. they can make goodmovies by messing with history, but haven't even better movies beenmade by not messing with it? even if Sherlock is fictional, messingwith his character is like making sparkling good guy vampires.

carla1308

(2013-05-01 14:28:49)

Brilliant

"Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows" is the sequel to the successful2009 Guy Ritchie film. Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law reprise theirroles as Holmes and Watson, respectively, and Jared Harris is thevillain of the movie as Dr. Moriarty.All of the actors in this movie give superb performances. Downey andLaw sizzle on screen together; the chemistry between them isincredible. Harris does a great job as Moriarty, bringing Holmes'arch-nemesis to life. Rachel McAdams, briefly reprising her role fromthe first Sherlock Holmes movie, is very convincing in her few scenes,as is Noomi Rapace as the female lead Sim.The film has a few weak points, such as the slightly clichГѓВ© script(although some Holmes-Watson scenes are truly hilarious) and the oftenconfusing plot. However, the cinematography is excellent, the effectsare stunning, and the music score is brilliant. Overall, Game ofShadows is a great action movie and pure entertainment. If you lovedthe first one, or even if this is your first introduction to GuyRitchie's adaptation of Holmes, you'll enjoy this movie.