Mania Review: Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows - Mania.com



Mania Grade: C

27 Comments | Add

 

Rate & Share:

 

Related Links:

 

Info:

  • Starring: Robert Downey, Jr., Jude Law, Stephen Fry, Jared Harris, Noomi Rapace and Rachel McAdams
  • Written by: Michele and Kieran Mulroney
  • Directed by: Guy Ritchie
  • Studio: Warner Bros.
  • Rating: PG-13
  • Run Time: 128 minutes
  • Series:

Mania Review: Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

Revelation or letdown?

By Rob Vaux     December 16, 2011


Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows
© Warner Bros/Robert Trate

 Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows easily ranks as the most disappointing film of the year: not dreadful, but falling so far from the brilliant initial film that its good points hardly matter. It stumbles where the first film soared, plays it safe where its predecessor went for broke.  Many of the assets remain in place, but they’ve lost their freshness, and the filmmakers – the same ones who infused the iconic detective with 21st century relevance – can’t find the means to bring it back. In fact, it plays as a textbook case of Things Bad Sequels Do Wrong. What, specifically? Let us count the ways.

 

Resting on Their Laurels

Far, far too much of Game of Shadows simply coughs up the old routines from the first film in hopes that we’ll still buy it. For instance, Holmes (Robert Downey, Jr.) analyzes potential fights and sees how they will go in a microsecond before throwing his first punch. A Game of Shadows brings a few new wrinkles into that mix, but the gimmick has already lost its pizzazz and repeating it as often as they do here quickly becomes tedious. Similar elements such as Holmes wreaking havoc in his apartments or his ongoing needling of Dr. Watson (Jude Law) pretty much confirm that those ideas ran their course in the first film. Law and Downey retain excellent chemistry and a few laughs crop up here and there, but too many elements here play like discards from the cutting room floor rather than a movie in and of themselves.

 

Changing the Formula in All the Wrong Ways

Conversely, when A Game of Shadows attempts to shake things up, it invariably makes all the wrong decisions. An early surprise is intended to set a darker, more ominous tone for the film; instead it shakes us so thoroughly out of the mood that by the time we’re back in the spirit of things, we’ve lost the thread of the plot (such as it is). More importantly, A Game of Shadows almost completely does away with the notion of a mystery. Instead, it becomes a run-of-the-mill actioner, with Holmes’s deductive skills focused more on getting him to the next set piece than puzzling out a grim conundrum. Director Guy Ritchie adds more of those slow motion explosions to the mix – and they work fairly well, for what that’s worth – but the resulting soup feels awfully thin.

 

A Less Interesting Story

The narrative may be to blame. The first film posited a brilliant conundrum for Holmes to solve: a villain seemingly brought back from the dead who challenged the detective’s science against apparent magical mastery. Not only did it give him a fiendish challenge, but it kept in the spirit of Doyle, who often used Holmes’s logic to dispel the fear of superstition. This time around, unfortunately, they saddle him with a stunningly dull conspiracy to start a war on continental Europe. It involves a lot of superfluous turns – brainwashing and cosmetic surgery play a large role, believe it or not – that add up to a whole lot of nothing.  Considering that the war Holmes is trying to stop kicks in just a few decades later, the entire exercise takes on a dull, pointless quality.

 

A Less Interesting Villain

After Mark Strong rocked the doors off the first film, the producers really needed to step up their game for the villain here. They had a sterling candidate in Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris), Holmes’s longtime nemesis who nevertheless retained plenty of nebulous qualities for the filmmakers to play with. Instead of rising to the challenge, they fall back on more banality. Moriarty is seemingly all-powerful without any attendant cause. His motives remain murky and vague – boilerplate bad-guy stuff devoid of the necessary fascination – and his schemes never coalesce into anything worth paying attention to. He and Holmes have some good exchanges, but they lack the vitality of the first film, and while we keep waiting for the two to kick it into high gear, it never does. Even the ending – lifted from one of Doyle’s most famous moments – can’t deliver the combination of respect and menace the character requires.

 

Bringing in a Superfluous Love Interest

The first film was never entirely sure what to do with Rachel McAdams, who played Holmes’ saucy foil Irene Adler. She’s here briefly, but rather than try to correct their earlier oversight, the filmmakers bring in a different and much less interesting figure (Noomi Rapace) seemingly on a whim. They saddle her with a collection of utterly uninteresting character traits– a gypsy fortune teller who’s searching for her lost brother and zzzzzzzz…. – then set her loose with the boys and insist that she needs to be there. McAdams’ chemistry with Downey vanishes, replaced by a non-Doyle figure about as interesting as a bowl of oatmeal.

 

Adding Characters Just Because They Can

Other new characters do better, at least as far as watchability goes, but that doesn’t mean they serve a useful purpose. Sherlock’s brother Mycroft (Stephen Fry) shows up to help goose the plot along, but while the actor is thoroughly delightful, he exists here solely to bring in new elements of the Holmes mythos with comparatively little effort. He – and frankly Moriarty – appear more as observers than actual players, as if their merest presence is enough to get the job done.

 

Coming Out Too Soon

According to Hollywood shorthand, it takes three years to get a proper sequel prepped, shot and assembled. A few exceptions exist (mostly horror franchises, which are cheap to shoot and don’t exactly aspire to much in the first place), but first-tier productions run a big risk if they try to finish more quickly. A Game of Shadows arrives two years after its predecessors: reeking of rushed decisions, cut corners and a script that needed three or four more drafts to really hum. The good things on display from the first film are still here. They just lack the infusion of creativity needed to maintain the franchise’s sky-high standards. Another six months could have given them that. As it stands, A Game of Shadows takes a big step down, leaving us with the taste of ashes in its wake. 

COMMENTS AND RESPONSES

Showing items 1 - 10 of 27
1 2 3 >  >>  
monkeyfoot 12/16/2011 8:54:17 PM

Just came back from seeing this. Disagree 100%! Gotta go now.

silverspear67 12/16/2011 9:19:03 PM

 You have definitely stepped outside the confines of your mind!!!  I absolutely loved the first one, and I think this 2nd installment tops the first.  One of the best movies of 2011!!!!

karas1 12/17/2011 5:51:39 AM

I saw it yesterday and I enjoyed it throughly.  I disagree with several of your points Rob.

Sim, the gypsy fortune teller, was never intended to be any kind of love interest for Holmes.  She was the client and she went on the journey with Holmes and Watson to find her brother, not because of any attraction to either of the men.

Relationship wise Holmes was completely fixated on retaining his friendship with Watson which he felt is threatened by Watson's marriage, a theme from the first film.  Mrs Watson puts up with his shenannagins with more patience and understanding than I would.

The cinamatography was breathtaking.  The scene of them being chased through the forest, shown in the commercials, is stunning in it's entirety and Ritchie's camera tricks with slowed then speeded up time to show bullets wizzing by them and shells exploding near them was stunning.

Moriarty exuded menace.  His motivation for the whole deal wasn't so much to make money, though his scheme would net him enormous profits if it succeeded, but to enable him to manipulate people.  He loved to play head games and Holmes was his most challenging opponent. 

Brother Mycroft WAS throughly delightful and brought some lighthearted moments to a fairly grim film.

There were a few overly talky moments in the movie, but overall it was most enjoyable.  And it was hardly the most disappointing movie of the year.  That honor still goes to Green Lantern.

 

makabriel 12/17/2011 7:39:20 AM

I think the real mystery is how this is getting worse reviews than Mission Impossible...

 

djcgmcse 12/17/2011 7:50:27 AM

Dark Knight Rises Trailer - twitvid. com/ embed.php?guid=RZTDH&autoplay=0

hanso 12/17/2011 10:25:48 AM

 The fire rises!

InnerSanctum 12/17/2011 11:17:25 AM

I really enjoyed the first film and I'm ready to catch this next week.  Despite the reviews, I'm more excited about this movie than MI.  

Why is there never a mention of soundtracks to these films?  I actually purchased the soundtrack to the first SH and enjoy it still.  It is such an essential piece to the pacing of a movie.  Forget 3D...what do I remember about Tron Legacy?  Nothing.  Except the soundtrack (and, there were lots of lights.  And, the Dude.)  

How on earth are so many TV shows successful if it takes three full years to produce a proper movie sequel?  Honestly, out side of schedueling, I'd think you could easily make a quality franchise film every other year.   

 

scytheofluna 12/17/2011 1:39:28 PM

Aw come on Tron wasn't that bad.  It was not life changing by any stretch, but I enjoyed it for what it was.

The reviews of the Holmes sequel all seem to be pretty harsh.  I will wait for Blu Ray but only because I hate going to the theater.  It looks great. 

Criticizing the film for using a lot of the same hooks as the first one is silly.  He's an obsessive compulsive, drug addled detective.  His mind is going to work in a pretty specific way, and it would be ridiculous to change things like his pre-fight analysis.

InnerSanctum 12/17/2011 2:59:13 PM

 Hey, I didn't say I didn't like Tron: Legacy.  It had some great effects and action (a little hard to follow at times due to the 3D effects.)  I enjoyed the film.  It has been a year and I can still recall being blown away by the soundtrack.  Heck, I'd like to see another sequel.  But, they must find a way to bring Bridges back into the picture.  I admit, a lot of my fondness for the film was that I couldn't believe they actually made a sequel to one of my favorite childhood movies.  

I'm curious, was Holmes depicted as a drug addict in the first film?  I don't recall.  I do know they had several nods to other movies.  I was a Holmes junkie last holiday.  I watched and read everything I could surrounding the character.  I got better.  

 

millean 12/17/2011 7:03:56 PM

OK, I just got back from the theatres where I saw Sherlock Holmes.  I didn't think it was possible, but I enjoyed this more than the first movie!  You will see a few regurgitated (sp?) jokes, but they didn't come off nearly as corny as some sequels (don't know why MiB II sticks out as the worst one to me in that regards, but it does).  Yes, you see some things coming from miles away, but others you don't.

Once again, Rob V and I have different tastes.  (Maybe that's why I enjoy things a lot more than he does.)  Still love you like a straight man can, though RV! :)

In any event, if you even REMOTELY enjoyed the first, you should love the 2nd.  Go see it now!

 

1 2 3 >  >>  

ADD A COMMENT

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Please click here to login.

POPULAR TOPICS