The first reviews for Guy Ritchie‘s Sherlock Holmes have begun to hit the interwebs, so I thought we’d do a round up of the early buzz. So far the response is kinda mixed. Some critics loved the film, while others hated it. Although it should be noted that the film currently has an 87% on Rotten Tomatoes. Here is a look at some of the review quotes:
The Guardian: “Sherlock Holmes is high-end hack work. It could have been made by anyone. There’s the odd Ritchie-ism, like crunchy slo-mo in the fight scenes, but he was, presumably, brought on board for reasons not wholly to do with his cinematic style.” … “Sherlock Holmes isn’t even a magnificent mistake. It’s just a film that makes you hanker after Ritchie’s back catalogue. Snatch included.”
Box Office Magazine: “Easily one of the most enjoyable action pictures in recent memory, this alternately brisk and brainy reworking of the legendary detective’s mythos makes the delightful Robert Downey Jr. into a rumpled, complicated and alternately swashbuckling and pratfalling Holmes for our time.” … “under Ritchie’s expert guidance, Downey has at last found a big, iconic mainstream movie character that draws on the full range of his limitless acting capacity, not just his brash narcissism, the way Iron Man’s Tony Stark does.”
More after the jump.
The Hollywood Reporter: “Guy Ritchie’s flamboyant, scorched-earth style ill fits Arthur Conan Doyle’s creation, but few among modern moviegoers will care.” … “Sherlock Holmes goes wrong in many ways” … “Even the Holmes/Watson pairing is odd, but if the film concentrated at all on character, it might have worked.” … “The plot? Wish you hadn’t asked. One is not meant to completely understand it, of course; you never do in a Ritchie movie. ”
Variety: “If you can get over the idea of Sherlock Holmes as an action hero — and if, indeed, you want to — then there is something to enjoy about this flagrant makeover” … “Such Holmes purists as may remain will blanch, but young audiences, particularly males, will likely swill the topped-out serving of sweaty masculinity, flexing muscle, imaginative violence, unusual weaponry, impudent banter and ballsy effrontery.” … “the single most important craft contribution is Hans Zimmer’s score.”
The Telegraph: “Guy Ritchie has spent a reported $80 million on refashioning Arthur Conan Doyle’s Holmes and Watson with verve, panache and, for him, relative restraint. It is undeniably a rollicking romp, an all-action blockbuster – but it could have gone a lot further over the top.” … “The pace rarely slackens throughout, the set pieces are explosive, the score relentlessly thunderous. Victorian London is recreated – relying on copious use of computer effects – with an eye for the grimy reality.”
The Times: “On the face of it Ritchie and Holmes should be a perfect fit, and to some degree they are. The British director, who loves nothing better than to fetishise London and its inhabitants, has great fun with the grisly cobbled streets and Victorian drawing room opulence. In two delicious scenes, Ritchie matches Holmes’s canny methods of detection with his own peerless editing style, as the great detective anticipates the blow-by-blow outcome of several fights in slow motion. Downey Jr is terrific as the troubled eccentric Holmes.”