Purely Joyful Movie!

A Brilliant Conflict

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

A young private detective Sherlock Holmes becomes famous overnight when he discovers and kills the most dangerous man of England; Professor Moriarty. The fame is short lived as a series of killings start that indicate Moriarty being still alive. Holmes sets out to discover the truth with a help of Doctor Watson, a mortuary who takes interest in Holmes' cases.I watched this movie "Sherlock: A Case of Evil" (2002) during sort of a Holmes obsessed time in my life, even when I had heard lots and lots of bad things about it. To tell you the truth, movie is not all bad. Production value is decent, sets and costumes nicely Victorian, and music, while a bit modern, not at all distracting. The plot also had some nice things going on for it, I thought the idea of Moriarty inventing heroin was clever, and there are some touches for Arthur Conan Doyle's stories like the rifle-stick and the game Sherlock and Mycroft play.So the story is not the worst thing here. The characterization is. This film wants to be sort of beginning for Holmes career as the famous detective we all love, wanting to explain his drug addiction and why there is no romance in his life. However, as the film starts Holmes is hot-headed party favorite who likes to have a different girl every night (sometimes two). His sudden change at the end to the Holmes of Doyle's stories is not a least bit realistic. It also doesn't help that James D'Arcy isn't least bit interesting. Well, he's not as annoying as Matt Frewer but still horribly miscast here. I can understand they wanted to make Holmes younger but they should have found someone else.Richard E. Grant seems a bit wasted in this movie, playing Holmes' brother Mycroft. I can't believe that he's already appeared in two Sherlock movies (other being The Hound of the Baskervilles with Richard Roxburgh) and not having played Sherlock himself, even when he has the perfect looks for the part. On the other hand, I did like Watson in this movie, played by Roger Morlidge. It's interesting to see that Watson doesn't become Holmes' best friend instantly but actually dislikes the detective very much first. Gabrielle Anwar as Holmes' supposed love interest is just a wallflower.The highlight of this movie for me was Vincent D'Onofrio's portrayal of Moriarty. It's a bit sad to say so because he is awfully campy and theatric, nothing like Professor Moriarty from Conan Doyle's stories, but he does play a competent villain. Though God only knows what kind of accent he is trying to have.All in all, "Sherlock: A Case of Evil" is not the worst Sherlock Holmes movie I have seen and while it certainly could be a lot better with very little effort, it does make a nice evening watch. However, if you really want to see a film of Sherlock Holmes' early years that actually tries to keep characters faithful to Arthur Conan Doyle's stories, watch Barry Levinson's 1985 underrated movie "Young Sherlock Holmes" instead.

Unquestionably, Sherlock Holmes qualifies as one of the most popular characters in English literature as well as the media. Hundreds of films and television shows have been made about him. Some are serious, while others are frivolous. Movies and television shows about Sherlock Holmes can be classified by their treatment of Holmes' companion Dr. Watson as well as the depiction of London Police Inspector Lestrade. Of course, the classic Sherlock Holmes is Basil Rathbone with Nigel Bruce as his bumbling sidekick Dr. Watson in the period 20th Century Fox and later contemporary Universal Pictures movies. Jeremy Brett has acquired a fan base for his impersonation of Holmes and the television shows that feature him adhere most closely to his literary counterpart than any others. Several actors have played the role. Leslie Howard's son Ronald Howard played Holmes rather conscientiously in the 1950 TV series and donned the deerstalker. All too often Holmes has been identified with the deerstalker because it looks so singular along with his curved pipe. Howard's Watson wasn't as cretinous as Bruce's Watson. In the late 1960s, Robert Stephens made an interesting Sherlock Holmes in Billy Wilder's "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes." Roger Moore essayed the role in "Sherlock Holmes in New York" in the 1970s. "Dracula" star Christopher Lee has incarnated the Arthur Conan Doyle's celebrated amateur sleuth in both films and television in the 1960s and 1970s. Steven Spielberg produced "Young Sherlock Holmes" that had Holmes meeting Watson in a boarding school when they were youths. Evil" is an interesting spin on the early life of the eponymous character. The story occurs about the same time as "A Study in Scarlet." Holmes has just tangled with the nefarious Dr. Moriarty (Vincent D'Onofrio of "Full Metal Jacket") and they fight each other in the deserted backstreets of London at night with cane swords. Eventually, Moriarty whips out a revolver and Holmes blows him away with a single shot that sends the villain pitching backwards involuntarily into the sewer system so that his body cannot be recovered. Holmes makes the mistake of informing the London newspapers that he has vanquished his deadly foe. Holmes had been working for a society dame, Rebecca Doyle (Gabrielle Anwar of "Body Snatchers") who Moriarty had tried to blackmail for 10-thousand pounds. At this point, Holmes is a younger chap than he has been played in the past. He has not met Watson yet, but he has horrid memories of the dastardly deeds that Moriarty did to his older brother Mycroft (Richard E. Grant) in giving him injections of some unknown narcotic. Holmes smokes cigarettes, drinks liquor, and occasionally goes to bed with a woman. He lives at 221 Baker Street, but he doesn't have a league of urchins running messages for him. He informs London Inspector Lestrade (Nicholas Gecks) about the death of Moriarty, but Lestrade isn't impressed with the news or Holmes. Meanwhile, a serial killer has been knocking off opium merchants methodically and Holmes refers to the killer as a sieral killer. An opium merchant hires Holmes and slips him a document signed by a local judge that authorizes Holmes to attend the latest autopsy of a murdered opium merchant. Lestrade objects initially until he sees the document, but the coroner is not impressed. The coroner is Dr. John H. Watson. Holmes and Watson (Roger Morlidge) grow fond of each other because they have keen scientific minds and speak the same language. This Watson is no fool and something of an inventor. He builds Holmes a single shot walking stick.Eventually, Moriarty reappears. Of course, Moriarty is behind the murders. He is trying to corner the market on a new drug that has not been outlawed yet: morphine. Holmes discovers that the young blackmail victim was hired by Moriarty so that he could dupe Holmes into believing that he had killed him. Holmes suffers in humiliation when he realizes that Moriarty has made a fool of him. Moriarty decides to eliminate Holmes and he abducts the sleuth, pumps him repeatedly full of morphine. Clearly, the producers are suggesting that Holmes came to use needles because Moriarty turned him into an addict. Holmes manages to escape. Moriarty kidnaps the woman that he hired to fool Holmes. Holmes had been protecting the woman from Moriarty and they became romantically involved until Moriarty grabs her and murders her in cold blood. Holmes and Moriarity duel again, this time in Big Ben, and Holmes sends Moriarty plunging from the shattered clock bace into the Thames. This R-rated for drug use adventure concludes with Watson becoming Holmes casebook correspondent. One of Holmes' relatives sends him a deerstalker and Watson, who has been reprimanding Holmes for smoking cigarettes, gives him a curved pipe. The crisply made, period adventure concludes with a bandaged Holmes posing in profile with the curved pipe and deerstalker for Watson who shoots a photograph of his newest friend. The pace is quick and Holmes and Watson even get into a brawl at a pub with several assailants and smash their way to safety with their fist. James D'Arcy of "Master and Commander" makes a bland but acceptable Holmes, while D'Onofrio is exceptional as the wicked Moriarty. There is one nude scene when a woman strips for Holmes in his Baker Street apartment. Holmes doesn't have an interfering land lady. Watson isn't a clown.Indeed, "Cadfael" director Graham Theakston has taken some liberties with the famous character, but "Sherlock: Case of Evil" benefits from top-notch production values.

I didn't know what to expect from this movie that appears to have gone straight to video. The front cover seems to suggest that Sherlock will be played by Vincent D'Onofrio (who actually plays Professor Moriaty). When I first realized James D'Arcy was playing Holmes I thought he was way too young. And then I realized that was the point. This is about Sherlock Holmes as he is just beginning to find himself. In many ways he has the same insecurities and vulnerabilities as many young men. When he finds himself arrested near the beginning of the movie and questioned down at the police station, my mind flashed to a similar scene with James Dean in "Rebel Without a Cause". This is Holmes pre-pipe (he smokes cigarettes), pre-deerstalker cap (he doesn't generally wear a hat) and pre-Watson (he meets him during the course of the story and at first they don't get along). The movie also succeeds in making Victorian London seem very modern indeed (with crime and vice abounding)--which of course it was for those who actually lived in it.For those who only like their Holmes to be of a more traditional variety, they will probably be turned off by some of the above elements as well as the modern soundtrack; however, the performances of D'Arcy and Roger Morlidge as Dr. Watson won me over. I'm a fan of Sherlock Holmes stories and I found this movie fresh and unexpectedly entertaining.

I liked the movie. I thought all the main characters did a really good job.But I also have a very bad taste in movies. I think the Richard Grant thing was a bit unnecessary. The idea of bringing a past into it was interesting, but not really developed as much as it could have been. I never fully understood why they brought him in to the story and to be honest, even as a Richard Grant fan, I didn't care much about the character. He could have been brought a bit more into the story. But D'arcy was great. So was the guy who played Watson. Still, the way they left it off, there is room for sequels. So unless they bring Grant back into the story later, I don't know. I think the scene and he story were well done, but just not as necessary as everything else.