|  |
| Customer Reviews: | | Average Customer Review: ( 38 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
22 of 24 found the following review helpful:
 Highly recommended Jan 04, 2006
By Kurt A. Johnson
It is November of 1902, and when the body of a young prostitute is found on the banks of the Thames, only Dr. John Watson (played by Ian Hart) suspects that something is amiss. When Sherlock Holmes examines the body he quickly makes a startling announcement, the body is that of Lady Alice Burnham. Someone is stalking the debutantes of London, and Scotland Yard is out of its depth. The game is afoot, and Sherlock Holmes is hot on the chase!
OK, I must admit to being of two minds about this movie. First of all, there are some things that turned me off. First of all, both Holmes and Watson are portrayed as much less cordial and polite than they were in the original A.C. Doyle stories, prompting my wife to label Rupert Everett as "the crabby Holmes." Also, Mr. Everett does not bring much energy to the role, giving a surprisingly somnambular performance. Secondly, I found Dr. Watson's fiancé (what happened to his first wife, Mary Morstan?) far too much of a clichéd American - "Come in, Sherlock, have a whiskey!"
But, that said, I really did enjoy this movie. The subject matter goes beyond the more simple stories of the original Holmes, but does a good job of catching Sherlock's spirit. I found myself pulled into the story, and really enjoying it. I am a great fan of Jeremy Brett's interpretation of Sherlock Holmes, but I must say that this is a solid, highly-enjoyable Sherlock Holmes story.
So, if you enjoy a good Sherlock Holmes story, then you will enjoy this movie. It's Sherlock Holmes, eight years after the events of The Adventure of the Empty House, and once more on the trail of a murderer. I really enjoyed this movie, and highly recommend it.
45 of 56 found the following review helpful:
 Sheer Burlesque. Oct 26, 2005
By mirasreviews
"Sherlock Holmes and the Case of the Silk Stocking" was written by Alan Cubitt based on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's classic "Sherlock Holmes" characters. This story finds Sherlock Holmes (Rupert Everett) semi-retired and Dr. John Watson (Ian Hart) engaged to be married to outspoken American psychiatrist Mrs. Vandeleur (Helen McCrory). When the body of an aristocratic young woman is found on the banks of the Thames, strangled, with a silk stocking stuffed in her mouth, Holmes takes the case. When another young woman of high birth is abducted, it becomes clear that a fetishistic serial murderer is preying on the daughters of high society.
The Sherlock Holmes of "The Case of the Silk Stocking" is smug, cheeky, flippant, and, frankly, unethical. He bears no resemblance to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's character. All period films are to some degree burlesques of the era in which they take place, but this one is over-the-top. Rupert Everett's Holmes makes no attempt at being a Victorian or Edwardian gentleman. He acts like a spoiled pseudo-intellectual dandy home from university. Some of his actions would be outrageous even now and are certainly preposterous in a film that takes place in 1903. Alan Cubitt made no attempt at writing his characters in their own era. Ian Hart does a decent job as Dr. Watson, and he coincidentally played Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in a brief scene in 2004's "Finding Neverland" about author J. M. Barrie. Audiences will either be able to stomach this Sherlock Holmes, or they will not. But Jeremy Brett's interpretation of Holmes from the 1980s and 1990s is still relevant, and reruns of those episodes would be more entertaining than "The Case of the Silk Stocking".
14 of 17 found the following review helpful:
 The game's afoot! Nov 18, 2005
By LonesomeDove
I can't understand the criticisms of the other reviewers of this outstanding presentation. As much as I loved the BBC versions featuring Jeremy Brett, I never considered Brett "definitive" as Holmes, any more than Basil Rathbone was. In my opinion, Rupert Everett has come closer than either of these icons in portraying the icily cerebral Holmes which Conan Doyle created.
I loved the sinister, sexually-charged atmosphere presented here. I agree with the reviewer who said that Conan Doyle would not have dealt with this sort of frank material, but then, I doubt he could have gotten it published in his time if he had. The fact is, Holmes's England had an extremely dark, randy underbelly of vice and perversion, and I found the mature treatment of this facet of the culture fascinating.
As for Holmes's use of opium and cocaine, simply because Conan Doyle didn't elaborate doesn't mean we must assume Holmes never would have indulged beyond those few lines found in the stories. Between cases, Holmes resorted to his seven percent solution to alleviate the despair he felt at the feeling his life had no purpose; why should we not suppose that he could also have visited the opium dens as well?
At any rate, I am one viewer who was delighted at the authentic atmosphere, the top quality writing that was both faithful to Conan Doyle's style and yet thoroughly original, and above all to the superb acting by all involved, especially Mr. Everett.
I enthusiatically give this presentation five stars.
11 of 13 found the following review helpful:
The Clothes Hound of the Baskervilles Oct 24, 2005
By A. Hickman
This was fun. The atmosphere was so thick you could cut it with a knife (and then lose the knife), but I've come to expect that from Holmes and the BBC. Everett and Hart make such an engaging team as Holmes and Watson, that I didn't mind, too much, when the mystery came up short. A couple of the minor players made an impression: Michael Fassbender, as a footman, and Perdita Weeks, as Lady Roberta. But it's the Holmes-Watson dynamic that sells the show. This time we are treated to Holmes' apparent jealousy at the prospect of Watson's impending wedding-to an American widow, no less! By the way, this Watson is no bungler, ala Nigel Bruce; he even gets the jump on Holmes in one instance. Everett's not about to make you forget Basil Rathbone, however, and there is a scene where Holmes appears in a rather transparent disguise that makes you nostalgic for the Holmes who impersonated a Music Hall performer in "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes." But Everett puts his own, patrician stamp on the character; he probably would have been too good looking for Sir Arthur's tastes, but the rest of us will welcome him back in the inevitable sequel.
7 of 8 found the following review helpful:
 Not thumbs up; Not thumbs down Nov 02, 2005
By RJ
It was great to see a new Sherlock, even though this Sherlock was very unSherlockian. He had the wrong guy detained, recklessly endangered a girl, and just seemed to be too much of a slacker. But, it is good to see any effort in the post Brett world. We need new Sherlocks -- as imperfect as they may prove to be.
See all 38 customer reviews on Amazon.com
|
| | |
