Sherlock Holmes: Rupert Everett
Dr. Watson: Ian Hart
Year: 2004
Case: non-Canon
Rating: 
I’m not entirely certain why I chose to watch this particular film, except perhaps that it was available for download and I have a compulsion to see everything there is to see.
I have, in the past, explained what it is that makes for good adaptations and imitations, and I’m going to repeat that here, because it is quite relevant in terms of this film.
Respect canon.
I’m not saying you can’t deviate from canon, or elaborate on canon, or even interpret canon, but if something within canon is stated as fact, then it is fact; do not, under any circumstance, alter these facts.
Case and point:
It’s not until the later stories that Holmes makes use of a telephone. Even then, Watson comments that Holmes dislikes the telephone; that he prefers, instead, to communicate via wire (telegram). So to have Holmes casually answer a phone (with a ‘hello’ of all things) was jarring to say the least.
There are a lot of incidences of ‘modernism’ (the finger printing and sending of samples to the lab for analysis come to mind) which didn’t really fit. Holmes’ manner of dress, too, was entirely too modern. Part of what I love about SH is the era; that turn-of-the-century London feel that transported me through time. This movie kept some of that, true, but too often it jumped ahead of itself, and every time it did I was immediately taken out of the story.
Then, of course, there is Watson’s fiancee. I understand why they included her; modern women undoubtedly crave a strong female presence amid a sea of fainting, overly emotional and often weak Victorian women, but her manner is entirely too sensationalized (not to mention completely out of context with the era).
I have other complaints (but then again, I am a critic, first and foremost, so when don’t I have complaints?) They are as follows:
The fog was overdone. Seriously overdone. Meant, I’m sure, to add mystery, but the end result was that I often couldn’t follow what was happening.
Both Watson and Holmes are entirely too young. I understand that this was meant to appeal to a younger, more mainstream audience, but my Holmes and my Watson do not have ‘boyish’ appeal. This is especially noticeable when you consider that the story is meant to take place during Edward’s reign, which would have been the early 1900s, a time when Holmes and Watson had already been living together for near twenty years.
The language was also off. There were times when it came close, but most of the time it was quite off. Doyle’s infamous wit was entirely lacking, as was his subtle ability to paint beyond the image (by this I imply that Doyle was particularly clever when it came to touching on things like economics and social culture and even politics, without ever mentioning these things directly). The use of lines from Canon almost made it worse, because they were delivered wrong, and so, even when the language was right, it was off.
It wasn’t all bad. There are a few things I enjoyed.
The story itself is interesting, and I probably would have enjoyed it had SH not been attached to it. Granted, the twist at the end was predictable and kind of dumb.
The slash is obvious. There’s this sense of possessiveness between Holmes and Watson that is very much in keeping with the Holmes and Watson I know. This is made quite evident by the fact that Holmes, after having been left by Watson, declines into a life of addiction and self destruction. It’s only with Watson’s return that he returns to work and abandons the opium dens of London.
There are also lots and lots of side looks and gazing. In fact, were they anyone but Holmes and Watson, I’d probably slash them.
Watson was fairly admirable as well (although I had a hard time reconciling his appearance). He proved quite useful, and was far more intelligent than most Watson adaptations. Still, there was something distinctly off about him that I couldn’t quite place my finger on.
I can’t quite decide what to think of Rupert Everett’s portrayal of Holmes. He certainly made a unique Holmes –an almost, but not quite, Holmes. I’m not sure, though, if this was his doing; with the right script, I think he could have made a rather brilliant Holmes. Sadly, the script was lacking, and so his Holmes didn’t quite measure up to my expectations. I think, though, that if he replayed the role, maybe in say, ten years, perhaps doing a Canon based adaptation, he might actually be able to pull it off
Overall I think I’d rate this movie fairly low in terms of faithfulness to Sherlock Holmes, but it does deserve a moderate rating for mindless entertainment value. See it or not, I don’t think it makes a difference either way. I’ve only given it 1 pipe here, as it really doesn’t work in terms of a Sherlock Holmes’ adaptation.