Did I just miss it or was there no, "It's elementary my dear Watson." I enjoyed the movie though, loved how they left it open for a second film.
I didn't see it either. Maybe Ritchie thought it would be too cheesy. I did hear also that it wasn't in the original stories.
i thought the movie was decent. i thought it was kind of silly that they tried to make it all jet li and full of fight scenes however. my 3 friends didn't really like it and kind of snoozed in the movie. i admit the movie dragged out a bit and the witty banter between holmes and watson got annoying but the movie was still entertaining and had a unique style to it. i guess the movie just met my expectations. one more thing.....rachel mcadams is hot.
for a sherlock holmes movie, there sure wasn't much suspense or mystery. No clues. No detective work. The movie just dragged along for what seemed like forever and then sherlock explains everything at the very end. Plus, i could hardly understand a thing Robert Downey Jr was saying for half the movie.
That was my main problem, it didn't feel like a lot deductive reasoning going on besides reading people. Rather he gave a nice tidy solution after the fact and it quickly moved to the next scene. But I tried to accept it for what it was, an action flick.
I just saw it yesterday. It wasn't bad, but it was basically: Lethal Weapon 5: This time were doing the 1800s. No coincidence that Joel Silver is one of the producers.
true. deductive reasoning doesn't play well on screen for a major marquee movie IMO. there's a reason CSI has dominated television for the last decade. the general public doesn't have the commitment (or maybe even capacity) to think things out. however, if a niche movie was the goal, then they probably could have gone more "thinking-man's movie", like memento, identity, donnie darko... still, it was easy, open-ended, and had great casting.
