Review: 'Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows'

Film: Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows
Director: Guy Ritchie
Cast:  Robert Downey Jr, Jude Law, Noomi Rapace, Jared Harris, Stephen Fry, Kelly Reilly, Rachel McAdams
Rating: ***

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows sees the eccentric human bloodhound (Downey Jr) and Afghan war veteran Doctor John Watson, his companion and chronicler, in a race against time to undo the evils of Professor James Moriarty (Harris). The distinguished mathematics scholar by day, whose presence was hinted at in the first film, is on a mad quest to do in diplomats from major European nations in order to plunge Europe into a World War with intent to profit from the ensuing chaos by ultimately supplying “everything from bullets to bandages”.

The film borrows elements from The Final Problem which Arthur Conan Doyle wrote to essentially kill off the pesky character Holmes who was overshadowing his other writings. In Guy Ritchie’s universe, though, the amazing spider-man's spider sense doesn’t have squat on Homes’s deduction skills with which he achieves Rajinikanth-levels of awesomeness.

In addition to the return of the femme-fatalized Yank Irene Addler (McAdams), Holmes and the newly married Watson hook up with gypsy Simza (Rapace), one of the professor’s humbler targets in France. Also introduced is Holmes’s diplomat brother Mycroft (Fry in an inspired piece of casting) who is just about as brilliant and eccentric as his brother.

With his inclination for playing megalomaniac savants (however, while he extols the genius of his antagonist, Holmes decries his ‘moral insanity’) Robert Downey Jr owns the film as the coolly detached detective.  The role of Watson---the man to whom Holmes is a source of embarrassment, exasperation, bemusement, but whom he holds in reverent awe fits Jude Law like a glove. Holmes’s immature resentment over Watson’s marriage (Despite his pronouncement that he represses nothing) is a consistent theme throughout the film.

While Harris is good as Moriarty, one wishes his diabolism was played out better, living up to Holmes’s sobriquet the Napoleon of Crime. Which brings us to the story…

Though the story wasn’t as muscular as it could be and there is no gigantic enigma (what doctor Watson in his memoirs would probably refer to as the ‘most singular part of the adventure’) per se at the heart of the plot, Ritchie has you gaping at the screen like an idiot with his technique. (How Watson spent his honeymoon, though this reviewer won’t reveal it, is the highlight of the film). But it’s not all sound and fury though. The witty repartee and constant bickering between Holmes and Watson adds another level of enjoyment to the film. Kudos to writers Kieran and Michele Mulroney for that, as well as the embedded references which Holmes fans would, no doubt, delight in. One must also appreciate the attention to detail given to maintaining a convincing vibe of the period in both costume and stunning set pieces (until they are blown up!).

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, Ritchie’s second dive into the Victorian era after gangster (and desert island) films, falls a little short of what a great popcorn movie can do. If reading bizarre Holmes pastiches keep you up past the dawn or you are in need of light-weight entertainment, A Game of Shadows is worth a look at.

Verdict: The game, though it is a little uneven, is definitely afoot!