Sherlock Holmes 2 A Game of Shadows

For the record, if the standard for Mycroft is that “he observes propriety even more than Holmes does,” I’d argue that is a standard still met in this movie.

Three people out of the group of seven I saw this with caught this. The other four wondered what we were laughing about.

Loved that Watson is nearly as smart and observant a detective as Holmes himself, and gets to be both an intellectual and physical hero in his own right. Don’t older versions show him as something of a bumbling comic-relief sidekick? I prefer the current trend. For the first time, it is clear why Holmes wants Watson for a partner.

Loved that Mrs. Watson, Mycroft, Lestrade and the Gypsies also get to be heroes of a sort. Isn’t police work really about the team?

Loved Jared Harris! OMG, loved his performance! Not over-the-top, not a caricature, totally believable and bone-chilling for the banality of his evil! Sure to be an iconic Moriarty for the ages.

Loved the pre-thinking of the fight scenes. Opinion on this is far from unanimous, of course, but for me it is one of the unique and compelling elements of this interpretation. A great innovation by Guy Ritchie.

Loved the steampunk anachronisms; car, machine gun, typewriter etc. Just part of the fun.

In the series so far, love that the supernatural is firmly debunked and the clues are visually/vocally laid out for any quick-witted DVD/TiVo-wielding watcher to notice. Now that’s a whodunit!

Also, aforementioned DVD/TiVo watcher can probably follow and recreate part of the chess game – more than can be said for Harry Potter Book 1.

Loved it!!! Will be back for part 3.

When Basil Rathbone played Holmes, his Watson was definitely portrayed as a bumbler. But most other Watsons have been capable men, in their way. (It’s hard to outshine Holmes.)

In the BBC Sherlock, John Watson is a good shot, quite brave & intelligent. Not as brilliant as Sherlock, but more balanced; they definitely complement each other. (Series II begins January 1st in the UK.)

I haven’t yet seen the second of the new Holmes movies. Didn’t love Downey’s Holmes but thought Law was a pretty good Watson…

Were you sleeping during his nekkid scene?! :smiley:

I enjoyed the film greatly, but yeah, even I, by the end, was a little tired of the retrospective pwning of everything before it even happened.

Even the near-ending, where he ‘died’, didn’t surprise me and I was thinking ‘Oh, ok, I guess this is how it ends’. I was almost irritated by the way he didn’t die…except that I’d like to see more, so of course I’d rather he live. Just…nobody REALLY likes a Teflon protagonist.

I thought of it more as a James Bond movie than a Sherlock Holmes movie, but I loved it anyway.

My only disappointment was Colonel Sebastian Moran. In the books, he’s the second-most dangerous man in England. In the movie, he was just a jackal-faced lackey with a sniper rifle.

Are any of those actually “anacronisms” in 1890?

As for the movie - what was the object sent to Watson in the package at the end?

It was Mycroft’s “private oxygen supply.”

The amplified loudspeaker in the gun factory struck me as quite the anachronism.

So, the sharpshooter is also an authentic element of the canon! Makes me appreciate the movie even more. I thought the movie treated the character respectfully, as a smart and deadly villain in his own right. AND…shudder he’s still out there, even after Moriarty goes over the falls! Hello Part 3.

Well, I believe the car is, at least. Some of the reviewers singled out the tommy guns and the KIND of typewriter Watson was using, as anachronisms for 1891. Ah, what do reviewers know.

I believe the earliest combustion-engine powered motorcars hit the market in the late 1880s (I know that is when Benz started selling them). With steam powered versions earlier than that.

Can’t speak to the specific model shown (if real) or how likely it is that someone like Sherlock Holmes would have one.

I honestly do not know. Cars, typewriters and automatic weapons all existed at the time - but I do not think hand-held submachine guns or assault rifles did. Dunno about the specific models depicted of course. The actual tommy gun wasn’t invented, I believe, until the end of WW1.

These things may be anachronisms, but they aren’t very anachronistic. For example, one of the Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes (very “original canon”) depicted one of Sherlock’s clients driving an early automobile - the Problem of Thor Bridge (though he was, admittedly, a very wealthy man).

In the original Sherlock, Moriarty did in fact invest in some inventive weaponry - a silent, deadly accurate air-gun for use in assassinations - used by Moriarty in the Empty House.

I liked the first movie a lot, and I liked this one as well. I thought that taking Moriarty over the falls was a very nice touch. Moriarty is so ingenious that the only way to beat him was to do something his narcissism couldn’t comprehend - self-sacrifice…

And Downey and Law have fantastic on-screen chemistry.

Yeah, I liked the setup for that, when Holmes told Moriarty that if Moriarty’s destruction could be assured, he’d sacrifice himself.

And agreed on the Downey/Law chemistry; the Holmes movies are the first time I’ve genuinely enjoyed and LIKED Law. I’d always kind of detested him previously.

The firearms aren’t as badly off as you might think.

The soldier rifles look like WW2 rifles, because they basically were. The design line saw service for…well, right up to current day, actually, but they were perfectly in-period for Holmes’ time, if on the higher tech end of things.

The pistol seen in the crates was first produced in the mid-1890s, although the particular detachable magazine variant they show came much later than that (1930s) and was probably chosen either in error or convenience, thanks to WW2 mass production.

The machine gun in the movie is the biggest offender. It’s a complete fabrication, possibly intended to be either an aircraft submachinegun of 1914 or a light machine gun of 1924

Another anachronism, I think: laborers are shown digging out the Underground along Baker Street. The Baker Steet station actually opened in 1863: Baker Street tube station - Wikipedia

I liked the movie just about as much as the first one, which is pretty rare for me and sequels. Like the first, it was more steampunk than Holmes & Watson overall, I thought, but still fun. I was a little sorry to see Irene Adler meet her end (if indeed she did). I liked Holmes’s “urban camouflage,” and knew after the first reveal that we’d see it again. Thought Mrs. Hudson was too young, but otherwise properly annoyed with her famous lodger. I agree with obfusciatrist as to Holmes’s near-omniscience. The friendship between Holmes and Watson was nicely portrayed. Moriarty looked nothing like he did in the original Strand illustrations, but the actor did a good job in the role.

I hated, hated, hated Mycroft’s nudity in the presence of a lady. That’s just not Mycroft. Worst part of the movie.

That was a great Stephen Fry scene. It was not, however, a very good Mycroft scene.

Best line:

‘Why would I want something with a mind of its own bobbing between my legs?’

:smiley: