This was a very entertaining movie. Being a Sherlock Holmes fan, I have read all the original books. This is the closest depiction of the original character I have seen. It is however, more exaggerated towards action. All the other movies and depictions have zero physical prowess for Holmes. In the Sir Arthur Conan Doyle books, Holmes is portrayed as an expert boxer, fencer and an expert with the singlestick or cudgel. He was also portrayed as a physically strong person in the original books.I also liked how the movie was current with the technology of the day. The first voice transmission using radio waves was in 1900 and 1901 by 2 different independent people. I would expect that in the late 1800's of the movie, a binary on/off use of radio waves would be a first step.This character is also shown as more disheveled with his apartment and his person. This is also more in tune with the original books. I do like the old Basil Rathbone movies made in the 40's as well as most of the other portrayals (Benedict Cumberbatch series). However, they do not fully portray the full breadth of the character in the original books. Unfortunately, the pseudo intellectuals, who have obviously never read the original books, use the old movies and current shows as the guide line. They give this move a "1" because it is "Not like the original character" or the tech is beyond tech of the day. In reality they wanted "Jane Austin" or colorized version of the old Basil Rathbone movies. What they got Sir Arthur Conan Doyle on steroids.If you are looking for a more action version closer to the original books (although exaggerated) this movie is for you.

The sequel was set in 1891 so this film must be 1891 or earlier. Eros wouldn't have been in Piccadilly Circus. I can use Google why cant film makers?

Sherlock Holmes just didn't seem to sweep me off my feet like some other films have done in the past. Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law were exceptional, and the sound and score to this film were absolutely phenomenal. The plot and story were great and the pacing was great, but I just didn't feel blown away by the film at the end of the movie. So with all that being said, I decided to give Sherlock Holmes a "Good" on theVade Review Bar or a 7 out of 10. If you haven't already seen this film, go out and do it right now. This film has some great moments and I believe it is worth your time watching it. Sure it might not be the most amazing film you'll ever see, but that's not the point. The point is to entertain you, immerse you, make you laugh, and make you want to uncover the mystery. And I believe that Sherlock Holmes nails that perfectly.Read more at theVade.

"Sherlock Holmes" fails in every way imaginable. There isn't one aspect of this film that feels fresh and original, which is vital for remaking a story and putting it to life. Robert Downy Jr. and Jude Law play Holmes and Watson, giving forced and fake performances while lacking any chemistry between the detective partnership. Let's just say this film moves slower than a tortoise, taking forever to become interesting or engaging. What would have helped is if it was made with more of a dark undertone, gripping the audience in to a more complex portrayal of crime and law. Instead we're forced to sit through two hours of ridiculous one-liners and dull action that never helps move the story forward.