Sherlock Holmes--the reboot
Jan. 4th, 2010 10:53 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ivyficI saw Sherlock Holmes this weekend, and despite always enjoying RDJ, and despite the fact that this movie isn’t so much slashy as it is actually gay (this is beyond "the plot holes only make sense with teh gay" of Smallville and The Fast and the Furious and into the territory of "it was clearly the filmmakers and actors’ intent that these characters are gay"), I was not particularly grabbed by it.
Let me start out by saying, yes, I know this Holmes story is intentionally discontinuous with others. I’m not knocking it on not being true to the stories. I didn’t expect it to be. But I’m going to compare it to earlier Holmeses anyway to explain why this one didn’t grab me while others did.
Also, I have read most if not all of the Holmes stories but it’s been awhile, so I’m going to compare it to the Jeremy Brett Holmes, which I rewatched all of recently. Brett’s Holmes is, I think, the most true to the books, but I recognize that some parts of his portrayal are not in the books.
What struck me about RDJ’s Holmes was not how different he was from earlier Holmeses, but how similar. Let’s make a list!
- RDJ brawls. Though I wouldn’t call Brett’s Holmes a brawler, he does know martial arts, as does Holmes in the books.
- RDJ, when not on a case, locks himself in his quarters, smoking far too much, doing mind-altering substances, and experimenting. So did Brett. Of course, Brett and literary Holmes shot up cocaine, but as jethrien pointed out, it’s kind of hard to have a family friendly movie when your hero is shooting up (currently illegal but then legal) drugs intravenously.
- RDJ recklessly takes a hallucinogen in order to more fully understand the criminal. So did Brett, in "The Devil’s Foot."
- The plot of this movie focuses on the occult. So did some Holmes stories. Doyle was actually a firm believer in the occult, and believed Houdini escaped his ropes by making himself insubstantial. So that part of the movie didn’t bother me at all.
- The mystery is completely unsolvable to the audience because Holmes withholds vital (made up) facts that we couldn’t possibly know until the end. This is entirely typical of Holmes stories. They always have Holmes saying things like "I could see by your pink fish tattoo that you were a sailor in China and therefore are distressed about the murder you committed twenty years ago in the pursuit of a robbery." I’ve always considered the Holmes stories more adventures than mysteries.
I think what bothers me is not that RDJ is different than Brett, but that his Holmes is far less complex than Brett’s. It’s like RDJ is playing a caricature of Holmes.
For example, look at Holmes and Watson. In the movie, is Holmes hard to live with? Yes. Is he extremely eccentric, rude, petty, and manipulative? Yes. But in the movie, that pettiness and manipulation is more along the lines of a long-married couple bickering. It’s childish, but ultimately harmless.
Brett’s Holmes, on the other hand, is downright cruel to Watson. Take, for example, "The Solitary Cyclist," in which Holmes sends Watson to observe, and then when Watson reports, proud of what he’s learned, Holmes belittles and demeans his efforts. What’s remarkable about it is not that Watson is stupid, but that he isn’t. That Holmes is holding him to an impossible standard, setting him up to fail, and then biting his head off for not doing what Holmes didn’t tell him he should have done. What’s even more remarkable is that Holmes doesn’t apologize to Watson for his actions, Watson apologizes for Holmes.
Holmes lying to, manipulating, and hurting Watson, and putting him in mortal danger because he wasn’t forthcoming, is a common feature of the stories. Just look at "The Empty House," where we learn that not only did Holmes fake his death for three years, he did not tell Watson because he did not trust Watson to keep the secret. He put his friend through unimaginable emotional pain because he just didn’t trust him enough, which Watson is rightly pissed about. And even if you write that off as Doyle retconning "The Final Problem," there’s "The Dying Detective," in which Holmes lets Watson think he is dying, then tells him to his face that he doesn’t trust his medical skills, again because he doesn’t trust Watson enough to let him in on the ruse.
It’s this dynamic that fascinates me about the Holmes/Watson pairing. It’s not just that Holmes is eccentric or difficult to live with, it’s that he is especially cruel to the only person he really cares about. And that Watson takes this abuse, not because he’s a wuss, or is overly submissive, but because he seems to be the only one who can see Holmes’s cruelty and social ineptitude as covering for underlying frustration and fear. It’s Watson’s unique ability, not to tolerate Holmes, but to see him clearly, that makes the pairing work for me.
By contrast, in the film, you get Watson’s one reference to following after Holmes even though Holmes never tells him what’s going on, which I found hilarious, but other than that, Holmes is really incredibly nice to Watson. Oh sure, he bickers, and is trying to drive Mary away, but he compliments Watson on his detective skills, thanks him for his heroic efforts, and tells him that he likes having him along. That is what rings untrue for me about this whole mess of a film. I know they were doing this to show Watson as not an idiotic patsy, and I did like seeing him as an army man, but...with Holmes being so simpering towards Watson, Watson ended up spending the whole movie annoyed at him, rather than the combination of admiration, hurt, and tenderness I see in both Watsons in the Brett series. I think Holmes inability to show his feelings is a fundamental part of his character. In Brett's series, Holmes calls Watson by his christian name once--once!--and that's only after he's almost killed him with stupid, stubborn, reckless behavior. Whereas RDJ seemed to have no real difficulty making himself known.
So it wasn’t the complete adulteration of Irene Adler’s character that annoyed me, or the fact that Holmes should know Mary pretty well after solving her case, or the crapitude of the science (you can stand in a room full of cyanide gas and be fine because you drank an antidote? Seriously?), it was that I didn’t see anything particularly interesting in the Holmes/Watson dynamic. They bickered. Sure it was fun, sure it was textual that they were gay for each other, but I didn’t see anything deeper going on there.
I’ll still read the fic, because I have great faith in fic authors for adding depth to shallow canons. But this movie excited me far less than I thought it would, and far less than the recent Star Trek reboot.
Let me start out by saying, yes, I know this Holmes story is intentionally discontinuous with others. I’m not knocking it on not being true to the stories. I didn’t expect it to be. But I’m going to compare it to earlier Holmeses anyway to explain why this one didn’t grab me while others did.
Also, I have read most if not all of the Holmes stories but it’s been awhile, so I’m going to compare it to the Jeremy Brett Holmes, which I rewatched all of recently. Brett’s Holmes is, I think, the most true to the books, but I recognize that some parts of his portrayal are not in the books.
What struck me about RDJ’s Holmes was not how different he was from earlier Holmeses, but how similar. Let’s make a list!
- RDJ brawls. Though I wouldn’t call Brett’s Holmes a brawler, he does know martial arts, as does Holmes in the books.
- RDJ, when not on a case, locks himself in his quarters, smoking far too much, doing mind-altering substances, and experimenting. So did Brett. Of course, Brett and literary Holmes shot up cocaine, but as jethrien pointed out, it’s kind of hard to have a family friendly movie when your hero is shooting up (currently illegal but then legal) drugs intravenously.
- RDJ recklessly takes a hallucinogen in order to more fully understand the criminal. So did Brett, in "The Devil’s Foot."
- The plot of this movie focuses on the occult. So did some Holmes stories. Doyle was actually a firm believer in the occult, and believed Houdini escaped his ropes by making himself insubstantial. So that part of the movie didn’t bother me at all.
- The mystery is completely unsolvable to the audience because Holmes withholds vital (made up) facts that we couldn’t possibly know until the end. This is entirely typical of Holmes stories. They always have Holmes saying things like "I could see by your pink fish tattoo that you were a sailor in China and therefore are distressed about the murder you committed twenty years ago in the pursuit of a robbery." I’ve always considered the Holmes stories more adventures than mysteries.
I think what bothers me is not that RDJ is different than Brett, but that his Holmes is far less complex than Brett’s. It’s like RDJ is playing a caricature of Holmes.
For example, look at Holmes and Watson. In the movie, is Holmes hard to live with? Yes. Is he extremely eccentric, rude, petty, and manipulative? Yes. But in the movie, that pettiness and manipulation is more along the lines of a long-married couple bickering. It’s childish, but ultimately harmless.
Brett’s Holmes, on the other hand, is downright cruel to Watson. Take, for example, "The Solitary Cyclist," in which Holmes sends Watson to observe, and then when Watson reports, proud of what he’s learned, Holmes belittles and demeans his efforts. What’s remarkable about it is not that Watson is stupid, but that he isn’t. That Holmes is holding him to an impossible standard, setting him up to fail, and then biting his head off for not doing what Holmes didn’t tell him he should have done. What’s even more remarkable is that Holmes doesn’t apologize to Watson for his actions, Watson apologizes for Holmes.
Holmes lying to, manipulating, and hurting Watson, and putting him in mortal danger because he wasn’t forthcoming, is a common feature of the stories. Just look at "The Empty House," where we learn that not only did Holmes fake his death for three years, he did not tell Watson because he did not trust Watson to keep the secret. He put his friend through unimaginable emotional pain because he just didn’t trust him enough, which Watson is rightly pissed about. And even if you write that off as Doyle retconning "The Final Problem," there’s "The Dying Detective," in which Holmes lets Watson think he is dying, then tells him to his face that he doesn’t trust his medical skills, again because he doesn’t trust Watson enough to let him in on the ruse.
It’s this dynamic that fascinates me about the Holmes/Watson pairing. It’s not just that Holmes is eccentric or difficult to live with, it’s that he is especially cruel to the only person he really cares about. And that Watson takes this abuse, not because he’s a wuss, or is overly submissive, but because he seems to be the only one who can see Holmes’s cruelty and social ineptitude as covering for underlying frustration and fear. It’s Watson’s unique ability, not to tolerate Holmes, but to see him clearly, that makes the pairing work for me.
By contrast, in the film, you get Watson’s one reference to following after Holmes even though Holmes never tells him what’s going on, which I found hilarious, but other than that, Holmes is really incredibly nice to Watson. Oh sure, he bickers, and is trying to drive Mary away, but he compliments Watson on his detective skills, thanks him for his heroic efforts, and tells him that he likes having him along. That is what rings untrue for me about this whole mess of a film. I know they were doing this to show Watson as not an idiotic patsy, and I did like seeing him as an army man, but...with Holmes being so simpering towards Watson, Watson ended up spending the whole movie annoyed at him, rather than the combination of admiration, hurt, and tenderness I see in both Watsons in the Brett series. I think Holmes inability to show his feelings is a fundamental part of his character. In Brett's series, Holmes calls Watson by his christian name once--once!--and that's only after he's almost killed him with stupid, stubborn, reckless behavior. Whereas RDJ seemed to have no real difficulty making himself known.
So it wasn’t the complete adulteration of Irene Adler’s character that annoyed me, or the fact that Holmes should know Mary pretty well after solving her case, or the crapitude of the science (you can stand in a room full of cyanide gas and be fine because you drank an antidote? Seriously?), it was that I didn’t see anything particularly interesting in the Holmes/Watson dynamic. They bickered. Sure it was fun, sure it was textual that they were gay for each other, but I didn’t see anything deeper going on there.
I’ll still read the fic, because I have great faith in fic authors for adding depth to shallow canons. But this movie excited me far less than I thought it would, and far less than the recent Star Trek reboot.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-01-04 08:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-04 09:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-04 09:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-04 09:31 pm (UTC)Given not only the various adaptations but also the mountains of Holmes pastiches, I think most people can be forgiven for not really knowing what Holmes's character is really like. Most fandoms aren't played out in public, published books the way the Holmes fandom has been. I think the classic case is that of Irene Adler who, I'm sorry, just based on "Scandal in Bohemia," I do not see as a great detective/criminal or Holmes's great nemesis/romantic interest. It's just not there. It's all over the pastiches, though. But I think all of this fanon that's built up around her (hem Mary Sue hem) obscures the elegance of her character--that she's not a great figure, but that she refuses to be a victim and outwits Holmes. For the love of someone else, even. I can't see his admiration really going beyond intellectual.
no subject
Date: 2010-01-04 09:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-04 09:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-04 09:36 pm (UTC)Finally saw this movie
Date: 2010-01-25 05:44 am (UTC)As for the rest of it, it was fun. Silly, but worth the $6 matinee.