Thursday 2 February 2012

Sherlock Holmes - Game of Shadows

Starring: Robert Downey Jr, Jude Law, Noomi Rapace
Director: Guy Ritchie

NOW that the hype over the TV series of Sherlock (the one with Benedict Cumberbatch, or Cumbercob if you’re from Nuneaton) is beginning to die down, it is worthwhile taking a look at the recent film.
Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law are back at it again, investigating super crimes by super villains. This time they’re up against the dreaded Moriarty, the Blofeld of the Holmes world.
What Downey Jr and Law brought to the first film, they bring again to the sequel. In Law, Downey Jr has found another collaborator and like his partnership with Gwyneth Paltrow in the Iron Man series, these two complement each other, bouncing off each other’s charisma.
And director, Guy Ritchie, is on fine form too, showing off his bravado with magnificent sets, shot in the same muted colour as his previous films.
Secondary cast members help us along our journey, this time with Swedish actress Noomi Rapace playing Gypsy girl Madam Simza Heron searching for her brother; Stephen Fry as Sherlock’s elder brother and statesman Mycroft; and Jared Harris as the evil Professor James Moriarty.
They all play to the backdrop of an impending war between France and Germany.
So the pieces are in place but does the action meet the hype?
The first film in this interpretation of Sherlock, did not grab me like it did other people, but I understood its popularity.
Game of Shadows opens with Sherlock running into old flame Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) but gets into trouble when he finds himself surrounded by hoodlums, under the pay of Moriarty.
This is the first of the well choreographed set-pieces, and they must be impressive. I say that because the action was going far too quickly to absorb it all in, so I couldn’t tell what was happening between each cut. All I was aware of was that Sherlock was able to despatch the four men he was fighting. I’m not against fast editing, so long as the eyes a chance to take it all in.
And unfortunately this set the tone for what happened throughout the rest of the film. Like the complex plot, the audience were forced to keep up with what was happening on screen. There was no chance to catch your breath and work out what was happening. Yes, the audience were swept along with action, but it was more frustrating than exciting.
And despite all the set-pieces, some of which were spectacular – the scene on the train is a terrific gambit – there was not enough observation, and a bit too much explosion, a case of bigger and better and the action was spectacular.
But it all detracted away from why we loved Sherlock Holmes in the first place, not enough detecting, too much fighting. It seemed as if we were watching a 19th century James Bond rather than our beloved super-sleuth.

The Woman In Black

Director: James Watkins
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe; Ciaran Hinds

THERE’S the old saying that less is more, and when it comes to The Woman In Black, that is certainly true.
The premise for star Daniel Radcliffe’s latest film is pure gothic – set at the end of the 19th century, solicitor Arthur Kipps (Radcliffe) is ordered to head to Northumberland to negotiate the sale of a derelict house.
The grieving solicitor (he lost his wife Stella in childbirth four years ago) is given this last chance to redeem himself in the eyes of his employer.
But on arrival in Northumberland he finds that the locals are not very welcoming and when he makes it known that he is there to negotiate the sale of the house, the villager are even less charming.
From the moment Kipps arrives at Eel Marsh House at the end of Nine Lives Causeway, the tradition of Hammer Horror comes alive.
The approach to the house is brilliantly atmospheric with an eerie, nauseous feeling as the cab makes it’s way along the path.
Then Kipps arrives at the house which appears like Edgar Allen Poe’s House of Usher – a sense of dread pervades the viewer.
Once inside Radcliffe sets about going over the paperwork but inevitably he gets distracted by the sounds of the brick body that he is trying to sell.
Be warned, despite being a 12A this is one of the most terrifying films for a long while. It is more than just jumpy, there are moments of pure horror which will cause psychological damage with children.
Director James Watkins has perfectly mastered the composition and style of the genre. With previous work Eden Lake behind him, he has once again proven to the suits that less is more.
Rocking chairs, freaky wind-up toys and exploding pipes add to the atmosphere. Then there’s the appearance of our monster.
Flashes of the Woman are all that is needed and we never really see her features until the very last moment.
But the true star is neither the Woman, nor Daniel Radcliffe, who is convincing as a subtle solicitor trying overcome his own demons, but that of Hammer Horror.
It is back to basics before they went down the road of lesbian vampires, and this feature shows they can make ‘em like they used to.
There are a few moments where the film loses it a bit, such as towards the climax where Kipps vows to make amends for past misdeeds, and the ending is bit clichéd.
But, armed with a great script by Jane Goldman, adapted from Susan Hill’s original book, with Watkins at the helm they have created a proper horror movie, and one that is not only jumpy but will linger long in the mind. You won’t look at a rocking chair in the same way again.

You can also see this review on Boolean Flix. Here's the link:
http://www.booleanflix.com/2012/02/02/the-woman-in-black/