Harockerce What a beautiful movie!

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Ortiz Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Phillipa Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

pretzylboy Really enjoyed the chemistry between Law and Downy. Beautifully shot with a dark edge to it. Not too much mindless combat.

bbinningokc 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.

jodyfranz This was my second viewing of this movie. I liked it better by first run through. Since my first viewing back in 2009 I have watched the latest Sherlock Holmes played by Bennedict Cumberbatch. I liked the modern updated version better than the Robert Downey Jr. rendition. Acting was good, sets were nice to look at, story was pretty good but overall it just lacked for me.If I had to choose between this and watching the BBC Sherlock Holmes - Bennedict wins.

tvsweeney-39052 Sherlock is made more human in this one and not simply the dispassionate thinking machine portrayed by others while Dr.Watson gets very physical, in brawls and street chases.Downey is good as Holmes, showing his selfish, somewhat petulant side--at Watson's coming marriage--as well as the usual brilliant observations about those around him. He rushes in where the police fear to tread and his casual insults to Lestrade are done in such a way the bumbling Scotland Yard man doesn't even seem to notice, pointing out his ineptitude. Irene Adler's place in Holmes' life is really built up in this one, though the real story between the two seems to have been more his admiration of her intellect and the fact she was one of the few people ever to best him, than a physical one. Nevertheless, it's fun, with a great villain and a secret society determined to bring down the government.Placing the story in its actual time period makes this one of the better Sherlock Holmes adaptations. There are great panoramic vistas of Victorian London, so vast they have to be partially paintings.Throw in a touch of the supernatural, some great effects, a dash of humor, a couple of explosions, and what's not to like?