Young Sherlock Holmes
Young Sherlock Holmes (1985)
Writers: Arthur Conan Doyle (characters), Chris Columbus (screenplay)
Cast: Nicholas Rowe, Alan Cox, Sophie Ward, Anthony Higgins, Susan Fleetwood, Freddie Jones, Nigel Stock, Roger Ashton-Griffiths, Earl Rhodes
Synopsis:
A prequel examining the first meeting between famous detective Sherlock Holmes (Rowe) and his sidekick John Watson (Cox), while they were in boarding school together. The pair are soon thrust from their normal academic duties into investigating a series of murders which seem to be targeting prominent London businessmen. They soon uncover that the murders are being perpetrated by a mysterious Egyptian cult called the Rame-tep. With the help of their fencing instructor Mr. Rathe (Higgins), Holmes and Watson discover not only is the cult responsible for the murders but also for the disappearances of several young women around London.
First Impression:
I didn't see this one in theaters, not because I wasn't allowed to (though I doubt my mom would have let me if I asked), but because at 9 years old I wasn't really interested in anything that Sherlock Holmes did. I caught this several years later on home video. It was on videotape given to my brother by my aunt who had recorded a series of movies onto it, including this one, as well as the Lost Boys and Best Seller. I remember enjoying the film quite a bit when I first watched it. While I wasn't a fan of Holmes at the time (I'm still really not), it appealed to me. That videotape was one I would frequently return to whenever there wasn't much on TV and my folks didn't want to take us to rent a video, so this film has a special place in my heart. I hadn't watched for decades until I managed to pick it up on DVD several years ago. Its been a while since I last watched it, so hopefully this review doesn't taint that initial impression.
Story/Direction:
"The game is afoot."
There are a few things to talk about in regard to this film's story. First of all, this is not adapted from any work by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Instead, it's a completely original story that shows the audience a snippet of the famous detective's early years. I think this pissed off a few Holmes fans, as there are a plethora of stories written by the character's creator to adapt into a film, so why write a new story that wouldn't even be considered canon? In fact, I think the filmmakers suspected such a reaction because the film opens with a disclaimer making sure viewers are aware that Doyle had nothing to do with this story and it is a completely original work. This kind of gets the movie off on the wrong foot, I think, because it seems like the filmmakers are almost apologizing for movie before it even gets going. It just seemed like an odd choice to me, especially in this day and age, where prequels are a dime a dozen.
Speaking of which, this film is one of the first times in my life that I encountered a prequel movie. Fortunately for me it was regarding a character that I don't really have any sort of connection with, so the creative liberties it takes didn't bother me so much because I know very little about the character other than the basics that most everyone is aware of at this point.
As for the story itself, I found it fairly interesting. It seemed like it was tailored specifically for this set of characters and not a generic script that was adapted to fit a more well-known IP. It was well suited not just to the characters but the era in which it was set, the Victorian era. However, some modern viewers may find the film's plot and antagonists a bit culturally insensitive.
While I like the overall theme and pace of the story, I think the film had trouble deciding what it wanted to be from a tonal perspective. The film is about the teenaged adventures of Holmes and Watson, while attending boarding school. If you read that off the back of a VHS box, you'd be inclined to think the film was geared mostly towards a younger audience. This is not really the case. While the earlier scenes with Holmes and Watson are light-hearted and full of teenaged shenanigans, there are also a number of relatively terrifying or disturbing scenes sprinkled into the first act that make the whole thing probably unsuitable for kids. I found those more frightening scenes to be a bit more compelling that the school-focused scenes a bit cringey. However, once the film shifts into the second act, it sheds the school hijinks and focuses only on the case, which helps the tone immensely.
Acting/Characters:
For a film with such big names attached to it (directed by Barry Levinson, produced by Steven Spielberg) the cast is one that was relatively unknown to me. In fact, I don't recall seeing any of the primary actors in anything else, with the exception of Roger Ashton-Griffiths who played Inspector Lestrad. The thing about casting mostly unknowns in a film is, their performances may be a bit of a mixed bag and that's what we get here. First of all, lets look at the the film's lead, Nicholas Rowe, who I'm not sure was ready to carry a major studio film at that point in his career. He plays Holmes as very intense and focused, with very little charm. Again, I don't know a ton about the character but Rowe's portrayal pales when compared to later interpretations of the character from Robert Downey Jr. and Benedict Cumberbatch both of whom succeeded in giving the detective a bit more of personality.
I was similarly unmoved by Alan Cox's portrayal of John Watson, who seemed to be there mostly as comic relief. The film makes Watson as a bit of a bumbler, who main purpose is to make Holmes seem more smart. I don't know if that's the way Doyle has always portrayed him in the original stories but, to me, it seems like a waste of a character. Although, to be fair, Watson at least had a bit of a personality and seemed like more of a fleshed out character than Holmes was.
The rest of the cast, though not well-known film actors did well for the most part. However, Sophie Ward doesn't get much to do as Elizabeth Hardy, as she's relegated to love interest who gets put into danger to motivate the hero. everybody else in the cast, which I think was mostly veteran British stage or TV actors, did an admirable job.
Visual/Special Effects:
The visual effects in this film are quite good for the time, using a mixture of animatronics and stop-motion, as well as some early CGI. In fact, this film is a landmark one in SFX because it was the first motion picture to include a fully-rendered CGI character, which to be honest,, looks pretty damn good considering the film was released in 1985. It's the special effects where most of the film's eerie scenes stem from as they are meant to depict terrifying hallucinations. As a result, we're treated to a living stained glass window, a grumpy cooked pheasant and some angry little gargoyles. Once again, for the time these looked pretty good and still hold up well today. The only exception is the army of pastries (yeah, that's right) which look a little off, but I think they were meant to be that way.
Score/Music:
The music in the film was composed by Bruce Broughton and I think it's one of the movie's highlights. It captures not only the time period the film is set in, but it also transitions nicely from the whimsical tone of the school scenes to the more sinister doing of London's more seedier areas. The highlight, I think, is the chants from the cultists that really is quite catchy (although, I guess that's what chants are designed to be) Of course, I've been humming it to myself all week, so that's another good sign.
Action:
This film has a little bit of action in it, though not much, which is what one would expect from a Sherlock Holmes story. What little action there is in the film, it's done fairly well. we're treated to a couple of decent fencing scenes, as well as an interesting chase or two. This isn't a film that relies heavily on the action set piece, but what little action there is passes the sniff test.
Final Verdict:
So, this is one of those instances where a long-beloved film of mine has lost a little bit of its sheen over the years. The story is interesting and engaging enough, despite the rather drab characters. If you want to watch a neat detective story set in a wintery Victorian London, check it out. Fans of Sherlock Holmes should use their own judgment as to whether they see this film or not.
Comments
Post a Comment