Sherlock Holmes doesn’t need billy clubs to kick your ass

December 22, 2009 at 7:59 pm (The Movie I'm not Seeing this Weekend) (, )

Back when I was writing on the newspaper blog, I had to clean up this post title for the masses. Now I have my own blog, and “masses” rhymes with “asses.”

At any rate, Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes trailers have been working my nerves for the last six months. Why? you ask. “Why?” Because I *heart* Sherlock Holmes, that’s why! He is the best motherfrakking detective ever (with the possible exception of L, who was clearly modeled after him)! He has a masterful knowledge of human behavior, an arsenal of pithy quotes and he can bend an iron rod with his bare hands. WITH HIS BARE HANDS!

(It needed capitalizing.)

I'd like to see you try it, you think you're so hot.

Sherlock Holmes is, in a nutshell, the be-all, end-all best detective ever, and no detective will ever live up to him, because holy Gods, he’s just that awesome.

I like this picture of Holmes because he's not wearing that damned deerstalker cap.

(Also fictional. Right. I get that he’s fictional. I’m on it. Fictional.)

A master of pugilism! A god of observation! A crack shot, a cocaine addict and a violinist.

Was there nothing Holmes couldn’t do?

Yes. And that was this: Stay out of the public domain.

Which is why Guy Ritchie is all like, “Oooh, I’m making a thinking man’s action movie, and you know it’s a thinking man’s action movie because it’s about the original thinking man, Sherlock Holmes, except I’m going to bastardize everything that made the character great into one Robert Downey-sized package, and go to hell, purists.”

"Also, I'm going to make him handsome, because frak you, canon."

And I’ll admit, Ritchie’s flick looks like it could be a fun romp. (Actually, all his flicks look that way, until you realize he just made the exact same movie for the 11th time or whatever.) It just doesn’t look like a Sherlock Holmes movie.

Also? And this bugs me to no godsdamned end, people: Irene Adler was not ever EVER EVER Holmes’s love interest. He expressed admiration for her. Once. In the first Holmes story ever. She was never mentioned again. He didn’t think of her fondly. He didn’t love her. She outwitted him, and was a decent human being, and he admired her for it. Stop trying to make it a grand romance between the two of them, Hollywood and you damnable mystery writers who think you can do Holmes justice! Holmes was what he was, which was a man’s man: he was the best buddy you could ever have. He wasn’t going to abandon you to go home to his wife and kids. He didn’t have those. He wasn’t going to ignore you to chase skirts. He didn’t chase them. He had one purpose and that was to take you, Watson, on a mad, whirlwind ride of action and adventure and occasionally express his undying devotion to you.

And I certainly hope you appreciate it, Watson.

(That paragraph got a little bit away from me there.)

I guess the point I’m trying to make is that Holmes didn’t exist without Watson. How many Holmes stories weren’t chronicled by Watson? Four! And they weren’t very good, anyway.

(I’m sorry, but they really weren’t.)

Anyway, the point I’m trying to make here is that if you got on Sherlock Holmes’s bad side, he would pummel you to death with his fists.

He doesn’t need billy clubs.


1 Comment

  1. Sherlock Holmes vs. Sherlock Holmes « Hollywood Hates Me said,

    […] come out superior? Let’s get ready to rumble! (Or something.) Physicality. Now, as I’ve noted before, repeatedly, Sherlock Holmes was never intended to be an attractive man. However, the world at […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: