It is rare when I can't remember anything about a movie. I even remember things from bad movies that I will never see again, but in the case of Paramount's Young Sherlock Holmes I could not remember anything about the film, beyond the premise, which has Holmes and Watson meeting as young boys and solving there first case together.
The movie has quite a pedigree. It is executive produced by Steven Spielberg and his Amblin Entertainment, directed by Barry Levinson (The Natural, Rain Man) written by Chris Columbus (Goonies, Gremlins) and features the first ever fully digitized character created by John Lassiter of Pixar. With that amount of talent you would expect a substantial film, but it is not, and that is probably why I didn't remember anything about it.
Released in 1985 the film was a big budget action adventure yarn for the Christmas season. Paramount was probably planning a franchise of Young Sherlock Holmes adventures, especially considering the ending, but the film failed at the box office and no sequels were ever made. On a budget of $18 million the film made $19.7 million. This was a big disappointment when you consider that Back To The Future,another film aimed at the same audience, released in 1985, grossed over $200 million.
Then again I question who is the audience for Young Sherlock Holmes? The movie has many literary references that would go over the top of most kids and yet the action is clearly in the Goonies mode and won't appeal to most adults. The film is cast entirely with unknowns, so there is no star for the audience to recognize and identify with. Both characters, young Holmes and Watson are written as if they are miniature adult versions of their future selves, not real children, with the real emotions of adolescent boys.
The movie itself is cobbled together from parts of other movies including Goonies and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. I don't feel the need to go into a plot description here.
The film does not have any sense of authenticity. It is obvious throughout the film that the entire thing is made on a sound stage made up to look like Victorian England.
But there are two things lacking in the movie that made it so completely unmemorable. A sense of true emotion and adventure and a complete lack of humor. Both of these are required for any kind of action adventure movie.
Young Sherlock Holmes is a fun, entertaining adventure that like me you will probably completely forget a few hours after watching it.
At The Movie House rating ** stars
1 comment:
Perfect example of mismatched review and rating...you essentially panned this movie as a forgetable disappointment with no redeeming qualities or effort...Yet,the film gets two stars...Two stars equates to watchable...What exactly does a movie have to do to be declared a stinker by Mr MH. Based on everything you wrote, it would seem you would like to have your money back on this one...hence, stinky movie, reward for stinky movie equals 1 star. A bomb is a bomb, even when its a dud. I believe movie ratings should be on a bell curve...for every 4 star flick, there is a bomb needing to be mentioned...granted, you are not going to review many one star flicks because you will tend to shy away as word of mouth will inform you to avoid certain movies...nonetheless, this movie probably got one of your worst reviews, yet it still earned 2 stars....We hereby submit a formal request for a reassessment (All previous such requests have been denied)
I am begining to think that Mr Moviehouse is one of those kooks who thought Skakespeare in Love was deserved the AA for BP over Saving PrivaTE rYAN
Post a Comment