Sittin' in the movie-show, thinkin' nasty thoughts...

[la_belle_laide]

I know I titled another movie review with that header before, but it makes me giggle so I'm using it again. Otherwise I would have titled this “Sherlock Holmes, Steampunk, Random Kung Fu and That Character Who's Not Bad For A Girl.”

So that's actually the first thing I want to get out of the way, this thing I'm going to call the “For A Girl” element. It's that unspoken quantification that seems to follow around these spunky female characters that are tacked on to the plot of Guy Movies. Now by the way, I happen to love Guy Movies. I love these Bromance stories, Dude-bonding, and plots that involve two men going on adventures together. I like that kind of stuff! I fail to understand why society deems it necessary to tack on a romantic female character where one is not necessary to the plot, and then give her all of these supposedly admirable qualities so that she fits in with the Dudes. She's always different from the other female characters, if there are any. The rest of the women in the movie are “typical” - wives, fiances, moms, or extras. Then you get the Tacked On Female and she can fire a gun, take care of herself, figure stuff out. All in all she's pretty smart and tough. For A Girl. And they always seem to show her outwitting and besting some Bad Guy – not the MAIN bad guy of course, but some lesser bad guy. You know, the kind that girls can handle. And I always feel like the writers and director are going, “Look, we put a girl in here for you! And check this out, she can even do things! Don't you gals just love that? Aren't you, like, so appeased? We're throwing you a bone, here!”

Okay maybe I'm just really sensitive to this, being a girl myself who fights with boys (and I'm evenly matched with some, better than one or two, and would get killed by the rest, none of which has anything to do with the fact that I have a vagina.) But I sense this in a lot of damn movies! Like the POTC movies, for instance, of which, by the way, I am a huge fan. But Elizabeth really rubbed me the wrong way because she was written in that For A Girl way, too.

I'm trying to think of some female characters who weren't tacked on and who weren't given that quantification just in order for the movie to seem hip and forward thinking. I'm coming up with Agent Scully and Clarice Starling. Hermione Granger never seemed tacked on, either. Hmm. And Tifa Lockhart, believe it or not. (Even in the movie, she's a better fighter than Cloud, even though at the end it is his battle with the cells inside him that he has to face – it is his battle to win and not hers, but she still overall kicks much more ass than he does.)

ANYway, Sherlock Holmes. I mean, it was tons of fun, I loved the setting, what-with the whole foggy London, cobbled street, gaslight, copper tubs, dawn of industry and, whoop whoop, steam-power feel. I love RDJ and his quirky face, thick wavy hair and ridiculously hot build. The Kung Fu scene was completely unnecessary to: the plot, his character, or the overall setting, and I went into the movie thinking that they would have found a way to make it logically essential, but they did NOT. There was no logic to it at all, it was entirely gratuitous. Now hey, I mean this is me, and gratuitous, sweaty, bare-chested Kung Fu for no other reason than “just 'cause we could” doesn't give me any problems, but gosh, it was just so damn obvious. I'm glad RDJ knows Kung Fu. I'm glad he's in such great shape and can kick so much ass after all that he's been through. I'm always happy to see him get half-nakie. But this is Sherlock Holmes and I think they forgot about that for a while.

I used to find Jude Law wildly appealing, and he's still got that attractive face and all, but he kinda doesn't do it for me anymore. I liked his Watson though, and I thought he was right for it. One thing that kept bugging me was how they used him to explain all of the jokes. For instance, there's this part where he shoots his gun and Holmes tells him, “Save your bullets, Watson.” Then Holmes gets startled and empties his gun at a wall. I thought that was pretty funny and I totally laughed at the goofiness. And then they had Watson say, “What was that about saving bullets?” Yes, WE GOT IT, THANKS. We don't need that nudge to the ribs with the writer going, “GEDDIT? Cute, huh?” He did that in a few instances and I just think that's part of dumbing down movies so that “regular folk” can get it. Well guess what, Hollywood, we're not all goddamn imbeciles.

Moving on, I was also tempted to say, “I liked this movie back when it was called 'Young Sherlock Holmes.'” If you've seen that old 80's flick, you've seen quite a bit of this one, too. Except that in that one, the romance was part of the actual plot as opposed to tacked on, was dripping with syrup, and ended in tragedy. In this one, they just updated the relationship to “snarky” and updated the female to “Tough For A Girl.” But it had the same feel and the same theme, which was science and technology vs. superstition and arcane power, and I'm sorry if this is any kind of spoiler—you're kind of silly if it is—but in both movies, the “arcane power” actually is veiled science and technology and so science wins the day. This is a theme that is close to my frontal lobe and therefore treasured so I'm not complaining about it. It's just that I felt as if I'd seen this movie already, except this was minus the “Young” part.

And of course there can really be no spoilers in Sherlock Holmes, right? I mean, even if you haven't read the series (which I haven't; I think I read one as a child,) even if you've just been, you know, alive in the last hundred or so years, you already know who the bad guy is and how he does it. And that is also not a complaint, I mean if they'd all of a sudden busted out some random, unheard of Big Bad I would be like, “What the hell!”

Oh, the explosion in the slaughterhouse was a really cool scene. Actually the whole thing was filmed really beautifully. When did visuals become a main character? I guess back in the 90's. But I'm a sucker for a well-filmed scene, so.

Don't get me wrong, I actually did enjoy the film and I would totally see it again and even buy it on DVD. I do enjoy movies, you know? I can get irked by things and still appreciate the better points, and this movie's better point was fun, and it was actually lots of fun.

That's what I thought of Sherlock Holmes but honestly my mind kept going back to this trailer I saw before it came on, for a movie called “Inception” where, apparently some dude has the power to change reality, including time and space, with his mind. SERIOUSLY, DOUCHEBAGS? Come on, not now, please! Not when I'm trying to sell that same story! PLEASE! Man, now I have to go and look it up and see if it's the exact same goddamn thing I just spent years writing. Dicks.

Comments

[reanimated.livejournal.com]

so was irene not in the books? o_0

[skitty-kitty.livejournal.com]

Irene's canon.

[la-belle-laide.livejournal.com]

Really? I only read one, long ago. Was she a spunky criminal who tied Holmes naked to a bedpost? O_O

[skitty-kitty.livejournal.com]

Lol, she appeared in only one story. Here's the wiki entry. I don't think the nekkidness is canon, but she's the only chick to match wits with Holmes and best him.

[la-belle-laide.livejournal.com]

Oh, neat! So, she was smart, but not as relevant or as involved (or romantic, or a criminal) as portrayed in the film.

[skitty-kitty.livejournal.com]

Yup, pretty much, though maybe a 'touch' criminal since she was trying to screw over her ex with scandalous photos. ;D

[spatterdash.livejournal.com]

Of course, the other way to look at that Inception thing (not that i've seen the trailer, nor even read your whole book) is, if it does go stratospheric, you already have a completed manuscript to ride the wave, kind of like how everyone who'd already written a pirate novel and sent it around after PotC blew up huge made the niche presses shit money-bricks.

[la-belle-laide.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I mean that's true and all, and I know it's not totally a new idea or anything, but it still irks me because stupidly, I would not want people to actually think that I was riding that wave. :/ Meh. Bright side and all of that.

However I could totally be wrong about the movie because it was purposely very vague.

[danalwyn.livejournal.com]

I have a rant very close to your "For A Girl" problem, but for the villains, which I should probably get around to writing up one of these days. But you're not the only one to notice the problem.