WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
News/Headlines
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

"Sherlock Holmes" - What Did You Think?

Posted: December 27th, 2009 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
"Sherlock Holmes" - What Did You Think?Submit Comment
The results are in, and Guy Ritchie's "Sherlock Holmes" is a success at the box office, which means that many of you got the chance to watch it this weekend. In the comments section below, let us know what you thought of the movie.

Ritchie always thought of "Sherlock" as a franchise and already has plans for the sequel. And Robert Downey Jr has recently stated that he will likely only make "Iron Man" and "Sherlock Holmes" installments from now on. But is "Sherlock" really that good for the studio to continue making sequels?

On RottenTomatoes, the film has a 69% fresh rating, but we found the film slow and boring. Do you agree? And did "Sherlock" deserve getting the biggest Christmas weekend opening?

Click here to read our "Sherlock Holmes" review.

Source: WorstPreviews.com


Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 40 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
MattC903 writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 2:57:39 PM

personally i didnt like it, but cmon with an ending like that you have to make a 2nd, but yeah i saw it opening night and was sorely disappointed.
thebreach writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 3:11:18 PM

sorry wp can't agree with your review. some of the characters lacked depth and the story though it had it's twists waws pretty predictable. BUT, robert downey was fantastic and jude law was pretty good as well. a lot of good wit and humor and some good action kept me very well entertained through out. i was definately entertained through out. 7/10
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 3:49:41 PM

If X-Men can get a sequel, so can this.
hugonv writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 4:13:53 PM

i loved it
i give it 10/10
CCBlev writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 4:46:03 PM

Just got home from seeing it, I didnt think it was too bad, I can defiantly tell they are trying to set up a series with this movie.
Ranma-Irias writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 4:46:22 PM

well i really liked the movie! There's not much to say about it, it had great humour, RDJ was amazing as usual, Jude Law too!

Overall the movie was great!

8*
Kingrixy writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 4:54:09 PM

as a long time Sherlock Fan, this movie was awesome, I cant wait to see it again, Guy Ritchie has finally moved into the Mainstream and maybe he should have focused more on this than making sweptaway (or whatever it was called) and revolver, and gone straight for the action genre hybrids, great move well worth a look at, hope there is a Directors version for Blu Ray.
KirkLazerus writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 5:37:01 PM

sh*t was tight, Rdj and Jude law were great
Ari Gold writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 6:27:54 PM

Did Brad Pitt get that cameo?
Kindlegolas writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 6:37:07 PM

I thought the film was very well edited together, and very good acting overall. RDJ and Jude Law had excellent team chemistry. The film was very good, and I can't wait for the sequel. It was nice to see some action in a Sherlock holmes story..Overall 10/10
Alex DeLarge writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 6:41:43 PM

my god people, why must you always try to act like experts and critique every aspect as if it really makes a difference. "the characters lacked depth"? i just saw it and thought it was great, and i thought the characters were plenty well played out and spoken for. its either good or ok or bad or whatever, but i just love how every person on here who went and watched and lives an average life like me thinks that they know what they're talking about and tries to sound so cinematically intelligent.
MattC903 writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 6:45:58 PM

@ ARI GOLD he didnt, the voice over of moriority didnt sound like pitt either.
MattC903 writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 6:50:03 PM

@ ALEX..... I FULLY AGREE! i wonder how many people on here use a thesaurus to make their comments sound more "deep". (hmmmm whats a better word for deep)
jeffw1978 writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 7:33:32 PM

@Alex well it is a movie website so people will have their opinions just like you have yours and yes I belive a thesaurus is used alot for this site.
carl4prez writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 7:46:37 PM

It wasn't bad but it wasn't good. I wasn't happy with them turning Holmes into an obssesive complusive guy and the action Holmes was just odd. The actors were good and Guy Richie was decent as director, but overall a film a forgettable film. And the scene on the bridge looked totaly fake. Ya'd think they could afford better CGI. Old LOndon did look pretty good though. All in all, I give it a C+.
Jamall316 writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 8:03:19 PM

Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law had excellent chemistry. Go see it for those two guys crack jokes on each other.

Nothing was really bad about the movie. The chemical attack was kind of "a little advance" for that time period I guess.

Part 2 is a definite, if Robert Downey Jr doesn't "retire" from acting.

Bonzaitri writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 8:42:15 PM

Watson, what have you done? Acting was great and i'll be in line for the inevitable sequel. kinda hope they go for a different director for the follow up tho.
mmmac writes:
on December 27th, 2009 at 8:47:01 PM

@carl4prez i hate to break it to you and the rest of the world who agrees with yo but you do not know what the hell you are talking about they didn't change the Sherlock Holmes character at all really. The source material has this Sherlock Holmes in it and while RDJ and Ritchie both bring a new style to him he is for the most part the same Holmes that appears in the books. The earlier adaptation of Holmes (of which there are many) are the adaptations who changed the character and now most of the population believes as you do that that is the original Sherlock Holmes. Well it isn't and I'm glad to see a badass Holmes as Doyle intended him to be.
HorrorJunky4Life writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 12:12:37 AM

Enjoyed it enough to know that this will be in my DVD collection when it's available.
TeemSelami writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 2:01:35 AM

liked it but i expect the second to be better. also the female characters were a joke
TeemSelami writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 2:11:57 AM

Downey and Law were great. the sh*t above was to negative
Teines writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 2:14:50 AM

Saw it last night and loved it .. my BIGGEST disappointment was the " NO TIME " it took to travel over 2 miles between the Houses of Parliament and Tower Bridge ??? Look for yourself ! and that's as the crow flies.

Anyway .. loved the banter between JL and RDJ
sombrero1984 writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 2:18:52 AM

Your critic complained about a lack of depth in the character of Sherlock Holmes. This, unlike the Rathbone movies, was an action movie and it takes two or three movies to develop the character. Critics are such snobs!
masKritic writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 3:45:49 AM

WP f*cked up, 2 out of 10??

Bullsh*t this movie was awesome everything you guys complained about in the 2/10 review was all horsesh*t. almost everything you in your review is wrong.
takai writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 4:27:43 AM

I haven't seen it yet, but I find it funny that WP gave Rock'nRolla an 8/10 but Holmes a 2/10, and blame it on the movie being slow and boring. RocknRolla was slow and boring, but slow isn't a bad thing, and boring can also be called 'didn't pay attention.'
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 4:52:35 AM

Slow is a bad thing because that means the pacing is off. Boring can also mean the film couldn't hold their attention which is hardly the individuals fault. Boring material is boring material. RockNRolla certainly isn't an 8/10 but it isn't exactly "slow" either, it ramps.
ugotjewed writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 7:36:50 AM

I would have seen Sherlock Holmes christmas day if if it wasnt for me getting f*cking snowed in, instead i had to settle with Avatar on Christmas Eve.
takai writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 7:53:41 AM

There IS such thing as a SLOW PACE. What makes you think that all pacing is quick then slow, then ramps, then slows, then quick again? Not all movies are roller coasters, nor should they be.

Viewers not paying attention is totally their fault. Now sometimes, yes, the movie isn't worth paying attention to, but everyone decides where their attention is focused. If they think an amazing movie is boring because they just want explosions, and they don't pay attention, that's them sucking at watching movies.

Excellent cases are 'Watchmen' and 'Seven Samurai'.

Some people say Watchmen was boring. That's solely because they decided to stop paying attention. Every moment of that film contributes to the story, even the action sequences. Seven samurai is almost four hours long, but again, every moment is amazing character development or action.

Another case, is a movie I hated. That is, 'There Will Be Blood'. Some say it was a masterpiece, I think otherwise. I wasn't bored though. I payed attention, and decided I thought the movie sucked because it had NO point. (I will give it good character dev. though.)

There are movies that pull you in and keep you there. (Like 'The Hurt Locker', 'The Dark Knight', and even f-ing 'Avatar') But then there are films that the viewer has to choose to be engrossed in. It's not the movie's fault if the viewer is too meathead, or just uninterested, to pay attention.


So yeah, sorry this was so long. It's 8am and I haven't slept yet. (BTW-the Samurai Champloo soundtrack is amazing.)
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 10:26:14 AM

HEy i am the golum here copycats, im the darknight and you are my copycats lets have a drink together some time! you invite me!
victor arroyo writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 11:18:08 AM

@Alex DeLarge

AND

@jeffw1978

you are both right brothers.


But f*ck!, in my country it will premier till january 1st.
fsport81 writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 11:21:48 AM

i think it was cool that they made holmes with some fighting skills, i glad it wasnt a 1 hour nancy drew flick.
rabid writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 11:23:49 AM

I've heard nothing but good things about this film. I plan to see it on thursday.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 1:14:53 PM

Watchmen was boring because the acting was bad for the most part, the dialog was laughable, and it did nothing new for a story I've known for years now.

You shouldn't have to work hard to be engrossed in a film. If the characters are interesting and relatable it should be relatively easy for you to feel for them and get invested in their story. Movies that feel slow generally have bad pacing, they might have great everything else but the pacing is off.
takai writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 1:23:04 PM

I don't know what version of the GN you read, but the actors were perfect for their characters. My favorite criticism is that Dr. Manhattan was too monotonous. hahahaha. Oh my. That just proves that people don't pay attention, or are just dumb.

The dialog was exactly what it was supposed to be. You could seriously read along with the GN in the theater to the film.

The whole point of Watchmen wasn't to bring out the story to new people, or reboot it to update it. Snyder's only intention was to put the book on the screen, and he did just that. Pulling off Watchmen proved to any comic fan that Snyder can do whatever he wants.

I know how much of a Dark Knight fan you are, from previous conversations, but down the road if and when Snyder makes The Dark Knight Returns, he's going to rock the Batman franchise all over again.


Of course, all of this is my opinion. That's what this whole site is. Opinion.

I just don't think every movie should be able to pull in any viewer. I think effort makes the payoff that much sweeter.
flaggingmoose writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 6:08:53 PM

I'm very sorry WP but whoever writes your reviews is clearly no professional critic because this film was fantastic. Everyone I know who has seen it has simply raved about it and I myself think it showcases some great film making on Guy Ritchie's part as well as a brilliant and near perfect portrayal of its title character by Robert Downey Jr. 2/10? What a f*cking joke. Every scene of the film was exciting, entertaining and fresh and I thought the scriptwriting maintained a high class the entire way through. From me this film scores a solid 8/10. One of the most entertaining films of this year.

What amazes me is how this website can give 2/10 to a stylish, entertaining and well made film such as this and 8/10 to some trashy piece of Sarah Jessica Parker sh*t like "Did you hear about the morgans?" There is no comparison in my opinion. Pshaw pshaw!
pomme writes:
on December 28th, 2009 at 7:02:16 PM

an empty movie on my cousin's opinion
FBO writes:
on December 29th, 2009 at 2:33:19 AM

Sherlock is OCD. Think of it like this, Greg House is based on Sherlock Holmes, so think House. And the Boxing thing, yeah Holmes always boxed. He also had an addiction to drugs... Like House. So I'd say that the movie was right on.
Lander writes:
on December 29th, 2009 at 6:00:42 AM

Movie was great. Loved it. And I really look forward to a sequel.
rabid writes:
on December 29th, 2009 at 1:14:23 PM

Sherlock Holmes was fantastic! Whoever called it "slow and boring" has zero credibility as a film critic. Best screen version of Holmes ever. Sequels please.
shadowfax845 writes:
on December 29th, 2009 at 9:56:57 PM

Ritchie is still a badass.
RDJ and Law are their usual awesome selves.
A tad bit predictable, but still immensely entertaining.

8.5/10
Also I did not find myself bored at all in this movie, but thats just me.

There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Demolishes Pre-Sale Records

Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"

Daniel Craig Would Rather Commit Suicide Than Return as James Bond
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved