Sherlock Holmes

In order for me to write this review I must give you some background on the character and you will see why I am trashing this crappy movie.
Sherlock Holmes is a well loved literary character dating back to short stories that began in 1887 and written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Holmes appeared in 56 short stories and 4 full length books. In 1887 they were published in a magazine and the readers looked forward to the exploits of Holmes. The interesting thing about the Holmes' stories is that they were set in the period they were written. Sherlock Holmes was brilliant, a drug addict, recluse and scared his land lady on more than one occasion with his strange goings on in his flat. He also had one of the first recorded Bro-mances* with his faithful friend, Dr. John Watson. No sidekick was more loyal to his friend or put up with as much but Dr. Watson was no fool. Dr. Watson was himself a decorated war veteran and well known physician. During the course of the stories, Watson went from being a housemate to Holmes to having his own established practice and getting married. Watson is a key figure in all the Holmes' adventures because he narrates all the stories from his point of view. Watson's view of Holmes' strange and brilliant behavior is what brings a human angle to an otherwise unlikeable man like Holmes. Sherlock Holmes was above all an English gentleman. This something that may be lost on someone today but to carry oneself and to be recognized as a gentlemen in those times was key to success. Holmes had clients that were royalty and often well to do and that would not have been the case for the character of Holmes in the new Sherlock Holmes movie.
Sherlock Holmes: Robert Downey, Jr. was wise to follow up his Iron Man success with another big movie. His big comeback was important and it is always important to keep that momentum going. I guess is the movie. But I think this movie is a total dog. True, I am a literary Sherlock Holmes fan but I am willing to watch different portrayals and there have been some brilliant ones, such as, Frank Langella and Jeremy Brett. This version of Holmes is so far off the mark that it should have been called something else. True, this Holmes does have the powers of observation but with the attitude of a frat boy, not a gentleman. I would rather watch the Mentalist with Simon Baker on Thursday nights. Baker's character is easily a modern day Sherlock Holmes and truly pays homage to a gift of figuring people out just from observing them.
The plot of Sherlock Holmes is so muddled that I can't even describe it. Something about secret societies, black magic and even a toss in of Dr. Moriarty (Holmes nemesis) as a tease. A sequel is in the works - I don't know why. That was like having a sequel of Steve Martin's Pink Panther (which they did!) - totally a waste.
I don't want to you think my review is totally biased because I am a Holmes fan of the first order. I am okay with changing up. J. J. Abrams took a huge undertaking of keeping true to Star Trek lore yet adding his own slant to it and brilliantly. I was willing to give it a chance as I was with Superman Returns. Like Superman and Captain Kirk, some characters deserve respect. If you are not going to do that - change the name of the character. The former Mr. Madonna (Guy Ritchie) has not impressed me with this outing.
You don't have to be a big reader to get into Holmes. If you want to see the most true portrayal of Sherlock Holmes then get the BBC series of the same name with Jeremy Brett. There is also a filmed stage version with Frank Langella which is also very good.
Don't waste you time with this rubbish.
BOMB! (No M's)
*Bro-mance: Describes the complicated love and affection shared between two straight males. They are so close that they seem like a couple. (Urban Dictionary)