Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

If all of the visual tricks, acting exhibitions, screenwriting ideas and fantastic locations were part of a clear and engaging story, this would be one of the top blockbusters of the year. But I really didn’t care about what was happening or what was going to happen next. And what’s the point of those drawn-out, several-minute ultra-dramatic scenes in which Sherlock and Watson are in danger of actually being killed, when we all know that neither one of them can die?! (12/20/2011)

Loaded guns, brains in full swing, deduction vibrating at maximum. When Holmes' deductive/martial arts escapades conquered cinemas for the first time, I eagerly swallowed every one of Guy Ritchie's ideas, and when Robert Downey, Jr., with a sparkle in his eyes, uncovers a web of intrigues for the second time, I applaud again. Moriarty is indeed the perfect nemesis, capable of threatening the most mundane situation, and in such moments, one needs not only a loyal partner but perhaps also an exhibitionistic brother figure with a shaky staff. This impressive action-oriented approach simply suits me amidst the faltering Victorian era, and the whole creative team effortlessly navigates through emotions and locations with me. Please, dear Watson, bring me a trilogy. (01/15/2012)

The screenplay was a rushed job and has only a couple of really excellent moments and the conflict of the two arch rivals is not depicted appropriately. But it’s still an entertaining romp full of snappy lines with excellent visuals. Effective slow-motion sequences are in exactly the right place and are breathtaking. The scene with “Hansel" in the forest and the final confrontation (an successfully transformed ending of one of the most important stories) and simply awesome. The story is awfully schematic, chases alternate with fights, and there isn’t much room for any hint of inevitability, even though the material for it is here. (01/11/2012)

This is exactly how I imagined that a pop culture update by Sherlock Holmes might look. A gourmet experience with a completely exclusive Holmes vs. Moriarty gambit. Despite many mistakes, a beautiful, intense and charmingly deliberate blockbuster, which has what the first film lacked the most... A soul. (12/30/2011)

The first film worked with something like a moment of surprise, with the famous detective navigating Guy Ritchie's exquisite visual world. The second time around, the moment of surprise is gone, and suddenly you start digging into what you didn't mind in the first film. For two hours of runtime, the plot is too diluted, the female protagonists are neglected, the villain is bland, and except for two or three funny dialogue exchanges, there’s a lot of filler. But most importantly, a detective storyline is one you don't care about whatsoever. The action escapades are trite and not saved even by the run through the woods, yet that scene was also genius. During the first half, I was hoping it would pick up in the second half, as some commentators sometimes promised, but for the last half hour, I was praying for it to end. You don't just see blockbuster fails like this. (04/28/2012)