Sherlock Holmes (7/10)

It had a lot going on. And probably too much. And that explained the long runtime.Unlike the stories that we have come to love from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, this version of Sherlock Holmes has just as much action as there are sleuthing; perhaps even more. Director Guy Ritchie did delve into the character's psyche, showing his audience exactly what a genius Holmes is, and at the same time also displaying how that can be a gift and also a curse. And with that a lot of humour has been injected in.The script and dialogue were mostly well written. The only drawback from its complicated storyline was the complication the story tried so hard to present cleverly to the audience. This resulted in a somewhat long-winded movie that could have used a bit of shaving here and there.And I do wonder where the two lead characters learned how to fight they way they did. They weren't just throwing punches around but they were very properly (perhaps too properly) choreographed. Coupled with how high-tech and scientific one of their main problem was, and how it's going to be another "end of world" disaster (obviously to capture as much of the mass market as possible); the entire movie seemed a bit too "Hollywood-ified". You can say this was quite a "modern" Sherlock Holmes even though the setting was in the Victorian era.However, the main cast were mostly brilliant. Robert Downey Jr once again delivers to his fullest, though I do suspect he didn't have to act much in this role. Jude Law was also fantastic as the good Doctor Watson. Rachel McAdams was also great in her role, but unfortunately for Dr Watson's love interest, Kelly Reilly's deadpan portrayal made Mary Morstan looked like a dead fish.