Three Questions:
1. Who done it?
2. Why did they do it?
3. How did they do it?
The payoff is in gradually revealing the answers to the audience to their surprise and anticipation. So let’s see how Sherlock Holmes works as a detective film:
WHO? Why Lord Blackwell did it of course, here we are arresting him and expounding on the matter in the opening scene of the film.
WHY? In the UK, there is only one definitive way to really explain your actions and that is of course to bring it up in Parliament. Which is what Lord Blackwell does in the second act of the movie.
HOW? This irked me the most. It was the ONLY thing the makers of this film tried to hide from the audience. And the answer was just, ‘CHEMICALS! But this is Viccie London and such chemicals are like magic to us!’ I think half the people watching the film had also guessed it was the answer as Holmes and Watson, when not at home watching their farting dog, where snooping around clandestine chemical labs.
As such, Sherlock Holmes is NOT a good detective film. If you have to explain it to people, tell them it’s not actually about Sherlock Holmes but that Guy Ritchie has instead made a film about a detective like guy, from Victorian London, who happens to be called Sherlock Holmes.
You may then explain to them what makes a good detective story and why the new Sherlock Holmes film is not a good detective story at all, as it barely satifies one of the three points. If you wish to further demonstrate my/your findings, here are some examples of detective stories that are better than the new Sherlock Holmes film.
SCOOBY DOO – 2/3 DETECTIVE MARKS
WHO? Ok, so we know who did it, it’s always the one other person in that episode but it’s not spelled out and billed in the opening credits
WHY? We never know why they really done it until the end, and even then there was always disbelief about the esoteric motive about real estate prices of hidden oil reserves, nonetheless it taught me an important lesson as a child about being wary of the real criminals in life, Developers.
HOW? How it was done was always a mystery in Scooby Doo and I’m sure we were all astounded and pleased to hear that the Phantom of Poderposa Bay was the creation of some natural clay and oils, fluorescent algae and a hand held radio.
ACE VENTURA 2: WHEN NATURE CALLS: 3/3 DETECTIVE MARKS
WHO? The White Mans Imperialistic Exploitation Machine: Everyone from the consulate, his ambassador to Ace and the thug hunters destroying the jungle wildlife were all in on this plot.
WHY? The driving motive of ANY good dramatic story is of course, Love or Money, in this case the Love of Money.
HOW? By the calculated hiring of thugs to do your dirty work and bribery of course, real plausible crime methods which we are blind to until the big reveal at the films climax.
Even the hiring of Ace himself, was all part of the villains plan, to create a plausible alibi for the eventual inquiry into the matter, how is THAT for a fucking plan?
In fact what makes Ace Ventura SUCH a good detective film is that Ace Ventura has a Holmes like power of observation. Like when he tackles the villain, Cadby at a dinner:
Assertion:
-You're an extreme workaholic. You recently returned from a short trip to Gotan in northern Africa, and upon your return you more than likely took a nasty spill because of some... shoddy masonry work.
Explanation:
- The abrasion on the palm of your left hand is the type one sustains breaking a fall of three to five feet, the small reminisce of plaster on the tip of your shoe pointed to a careless mason beam: the culprit; your new watch, a quality forgery of a cartieah was most likely purchased through the North African black market known to reside in GOTAN!
- And my work habits?
- Yes, a workaholic, the urine stain on your pants would signify that you're a single shake man, far to busy for a follow up jiggle.
The urine stain on your pants signifies that you are a single-shake man. Far too busy for the follow-up jiggle!
Bearing these case studies in mind, we may draw the conclusion that a 15 year old Jim Carrey character and a dog with a speech impediment are better detectives than Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes.
