Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueIn this mystery, Sherlock Holmes pursues his archenemy Professor James Moriarty to New York City, in which the villainous scoundrel has carried out the ultimate bank robbery. Meanwhile, Holm... Tout lireIn this mystery, Sherlock Holmes pursues his archenemy Professor James Moriarty to New York City, in which the villainous scoundrel has carried out the ultimate bank robbery. Meanwhile, Holmes enjoys a blossoming romance with Irene Adler, who becomes the target of a kidnapping by... Tout lireIn this mystery, Sherlock Holmes pursues his archenemy Professor James Moriarty to New York City, in which the villainous scoundrel has carried out the ultimate bank robbery. Meanwhile, Holmes enjoys a blossoming romance with Irene Adler, who becomes the target of a kidnapping by Moriarty.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 nomination au total
- Telegraph Office Manager
- (as William Benedict)
- Charles Nickers
- (as Robert E. Ball)
- Workman #1
- (as Vince Barbi)
Avis à la une
Moore isn't bad as Holmes. He has no particular resemblance to Holmes of the illustrations, though he is tall. He can do the cool, calculating thing. But the part does lack the sparkle of Moore's humor. Holmes gets off the occasional zinger in the stories but he's not known for his sense of humor.
Patrick MacNee is a perfect Watson, but he doesn't have much to do.
Charlotte Rampling isn't my ideal of Irene Adler, but she's good. John Huston seems to enjoy overacting as the Professor.
The story is kind of dumb (I can't see countries submitting to the process described). But they've got to have some MacGuffin. And as much as I enjoy Arthur Conan Doyle he penned worse stories.
I can see two sorts of people enjoying this movie: Sherlock Holmes completists with open minds (such as I) and those who know nothing about the original stories.
Another film about Sherlock filled with intrigues , suspense and action but this time is added a new ingredient : romanticism . In this mystery we find the famous calculator sleuth confronting his arch-enemy Moriarty and he pursues him to New York . Holmes excursion brings the famed Victorian sleuth towards N.Y. , as Holmes along Watson will solve unanswered mysteries and Sherlock undergoes some risked experiences to resolve the cases using even his habitual disguise . This is a nice Holmes film with gripping London and N.Y.C. setting . A genuine ripping yarn and very intriguing . The movie blends suspense , thriller , detective action , cloak and dagger , mystery and being enough interesting . It packs an exciting amount of surprises with great lots of entertainment . This is a classy and effective romp with a strong cast . Roger Moore as whimsical detective is passable , he's in cracking form . He makes an unique perspective on his life , revealing a complex personality . He's finely matched in battle of wits with Moriarty/John Huston . Although Basil Rathbone will be forever identified as Holmes ; however , here Roger Moore/Holmes is also played as an intelligent , cunning , broody and impetuous pipesmoking sleuth but addicted to cocaine , his interpretation is likeness to Christopher Plummer (Murder by decree) , Nicol Williamson (Elemental Dr. Freud) or Peter Cushing and Jeremy Brett in television . While Dr. Watson isn't a bumbling and botcher pal generally represented by Nigel Bruce , but a clever and astute partner well incarnated by Patrick McNee of ¨The avengers¨ . In fact , this is first of three feature film collaborations of actors Roger Moore and Patrick Macnee . The movies include Sea wolves (1980), A view to kill (1985), and Sherlock Holmes in New York (1976), with the latter of the three the only one being made for television . Furthermore , the support cast is pretty well such as : David Huddleston as Inspector Lafferty NYPD , Signe Hasso as Fraulein Reichenbach , Gig Young as Mortimer McGrew , Leon Ames , John Abbott and the former child prodigy , Jackie Coogan .
Atmospheric soundtrack , being first American television production scored by music composer Richard Rodney Bennett . Evocative cinematography by Michael Margulies . The motion picture was professionally directed by Boris Sagal , though with no originality . Sagal was a good craftsman who usually worked in TV , such as : ¨Ike: the war years¨ , ¨Masada¨, ¨Night Gallery¨ and occasionally made films as the successful Sci-Fi : ¨Omega man¨ .
Furthermore, interest in seeing early films based on Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories and wanting to see as many adaptations of any Sherlock Holmes stories as possible sparked my interest in seeing 'Sherlock Holmes in New York', as well as it having a talented cast and seeing how Roger Moore would fare.
'Sherlock Holmes in New York' is not terrible. It's not all that great either. Mediocre is more like it.
As said by me many times, there are better Sherlock Holmes-related films/adaptations certainly than 'Sherlock Holmes in New York', the best of the Jeremy Brett adaptations and films of Basil Rathone fit under this category. It's to me towards the bottom of Sherlock Holmes films, it is marginally better than all the Matt Frewer films (particularly 'The Sign of Four') and also much better than the abominable Peter Cook 'The Hound of the Baskervilles' (then again almost anything is better than that).
There are good things. The sets and costumes are handsome enough and there is evidence of atmospheric photography. The music also has atmosphere.
Moore is an agreeable, if far from definitive, Holmes with a charming twinkle in his eyes, while Charlotte Rampling has elegance and class. Parts of the mystery does intrigue and engage quite a bit and likewise with some of the script.
For all those good things, there are numerous major debits. It does feel too often pedestrian and stagy. Tension and suspense isn't enough and too much of the case is too simple, especially a denouement that makes the viewer feel annoyed at themselves at how they didn't solve it before very early on. How it's solved is all too easy and doesn't do Holmes' masterly deductions justice.
A good deal of 'Sherlock Holmes in New York' is on the cheap side and too much of it is flatly directed and too wordy. The more romantic angle agreed felt out of place.
Patrick MacNee has little to do as Watson and the buffoonish way he characterises can't help me think it was a directing issue or unfamiliarity with how Watson should be portrayed. He played opposite Christopher Lee later and that was a much better pairing and more subtle in interpretation. For me, there has never been a more hammy Moriaty than John Huston and that is not in a good way, there is nothing sinister about him and the dreadful over-the-top-ness takes one out of the film, even in the more forced moments of the script and story and there is also a fair bit of that going on.
To conclude, mediocre but not unwatchable. 4/10 Bethany Cox
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesIrene Adler (Charlotte Rampling) and Sherlock Holmes (Sir Roger Moore) recall a "Night in Montenegro". It was speculated by many, including noted Sherlock Holmes scholar W.S. Baring-Gould, who did not originate the idea however, that novelist Rex Stout's sleuth Nero Wolfe, who was born in Montenegro, was the son of Irene Adler and Sherlock Holmes.
- GaffesThe weight and value of the stolen gold is described using avoirdupois weight at 16 ounces to the pound ($28,000 per brick). Gold is measured in Troy weight at 12 ounces to the pound ($21,000 per brick).
- ConnexionsFeatured in La galerie France 5: Sherlock Holmes contre Conan Doyle (2018)
Meilleurs choix
Détails
- Durée1 heure 39 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.33 : 1