NOTE IMDb
3,4/10
2,2 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueSherlock Holmes and Watson are on the trail of a criminal and scientific mastermind who seems to control monsters and creations which defy belief.Sherlock Holmes and Watson are on the trail of a criminal and scientific mastermind who seems to control monsters and creations which defy belief.Sherlock Holmes and Watson are on the trail of a criminal and scientific mastermind who seems to control monsters and creations which defy belief.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Avis à la une
I wouldn't call this a good film but I found it to be charming in an amateurish way. It's rather like watching 1960's Star Trek or Doctor Who with modern-day eyes - it's corny and the special effects aren't great but it can be entertaining if you know you're not watching modern-day entertainment.
The production values, dialogue and direction aren't great and there isn't much in the way of dramatic acting until the climax of the film - the actor playing Holmes is particularly un-dramatic and speaks too softly for a leading man - but both Holmes and Watson are charming in their own way and have a playful chemistry together. Gareth David-Lloyd makes a sweet but quiet Watson who's a bit slow as times (though he gets to help save the day in small ways) and Dominic Keating isn't used all that much until the final 30 minutes of the film but he gives the strongest performance of all the actors involved.
The story wasn't too bad if you don't think about it too much - the bad guy (partly out of revenge) wants to use steam punk monsters to wreak havoc on London - but it is over-the-top at times (especially the part involving a hot-air ballon) and I wouldn't buy this film for the story alone. I have to say that I understood the story more on second viewing.
So overall, I wouldn't advise people to buy this film if they're looking for a professional movie to watch but if you're in the mood to watch something silly with friends that involves Sherlock Holmes, mechanical monsters and a cheap 19th century backdrop (and you don't mind films that have a cheap feel to them) give this a go.
For a mock-buster film, I'd give this 6 out of 10. For a film in general, I'd give it 3 out of 10.
The production values, dialogue and direction aren't great and there isn't much in the way of dramatic acting until the climax of the film - the actor playing Holmes is particularly un-dramatic and speaks too softly for a leading man - but both Holmes and Watson are charming in their own way and have a playful chemistry together. Gareth David-Lloyd makes a sweet but quiet Watson who's a bit slow as times (though he gets to help save the day in small ways) and Dominic Keating isn't used all that much until the final 30 minutes of the film but he gives the strongest performance of all the actors involved.
The story wasn't too bad if you don't think about it too much - the bad guy (partly out of revenge) wants to use steam punk monsters to wreak havoc on London - but it is over-the-top at times (especially the part involving a hot-air ballon) and I wouldn't buy this film for the story alone. I have to say that I understood the story more on second viewing.
So overall, I wouldn't advise people to buy this film if they're looking for a professional movie to watch but if you're in the mood to watch something silly with friends that involves Sherlock Holmes, mechanical monsters and a cheap 19th century backdrop (and you don't mind films that have a cheap feel to them) give this a go.
For a mock-buster film, I'd give this 6 out of 10. For a film in general, I'd give it 3 out of 10.
This is an astounding terrible movie which obviously had a pretty significant budget
To be fair here are some good points, effects, filming and sets.
Everything else was painful to watch without fast forwarding Pointless dialog Completely wrong casting for Sherlock Holmes Plot with so many holes discontinuities and absurdities Editing. If this film was edited at all it would be about 30 min long. It has many pointless scenes which add nothing to the story Bizarre non-Sherlock Holmes characters... like a brother named Thorpe who worked with Lestrade???
Definitely one of the worse movies I have ever seen and it isn't even bad in a good way, just tedious and dumb.
To be fair here are some good points, effects, filming and sets.
Everything else was painful to watch without fast forwarding Pointless dialog Completely wrong casting for Sherlock Holmes Plot with so many holes discontinuities and absurdities Editing. If this film was edited at all it would be about 30 min long. It has many pointless scenes which add nothing to the story Bizarre non-Sherlock Holmes characters... like a brother named Thorpe who worked with Lestrade???
Definitely one of the worse movies I have ever seen and it isn't even bad in a good way, just tedious and dumb.
This is a movie about one man - Ben Syder and his destruction of the character of Sherlock Holmes. I am astonished and appalled that such a hopelessly poor actor should have made it through the initial casting process. He would have been laughed out of any amateur audition. Forget the height, voice and mannerisms, just focus on the terrible, terrible acting. I can honestly say it's the worst I have ever seen.
And this is a great pity as the filming, sets, costumes and indeed, the other actors, are all very good.
Someone else suggested that he may well be the Director's son - I only hope he has that excuse.
And this is a great pity as the filming, sets, costumes and indeed, the other actors, are all very good.
Someone else suggested that he may well be the Director's son - I only hope he has that excuse.
-which is not to say it is actually much good either.....
This film currently has a 3.7 rating on IMDB and I think it (maybe, just,) deserves another star. In terms of quality per £ spent, it mayn't be that bad in fact.
There have been many Sherlock Holmes adaptations over the years and this is definitely one of the less good ones in absolute terms. However it is quite watchable (if unintentionally funny in places) and perhaps serves mainly to show how good some of the other adaptations are.
This film currently has a 3.7 rating on IMDB and I think it (maybe, just,) deserves another star. In terms of quality per £ spent, it mayn't be that bad in fact.
There have been many Sherlock Holmes adaptations over the years and this is definitely one of the less good ones in absolute terms. However it is quite watchable (if unintentionally funny in places) and perhaps serves mainly to show how good some of the other adaptations are.
I would compare this movie to pond scum, if not for the fact that it would be an insult to pond scum.
The acting is terrible, and - worse - the plot is nonsensical. Silly plot points are particularly troubling for a Sherlock Homes film, as the stories typically rely on intellectual consistency and insights. The fact that this film involves monsters and the White Chapel murders means it's not even suitable for children. As such, it's difficult to imagine how production was ever financed. A rich relative or generous government subsidies, perhaps? Ben Snyder's take on Sherlock Holmes is insipid ... but he certainly isn't helped by the stiff dialog.
The acting is terrible, and - worse - the plot is nonsensical. Silly plot points are particularly troubling for a Sherlock Homes film, as the stories typically rely on intellectual consistency and insights. The fact that this film involves monsters and the White Chapel murders means it's not even suitable for children. As such, it's difficult to imagine how production was ever financed. A rich relative or generous government subsidies, perhaps? Ben Snyder's take on Sherlock Holmes is insipid ... but he certainly isn't helped by the stiff dialog.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe "Mockbuster" rival edition of the Guy Ritchie blockbuster with the same title, following the tradition established by The Asylum (2000).
- GaffesIn the opening autopsy scene, Holmes states that it is ten o'clock. Yet the clock on the wall reads 8:05.
- Citations
Sherlock Holmes: My given name is Robert Sherlock Holmes. But who would ever remember a detective called Robert Holmes?
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 1 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée
- 1h 29min(89 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant