The mysterious death of Sir Charles Baskerville is blamed on a longstanding curse that has followed the Baskerville family for two hundred years. Enigmatic sleuth Sherlock Holmes is on the ... See full summary »
Okay, Asylum. We know your routine. Get some public domain property to do a "Mockbuster" of a new release, put a washed up star in a minor role so you can put his name first on the cover, proceed to decorate with cheap CGI.
Usually, what you get is pretty contemptible, like Hunter v. Alien or King of the Lost World. This, on the other hand, was actually okay.
First, they were truer to the character of Holmes and Watson than the Guy Ritchie abortion recently released. It would appear the writers actually READ something by Arthur Conan Doyle. Okay, maybe the story was a tad far-fetched. (Mechanical monsters in 1882 London? For that matter, Telephones in 1882 London, and ones that looked more like c. 1930 models.) But the relationship between Holmes, Watson and Lestrade was about right. They also didn't go for the cheap shot of making Moriarity the villain.
The only letdown is the actor who played Holmes. His voice was a bit too high and his mannerisms a bit too effeminate, compared to let's say Basil Rathbone or Jeremy Brett. But the very fact I feel the need to make those comparisons is really a step up for the Asylum...
One more note. The whole movie seems to have been filmed through a sepia filter. I guess that was the only way they could make it look more old time than it would otherwise.
47 of 64 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this