Watch Sherlock: Case of Evil For Free

best movie i've ever seen.

Awesome Movie

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Just about everything about this film is awful. They've hashed up the plot and characters so badly that it almost unrecognisable as holmes, lacking all the brilliance that made the doyle stories.the casting of holmes played by some actor that looks about 19 years old with wooden acting to match and non-of the attributes that make holmes holmes, makes the entire film completely unconvincing throughout.other negative reviews are spot on, there are so many flaws its just embarrassing, .....an 18th century police swat team, impulsive sex scenes!!.Watch the jeremy brett as holmes for a more accurate portrayal in the TV series.there a reason why this film is on at 2am on a tuesday morning on itv3, its utter rubbish.

Or, the summary should perhaps more accurately read, "A richness of embarrassments." The script is embarrassing. The storyline is embarrassing. The plot is embarrassing. The direction is embarrassing. The characterizations of Holmes & Watson are embarrassing, although not totally the actors' faults. James D'Arcy's Holmes is duly intense and focused, and might have shone if given a script less stupid; as it is, he's just embarrassing. Vincent Donofrio's fake accent and surprisingly crappy acting are both embarrassing. Gabrielle Anwar's character's name (Rebecca Doyle) is embarrassing. The reporter's hair is embarrassing. Inspector Lestrade is embarrassing (but then, he pretty much always is). The heavily armed London Bobby SWAT team is embarrassing. The gratuitous sex scene is embarrassing. Holmes as a leering lecher is embarrassing. The hackneyed Victorian London drug scene scenes are embarrassing. The climax is embarrassing. The closing scene is more embarrassing than the opening was. In fact, about an hour & a quarter in Inspector Lestrade himself gives this film its best one-line review: "This is a complete waste of time and resources." Everyone involved in this production who retains any self-respect whatsoever should be thoroughly embarrassed. The violence done the Canon here, the complete disregard for fidelity to the original material, is more than embarrassing, it is a crime worthy of Moriarity himself. I could go on, but now I'm too embarrassed to have been caught watching it . . .

I saw this movie recently with the very greatest of hopes.I have been a Sherlock Holmes fan for as long as I can remember, so when I saw the box for this film on the shelves at my local video store, I yanked it up without even looking at the synopsis on the back. After watching the movie, I might have enjoyed the synopsis more...a LOT more. The characters were two-dimensional and under-developed at very best: no depth at all was brought to any one of them, but for the struggling Rebecca Doyle, portrayed by Gabrielle Anwar...and in this setting, finding anything to like about her was a struggle. James D'Arcy never even saw the mark in attempting to bring humanity to the legendary Holmes; he just came off weak and vacillating in D'Arcy's hands. Vincent D'Onofrio - of whom I am an incredible fan normally, and who is notoriously known as "the Human Chameleon" for his most uncanny ability to lose himself in a role - just phoned this performance in, when I'd have loved to have seen a far more layered interpretation of this legendary bad guy. Roger Morlidge does a serviceable job of Dr. Watson, but it's just not enough.The plot was presumptuous of far too much detail relevant to the Holmes legend to introduce such intricacies as the reasoning behind the heroin addiction suffered by he and his brother, without providing much substantive sub-plot to make it plausible...or even make us care.The fencing battles between Holmes and Moriarty are well-executed, but only consume a cumulative twenty minutes of the film at the very most. Writer Piers Ashworth didn't think outside the box in his creation of this "new perspective", he just created a new box and hopped right in. Director Graham Theakston didn't seem to even attempt to transcend the poor scripting with crafty, smart, or inspiring visuals.I just didn't get it.

I recently watched this film and was amased at how bad it was. I am a great fan of Sherlock Holmes and have read all the books and seen most films produced, this interpretation was NOT him.I found the use of CGI pathetic as it was obvious, his drinking habits were confusing (he drank a bottle of vodka, a bottle of red wine and then half a bottle of absinth which would have made him blind), he slept with four women (two at the same time) and still somehow managed to save the day.Mycroft was played by one of my favourite actors but even he couldn't save the show. He is portrayed as a cripple who is frightened to go out. Mycroft is supposed to be a strong minded person who works for the government.Watson was the best of the lot, but i don't remember him being a mortician, also he should have been in the war.The biggest gaff I found was that they took a scene from "Hands of a Murderer" and made a couple of adjustments but it was still the same scene, didn't they have anything better to do?I would tell anyone who is considering watching this not to bother unless you are doing it for free and have nothing better to do, this is not for Sherlockians!