So, back to religion…
You know, an argument has been put forward more often than one would hope, but as often as can be expected, giving the altogether dismal state of the average person’s way of thinking. The argument is traditionally called “the argument from personal experience”, and it goes a little something like this: “It is possible to know that God exists, based on personally experiencing the witness of the holy spirit”… or some such nonsense. Now, you may be thinking to yourself that surely that’s an argument only used by lay people who perhaps aren’t all that well educated or well versed on philosophical or scientific thinking or process. However, this is an argument that has been seriously used in debates by none other than the messiah of Christian apologetics himself…
Dr. William Lane Craig
The man who has two PhDs in Philosophy and Theology, the man who even many atheists admit has an impeccable debating record, Dr. William Lane Craig has actually used the argument from personal experience many times, in serious debating formats… am I the only one who can’t help but think “if this is the best the Christians have to offer, then boy, might as well declare God non-existent right now and save humanity another millennia of religious wars, poorly educated children, pastors earning more money in a year than many will earn in a lifetime, and many Christians attempting to propagate the idea that unless you’re a science hating, gay bashing bigot who’s afraid of his own brain, lest he accidentally start thinking and subsequently stop believe that there is an Genocidal, infanticidal, megalomaniacal, all knowing and all powerful but completely undetectable being, pulling the strings of fate behind his iron curtain of a cloud, then when you die you will be sent to a place of fire and burning and smoke and torture and choking where you will writhe and scream and wail and cry for eternity”
...
...
...
...But he loves you :)
Anyway, where was I…
The main problem with this argument (among the innumerable amount of them) is the fact that Christians tend to overlook the fact that this argument is actually a bigger problem for them than for an atheist. Most atheists are more than happy to chalk up any so called “experiences” to the overwhelming power of the mind, particularly after recent studies indicated that it is now possible to induce these alleged religious experiences, in an objective scientific environment, with special equipment. However, if you are to take the Christian approach to these episodes, then you must, as the religious are so often unwilling to do, ask the obvious next question in the chain: what about everyone else? What about every Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist etc. who has ever claimed to have had a religious experience, and there have been many. As the great Christopher Hitchens once said “if you are to claim it for one, you must accept it for them all”. If you are to claim that your experiences that you chalk up to “the power of the holy spirit” are valid, then you must also grant the same validation that you think are false.
It’s a fairly simple train of thought to follow actually, when it comes to the faith ideology, there are three logical positions one can take. One is that all of the worlds religious people are deluded and are hallucinating, the traditional atheists position. The second is that none of the worlds religious people are deluded and hallucinating, a position that I don‘t think anyone takes. The third, the monotheistic position, is that every religious person in the world is deluded and hallucinating… except for those individuals pertaining to one particular denomination of one particular faith. Now, if the ridiculousness of the third position is not self-evident then no amount of persuasion will make it any more convincing. After all, I can’t prove that the third position isn’t in fact correct. But what I can say is that be it scientifically or philosophically, it is an ideology that is rationally and logically indefensible.
30 December, 2011
28 December, 2011
The 84th Annual Academy Awards: My Predictions, thoughts and opinions
We are well into Oscar season now, and so I’d like to give you what will probably be the first of three Oscar related articles, and tell you my predictions and thoughts with regards to the 84th Academy Awards on the whole. I’ll tell you what I think will be nominated and what will win, in addition to what I think should be nominated and what should win. I won’t be talking about things like best makeup and best art direction because, lets face it, does anyone care (other than Tim Burton, obviously)? I’ll also be avoiding things like best foreign film and best documentary, mostly because I haven’t seen any of them. Anyway, enough talking lets dive right into my 2011 Oscar predictions.
Best Supporting Actress
I’ll start with the category that I feel my predictions are most likely to be wrong in, partially because there just haven’t been that many supporting actress performances that really stood out for me, the opposite of the Best Actress category, which has plenty of big performances/potentially big performances, but we’ll get to all that a little later on. For now though Octavia Spencer from The Help and Vanessa Redgrave from Coriolanus both seem definite nominees, and Janet McTeer looks pretty likely to get nominated as well for her work in Albert Nobbs. The other two spots look pretty up for grabs however. I would guess that they will go to Bérénice Bejo from The Artist and Carey Mulligan from Shame, but Shailene Woodley will run them very, very close for her performance in The Descendants, and it’s Oscar campaign alone could well carry her to a nomination. Sandra Bullock is also worthy of consideration. Not much is known yet as to whether or not Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close will be the Oscar heavyweight that many think it will be, but if it lives up to the hype, then Bullock could well get a nomination, having previously won Best Actress for The Blind Side.
1. Octavia Spencer
2. Vanessa Redgrave
3. Janet McTeer
4. Bérénice Bejo
5. Carey Mulligan
Best Actor
Like the Best Actress category, this year has been littered with great performances that all would have been considered front runners, had the competition not been so fierce. The two performances that have gotten everyone talking this year however, come from George Clooney in The Descendants, and Brad Pitt in Moneyball. Seeing as I haven’t seen either yet, I couldn’t give my opinion, but the buzz seems to be that Clooney is the front runner, although by a fairly narrow margin. If the votes between the two end up being fairly split, the award could end up going to the third favourite, which by the looks of things at the moment seems to be Leonardo DiCaprio in J. Edgar. DiCaprio is a very talented actor who is long overdue for a Best Actor award, and probably deserves the win, though Pitt and Clooney currently have more momentum. Saying that however, if there’s one man who is more overdue for the award than DiCaprio, it has to be Gary Oldman, who looks like he could in for at least a nomination for his role in the first espionage Oscar candidate in god knows how long, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. That said, I can’t see this being Oldman’s year, though as I say, a nomination wouldn’t surprise me. Another outside bet is Ryan Gosling, who gave a stirring performance and added huge presence in The Ides of March, although his performance in Drive seems to be the one considered most likely to earn the attentions of the academy. Regardless, he could well be looking at a nomination for his efforts, though again, he’s unlikely to take home the prize.
1. George Clooney
2. Brad Pitt
3. Leonardo DiCaprio
4. Ryan Gosling
5. Gary Oldman
Best Actress
Meryl Streep is the early favourite to take home the Oscar for her performance as Margaret Thatcher in one of this year many biopics, The Iron Lady. She does however face some competition from Michelle Williams’s performance as Marilyn Monroe in another biopic, My Week With Marilyn. Of the two, Streep is the most likely contender, it’s the kind of film that the academy loves, and given how long overdue she is to add to her Oscar tally, I’d say she’s definitely the favourite. That said however, and consider this my “stick-your-neck-out” prediction for this year, but Rooney Mara has all the tools she needs to really be a contender for her role in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. She’s being directed by David Fincher, she’ll be playing off Daniel Craig, who looks like a good foil for her, and it’s the type of role that, if she pulls it off, will really draw the plaudits for her. There has been a consensus though that Dragon tattoo might be a little too edgy for the Academy’s tastes, and if that’s the case, then it could be a dry year for what’s promising to be an excellent film.
Best Picture
The granddaddy of ‘em all, and at the moment it seems to be a three horse race between The Artist, The Descendants, and War Horse, the latter probably considered the outsider at the moment. The race is far from over however, and Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close could yet upset the applecart, it has gotten a lot of hype, it has all the right ingredients to be a real Oscar heavyweight, and could well walk away with the prize. And then there’s the darkest of dark horses, the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Dragon Tattoo really has all the tools it could possibly want to be a great film. With David Fincher at the helm, there is only one reason that this film mightn’t succeed at the Oscars, and, as usual, it’s because the Academy don’t judge films objectively, and from the looks of it, Dragon Tattoo could well be too dark and edgy for the senior tastes of the Academy, especially considering Fincher’s pledge to stay true to the darkness of the original book. From the far, far opposite edge of the spectrum comes Martin Scoresese’s swing at a more family friendly film, Hugo. A huge departure from the man who gave us The Departed and Goodfellas, he knocked Hugo out of the park, it’s reception has been overwhelmingly positive from critics and audiences alike, and it could well be looking at a nomination, though a win would be a very, very long shot indeed. Another probable nomination, but unlikely winner is espionage thriller, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. There is a lot to like about the film, but spy films, just like sci-fi, horror and fantasy films, just don’t win at the Oscars. End of. None of the years many biopics, J. Edgar, My Week with Marilyn, The Iron Lady etc. have really picked up the traction needed to be considered major players in the Best Picture catagory. One could dabble with the idea of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 getting a nomination, in the same vein as Lord of the Rings, a reward for a series that hasn’t done well at the Oscars, but have always grossed well and have all been critically well received. And considering Hallows 2 is the highest grossing Harry Potter film, and the best reviewed, it has a chance to get a nominated, but it’s a slim chance. The Ides of March’s supreme acting and witty script was more than good enough to merit a nomination, but the film doesn’t seem to have picked up the momentum needed to really mount a serious Oscar campaign. It’s all moot however, as it looks like we are set to have yet another Best Picture winner that doesn’t deserve it, for probably the last four occasions, at least. My prediction: War Horse may be everyone else’s favourite, but, I’m just not feeling it, so I’m going to predict (very tentatively, mind you) The Artist. The Academy has been dishing out disappointment like it’s going out of style, and the cynic in me can’t help but feel that it’s going to more of the same this year for the Best Picture category.
1. The Artist
2. The Descendants
3. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
4. War Horse
5. Hugo
6. Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
7. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Best Supporting Actor
Christopher Plummer.
The Technical categories
I confess that my technical knowledge of film is somewhat limited, so I’m not really going to pretend I know what I’m talking about when it comes to the likes of best sound editing, best cinematography etc. but The Ides of March’s camerawork probably stood out most for me this year, take that for what it’s worth. As for best visual effects, at the moment it seems to be a two horse race between Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 2, and Hugo, which, if the hype is to be believed, has the best use of 3D in a film yet. Now, I’m still unconvinced about 3D, thus far, the vast majority of the time it just comes across as the studio trying to cover up the cracks in the story, characters and writing by throwing fancy visuals at us in the hope that we don’t notice. I have always said that cool visuals should be like a child having desert after dinner. You can have them in your film, you can have all the funky visuals you want, go to town, BUT, only after you get everything else right, once you have a workable plot, an interesting set of characters, played by talented actors, dancing to the tune of intelligent, witty writing, befitting whatever genre of film you choose to make, only after you get all that right, then, THEN, you can have all the CG and 3D and LG and AC and FBJD that money can buy. Anyway, where was I?
Best Screenplay
Dragon Tattoo looks like it could be a contender for best adapted screenplay. Also don’t be surprised if Moneyball’s screenplay get’s a big slice of recognition, wherever Aaron Sorkin is involved, you know great writing can’t be far behind. This is also probably The Ides of March’s best shot at winning on the night, it had an excellent script, deftly balancing excitement and wit with realism and subtlety, which was effortlessly executed by it’s talented cast.
Best Director
The best director involved this year in terms of overall talent, without doubt, is David Fincher, and the Academy may well want to atone for not rewarding Fincher’s spellbinding magnum opus The Social Network at last years awards, which sadly lost out to the bafflingly well received The King’s Speech. That said however, Fight Club, Se7en, and Zodiac didn’t go over too well with the Academy either, and Dragon Tattoo will definitely be in the same direction as those, particularly with Fincher pledging to stay true to the tone of the book. That said however, I could see Fincher perhaps getting a nomination. It might seem like an outside bet at the moment, but I could definitely see Martin Scorsese doing well with Hugo, I think he has a better chance in the Directing category than the Best Picture category, and Hugo does look the sort of film that had a lot of directing work go into it. Not only that, but Scorsese’s reputation is without question, and the Academy have often been criticised for not giving his films that awards to go with their acclaim. It wasn’t until The Departed in 2006 that Scorsese finally got a Best Directors award, and that was after the Scorsese holy trinity of Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and Goodfellas. I’d love to be able to say that this is the year where they don’t just give Best Director to whoever directed Best Picture, but the fact is, the directors of The Artist, the Descendants and War Horse will probably round off the nominations.
1. Michael Hazanavicious
2. Martin Scoresese
3. Steven Spielberg
4. Alexander payne
5. David Fincher
Whatever the case, the 84th Academy Awards are shaping up to be a memorable event, a lot could still happen between now and the end of February, and I will be doing an updated lists at the end of January, and after the Golden Globes. Until then… happy fishing.
Best Supporting Actress
I’ll start with the category that I feel my predictions are most likely to be wrong in, partially because there just haven’t been that many supporting actress performances that really stood out for me, the opposite of the Best Actress category, which has plenty of big performances/potentially big performances, but we’ll get to all that a little later on. For now though Octavia Spencer from The Help and Vanessa Redgrave from Coriolanus both seem definite nominees, and Janet McTeer looks pretty likely to get nominated as well for her work in Albert Nobbs. The other two spots look pretty up for grabs however. I would guess that they will go to Bérénice Bejo from The Artist and Carey Mulligan from Shame, but Shailene Woodley will run them very, very close for her performance in The Descendants, and it’s Oscar campaign alone could well carry her to a nomination. Sandra Bullock is also worthy of consideration. Not much is known yet as to whether or not Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close will be the Oscar heavyweight that many think it will be, but if it lives up to the hype, then Bullock could well get a nomination, having previously won Best Actress for The Blind Side.
1. Octavia Spencer
2. Vanessa Redgrave
3. Janet McTeer
4. Bérénice Bejo
5. Carey Mulligan
Best Actor
Like the Best Actress category, this year has been littered with great performances that all would have been considered front runners, had the competition not been so fierce. The two performances that have gotten everyone talking this year however, come from George Clooney in The Descendants, and Brad Pitt in Moneyball. Seeing as I haven’t seen either yet, I couldn’t give my opinion, but the buzz seems to be that Clooney is the front runner, although by a fairly narrow margin. If the votes between the two end up being fairly split, the award could end up going to the third favourite, which by the looks of things at the moment seems to be Leonardo DiCaprio in J. Edgar. DiCaprio is a very talented actor who is long overdue for a Best Actor award, and probably deserves the win, though Pitt and Clooney currently have more momentum. Saying that however, if there’s one man who is more overdue for the award than DiCaprio, it has to be Gary Oldman, who looks like he could in for at least a nomination for his role in the first espionage Oscar candidate in god knows how long, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. That said, I can’t see this being Oldman’s year, though as I say, a nomination wouldn’t surprise me. Another outside bet is Ryan Gosling, who gave a stirring performance and added huge presence in The Ides of March, although his performance in Drive seems to be the one considered most likely to earn the attentions of the academy. Regardless, he could well be looking at a nomination for his efforts, though again, he’s unlikely to take home the prize.
1. George Clooney
2. Brad Pitt
3. Leonardo DiCaprio
4. Ryan Gosling
5. Gary Oldman
Best Actress
Meryl Streep is the early favourite to take home the Oscar for her performance as Margaret Thatcher in one of this year many biopics, The Iron Lady. She does however face some competition from Michelle Williams’s performance as Marilyn Monroe in another biopic, My Week With Marilyn. Of the two, Streep is the most likely contender, it’s the kind of film that the academy loves, and given how long overdue she is to add to her Oscar tally, I’d say she’s definitely the favourite. That said however, and consider this my “stick-your-neck-out” prediction for this year, but Rooney Mara has all the tools she needs to really be a contender for her role in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. She’s being directed by David Fincher, she’ll be playing off Daniel Craig, who looks like a good foil for her, and it’s the type of role that, if she pulls it off, will really draw the plaudits for her. There has been a consensus though that Dragon tattoo might be a little too edgy for the Academy’s tastes, and if that’s the case, then it could be a dry year for what’s promising to be an excellent film.
Best Picture
The granddaddy of ‘em all, and at the moment it seems to be a three horse race between The Artist, The Descendants, and War Horse, the latter probably considered the outsider at the moment. The race is far from over however, and Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close could yet upset the applecart, it has gotten a lot of hype, it has all the right ingredients to be a real Oscar heavyweight, and could well walk away with the prize. And then there’s the darkest of dark horses, the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Dragon Tattoo really has all the tools it could possibly want to be a great film. With David Fincher at the helm, there is only one reason that this film mightn’t succeed at the Oscars, and, as usual, it’s because the Academy don’t judge films objectively, and from the looks of it, Dragon Tattoo could well be too dark and edgy for the senior tastes of the Academy, especially considering Fincher’s pledge to stay true to the darkness of the original book. From the far, far opposite edge of the spectrum comes Martin Scoresese’s swing at a more family friendly film, Hugo. A huge departure from the man who gave us The Departed and Goodfellas, he knocked Hugo out of the park, it’s reception has been overwhelmingly positive from critics and audiences alike, and it could well be looking at a nomination, though a win would be a very, very long shot indeed. Another probable nomination, but unlikely winner is espionage thriller, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. There is a lot to like about the film, but spy films, just like sci-fi, horror and fantasy films, just don’t win at the Oscars. End of. None of the years many biopics, J. Edgar, My Week with Marilyn, The Iron Lady etc. have really picked up the traction needed to be considered major players in the Best Picture catagory. One could dabble with the idea of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 getting a nomination, in the same vein as Lord of the Rings, a reward for a series that hasn’t done well at the Oscars, but have always grossed well and have all been critically well received. And considering Hallows 2 is the highest grossing Harry Potter film, and the best reviewed, it has a chance to get a nominated, but it’s a slim chance. The Ides of March’s supreme acting and witty script was more than good enough to merit a nomination, but the film doesn’t seem to have picked up the momentum needed to really mount a serious Oscar campaign. It’s all moot however, as it looks like we are set to have yet another Best Picture winner that doesn’t deserve it, for probably the last four occasions, at least. My prediction: War Horse may be everyone else’s favourite, but, I’m just not feeling it, so I’m going to predict (very tentatively, mind you) The Artist. The Academy has been dishing out disappointment like it’s going out of style, and the cynic in me can’t help but feel that it’s going to more of the same this year for the Best Picture category.
1. The Artist
2. The Descendants
3. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
4. War Horse
5. Hugo
6. Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
7. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Best Supporting Actor
Christopher Plummer.
The Technical categories
I confess that my technical knowledge of film is somewhat limited, so I’m not really going to pretend I know what I’m talking about when it comes to the likes of best sound editing, best cinematography etc. but The Ides of March’s camerawork probably stood out most for me this year, take that for what it’s worth. As for best visual effects, at the moment it seems to be a two horse race between Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 2, and Hugo, which, if the hype is to be believed, has the best use of 3D in a film yet. Now, I’m still unconvinced about 3D, thus far, the vast majority of the time it just comes across as the studio trying to cover up the cracks in the story, characters and writing by throwing fancy visuals at us in the hope that we don’t notice. I have always said that cool visuals should be like a child having desert after dinner. You can have them in your film, you can have all the funky visuals you want, go to town, BUT, only after you get everything else right, once you have a workable plot, an interesting set of characters, played by talented actors, dancing to the tune of intelligent, witty writing, befitting whatever genre of film you choose to make, only after you get all that right, then, THEN, you can have all the CG and 3D and LG and AC and FBJD that money can buy. Anyway, where was I?
Best Screenplay
Dragon Tattoo looks like it could be a contender for best adapted screenplay. Also don’t be surprised if Moneyball’s screenplay get’s a big slice of recognition, wherever Aaron Sorkin is involved, you know great writing can’t be far behind. This is also probably The Ides of March’s best shot at winning on the night, it had an excellent script, deftly balancing excitement and wit with realism and subtlety, which was effortlessly executed by it’s talented cast.
Best Director
The best director involved this year in terms of overall talent, without doubt, is David Fincher, and the Academy may well want to atone for not rewarding Fincher’s spellbinding magnum opus The Social Network at last years awards, which sadly lost out to the bafflingly well received The King’s Speech. That said however, Fight Club, Se7en, and Zodiac didn’t go over too well with the Academy either, and Dragon Tattoo will definitely be in the same direction as those, particularly with Fincher pledging to stay true to the tone of the book. That said however, I could see Fincher perhaps getting a nomination. It might seem like an outside bet at the moment, but I could definitely see Martin Scorsese doing well with Hugo, I think he has a better chance in the Directing category than the Best Picture category, and Hugo does look the sort of film that had a lot of directing work go into it. Not only that, but Scorsese’s reputation is without question, and the Academy have often been criticised for not giving his films that awards to go with their acclaim. It wasn’t until The Departed in 2006 that Scorsese finally got a Best Directors award, and that was after the Scorsese holy trinity of Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and Goodfellas. I’d love to be able to say that this is the year where they don’t just give Best Director to whoever directed Best Picture, but the fact is, the directors of The Artist, the Descendants and War Horse will probably round off the nominations.
1. Michael Hazanavicious
2. Martin Scoresese
3. Steven Spielberg
4. Alexander payne
5. David Fincher
Whatever the case, the 84th Academy Awards are shaping up to be a memorable event, a lot could still happen between now and the end of February, and I will be doing an updated lists at the end of January, and after the Golden Globes. Until then… happy fishing.
23 December, 2011
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows Review
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is the sequel to 2009’s Sherlock Holmes, both directed by Guy Ritchie. A Game of Shadows features the first appearance in this film series of Holmes’s most legendary antagonist, professor James Moriarty, played by Jared Harris, adding to an already stellar cast, including Jude Law as Dr John Watson and Robert Downey Jr. as Holmes himself. Holmes attempts to put a stop to Moriarty’s vile machinations before they reach their crescendo, as Moriarty attempts to start a world war, so that he may supply arms to the nations involved, leaving him very, very wealthy.
Am I the only one who feels that the whole “start a war, sell weapons to everybody in the war… profit?” idea has been done to death and beyond at this stage? As unoriginal, and at times convoluted as the plot may be, it still had me more interested than the first film’s efforts, although by a fairly narrow margin.
Ultimately, A Game of Shadows, whilst being a slight improvement over the first, still suffers from all the same problems that stopped it’s predecessor reaching any sort of memorable status. Namely, while Robert Downey Jr. has only improved and evolved following what was already a very impressive performance as Holmes, and while Jude Law does a great job as Watson, they still don’t really have anything interesting to do. Given that Moriarty is supposed to be one of the most intelligent, brilliant criminals of all time, Holmes’s equal in many regards, the fact that the story really couldn’t have been a little more creative was a real disappointment.
As with the first instalment, the question must be asked: what would the film had if Robert Downey Jr was taken out of the main role? The answer, as with last time, seems to be: not much. That said, I like Jared Harris as Moriarty, he is believable as someone possessing genius level intellect, and the films best scenes centre around the intellectual tussle between Moriarty and Holmes. However, when Moriarty isn’t on screen, there isn’t that sense that he really is pulling the strings behind the scenes, as many memorable antagonists have had in the past.
Another problem is the films action scenes. The choreography is fine, and Holmes’s clairvoyant like planning out of an entire skirmish is still entertaining, but they are shot in a way that makes it extremely difficult to keep up with what’s going on. It isn’t so much the speed of the cuts, it’s more the camera angles, the camera seems to be jumping all over the place, and it’s difficult to readjust your eyes before the camera cuts again. It results in a jarring experience, and makes the action, well choreographed as it is, difficult to keep up with.
Did I enjoy a game of shadows? Yes. Do I recommend it? Tentatively, yes. Had it wanted to be more than a typical action film, it could have been, and it means that the film wastes a lot of it’s potential. That said, if all you want is to kill a few hours, then Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows will do the job better than a lot of films in the action genre, and you should check it out.
Overall: 63/100
Am I the only one who feels that the whole “start a war, sell weapons to everybody in the war… profit?” idea has been done to death and beyond at this stage? As unoriginal, and at times convoluted as the plot may be, it still had me more interested than the first film’s efforts, although by a fairly narrow margin.
Ultimately, A Game of Shadows, whilst being a slight improvement over the first, still suffers from all the same problems that stopped it’s predecessor reaching any sort of memorable status. Namely, while Robert Downey Jr. has only improved and evolved following what was already a very impressive performance as Holmes, and while Jude Law does a great job as Watson, they still don’t really have anything interesting to do. Given that Moriarty is supposed to be one of the most intelligent, brilliant criminals of all time, Holmes’s equal in many regards, the fact that the story really couldn’t have been a little more creative was a real disappointment.
As with the first instalment, the question must be asked: what would the film had if Robert Downey Jr was taken out of the main role? The answer, as with last time, seems to be: not much. That said, I like Jared Harris as Moriarty, he is believable as someone possessing genius level intellect, and the films best scenes centre around the intellectual tussle between Moriarty and Holmes. However, when Moriarty isn’t on screen, there isn’t that sense that he really is pulling the strings behind the scenes, as many memorable antagonists have had in the past.
Another problem is the films action scenes. The choreography is fine, and Holmes’s clairvoyant like planning out of an entire skirmish is still entertaining, but they are shot in a way that makes it extremely difficult to keep up with what’s going on. It isn’t so much the speed of the cuts, it’s more the camera angles, the camera seems to be jumping all over the place, and it’s difficult to readjust your eyes before the camera cuts again. It results in a jarring experience, and makes the action, well choreographed as it is, difficult to keep up with.
Did I enjoy a game of shadows? Yes. Do I recommend it? Tentatively, yes. Had it wanted to be more than a typical action film, it could have been, and it means that the film wastes a lot of it’s potential. That said, if all you want is to kill a few hours, then Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows will do the job better than a lot of films in the action genre, and you should check it out.
Overall: 63/100
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)