Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I don't know if this is the right kind of dumb for me - I felt more cringe as I saw the trailer than anything else. Whilst Sherlock has somewhat been done to death as of late (at least it feels like it); I can't help but feel that the angle they've taken is just a touch too -- eh best I can come up with to describe it is "slapstick American" style for my liking.
Overread wrote: I don't know if this is the right kind of dumb for me - I felt more cringe as I saw the trailer than anything else. Whilst Sherlock has somewhat been done to death as of late (at least it feels like it); I can't help but feel that the angle they've taken is just a touch too -- eh best I can come up with to describe it is "slapstick American" style for my liking.
Yeah. Also 'anachronistic, ahistorical, slapstick American'. I feel shame just watching the trailer.
I really enjoyed the parody of more recent versions of Holmes (i.e., RDJr, Cumberbatch). The disguise gag is also a pretty legit criticism of how Watson is often played as a fool in order to make Holmes seem like a genius.
Probably, but it seems like this movie is worrying too much about doing stuff like that vs. just being its own movie version (comedy at that) of Holmes and Watson.
I am also somewhat amazed that Ferrell continues to get things like this greenlit.
His time as a 'leading man' or main attraction seems to have come and gone.
Ferrell is hit or miss- I have to say I really enjoyed Watson's trigger happiness. Trying to shoot bees!
This looks pretty good to me! Somewhere above Old School, but well below Blades of Glory.
Klawz-Ramming is a subset of citrus fruit?
Gwar- "And everyone wants a bigger Spleen!"
Mercurial wrote:
I admire your aplomb and instate you as Baron of the Seas and Lord Marshall of Privateers.
Orkeosaurus wrote:Star Trek also said we'd have X-Wings by now. We all see how that prediction turned out.
Orkeosaurus, on homophobia, the nature of homosexuality, and the greatness of George Takei.
English doesn't borrow from other languages. It follows them down dark alleyways and mugs them for loose grammar.
Hm, I think i'll just go and watch "Without a clue" again. At least with Michael Caine and Ben Kingsley, you know you're going to get some decent performances.
Kilkrazy wrote: The beauty of Holmes is he is such a strong established character that you can riff all kinds of crap off of him if you want to.
I think one problem is that the character of Holmes is a bit too strongly established. Unless you really try to put some sort of extreme spin on it, how do you get past the core concept that Holmes is, above all, a successful detective?
And, quite frankly, I'm tired of bumbling Watsons. Such a horrible trope from the old days of Hollywood where you had to have a "funny man" for random comedy in order to appeal to a wider audience.
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
Aye, Watson is far from bumbling in the original material, in fact Holmes trains him rather well in his methods and relies on him quite significantly many times. Watson is only really ever "lesser" when compared to Holmes, who in turn tends to result in most characters appearing lesser when compared to him.
I also find it interesting how many attempts to recreate Holmes ignore the fact that one reason he knew so much at the time was that he was trawling all the newspapers, built a huge library of important people and their own personal details etc... He essentially built his own "wikipedia" style knowledge base alongside his observational skills.
Overread wrote: Aye, Watson is far from bumbling in the original material, in fact Holmes trains him rather well in his methods and relies on him quite significantly many times. Watson is only really ever "lesser" when compared to Holmes, who in turn tends to result in most characters appearing lesser when compared to him.
I also find it interesting how many attempts to recreate Holmes ignore the fact that one reason he knew so much at the time was that he was trawling all the newspapers, built a huge library of important people and their own personal details etc... He essentially built his own "wikipedia" style knowledge base alongside his observational skills.
It's funny to me that the present version of Holmes floating about that gets all of those things the most correct is Elementary, the one derided by some Holmes fans as a "dumb procedural" that takes too many liberties.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
Overread wrote: Aye, Watson is far from bumbling in the original material, in fact Holmes trains him rather well in his methods and relies on him quite significantly many times. Watson is only really ever "lesser" when compared to Holmes, who in turn tends to result in most characters appearing lesser when compared to him.
I also find it interesting how many attempts to recreate Holmes ignore the fact that one reason he knew so much at the time was that he was trawling all the newspapers, built a huge library of important people and their own personal details etc... He essentially built his own "wikipedia" style knowledge base alongside his observational skills.
It's funny to me that the present version of Holmes floating about that gets all of those things the most correct is Elementary, the one derided by some Holmes fans as a "dumb procedural" that takes too many liberties.
I've not seen that, but I thought Jude Law's portrayal in the recent two films was reasonable too.
Sherlock Holmes meets Will Ferrell? Hard pass. Like...nobody is getting me to watch that unless it’s free. And even then...I suspect I’d rather be doing anything else.
Reality is a nice place to visit, but I'd hate to live there.
Manchu wrote:I'm a Catholic. We eat our God.
Due to work, I can usually only ship any sales or trades out on Saturday morning. Please trade/purchase with this in mind.
Elbows wrote: I'll watch it, just to spite all the "I'm too cool for a silly comedy film" folks. Christ, you're worse than theatre students.
Hey I'm all for silly comedy Just that the trailer for this suggests that the taste of the silly isn't my kind of silly silliness
Exactly!
Silly is just fine - and appreciated!
Stupid dumb?
Not so much.
It's a fine line between the two that many can very easily miss.
Take the old Dad's Army - they were silly but not dumb, just a bit daft. The new movie they made just went into realms of silly for silly's sake alone.
Overread wrote: Aye, Watson is far from bumbling in the original material, in fact Holmes trains him rather well in his methods and relies on him quite significantly many times. Watson is only really ever "lesser" when compared to Holmes, who in turn tends to result in most characters appearing lesser when compared to him.
I also find it interesting how many attempts to recreate Holmes ignore the fact that one reason he knew so much at the time was that he was trawling all the newspapers, built a huge library of important people and their own personal details etc... He essentially built his own "wikipedia" style knowledge base alongside his observational skills.
It's funny to me that the present version of Holmes floating about that gets all of those things the most correct is Elementary, the one derided by some Holmes fans as a "dumb procedural" that takes too many liberties.
I've not seen that, but I thought Jude Law's portrayal in the recent two films was reasonable too.
It was aye, but given those are based on that comic series rather than the original novels, it leans a lot into the "Holmes as unassailable solo-genius" angle purely so they can do the flashy solves and get right to the punching folk and running through 'splosions(which, for the record, is fine, I like those films a lot). Elementary has a Holmes who's evidently a cut above anyone else, but he has a large stable of "Irregulars", some one-offs, some recurring, who come in and give specialist assistance sometimes, and his Watson is very nearly an equal after a couple of years of training.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
It doesn't look horrific, and while I'm not keen on the slapstick humour (personal preference), I must admit I really liked the "We have a REAL doctor!" "Would you like some heroin" joke. I won't see it, but I might see it when it releases at home.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/07 09:38:46
It was aye, but given those are based on that comic series rather than the original novels, it leans a lot into the "Holmes as unassailable solo-genius" angle purely so they can do the flashy solves and get right to the punching folk and running through 'splosions(which, for the record, is fine, I like those films a lot). Elementary has a Holmes who's evidently a cut above anyone else, but he has a large stable of "Irregulars", some one-offs, some recurring, who come in and give specialist assistance sometimes, and his Watson is very nearly an equal after a couple of years of training.
Ah, I wasn't aware that the Guy Ritchie film s were second-generation adaptations. I thought they were pretty good portrayals of the relationship between Holmes and Watson as shown in the stories, and while we never got to see Holmes doing much research, there were hints of it (usually in the experiments on the dog).
If Elementary is on Amazon Prime or Netflix, I'll try and take a look.
The trailer managed to get a couple of chuckles out of me (particularly the bees) but I fear that, like a lot of recent Will Ferrell movies, all the funny parts will be in the trailers.
Some of his earlier roles were comedy gold, such as Zoolander, Anchorman and even his small role in Austin Powers stood out as one of the best characters in the film, but I can't remember the last time I got excited about him being in a film.
The same goes for John C Reilly. He's a fantastic actor with some great performances under his belt (Stan &Ollie looks incredible), but seems to enjoy making very questionable decisions
I loved Step Brothers and Talageda Nights, those 2 are great together. I won't get to the theater for this as usual, but it's already on my list for netflix/cable
Ultramarines, 3rd Co. and friends, 16k+ 
4k 
4k Points
Competition Index
