I think that Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes character is uniquely adapted from the Holmes in the original print series. In many ways, the film Sherlock is similar to the Sherlock in the books. He is still extraordinarily perceptive: in A Study in Scarlet, Holmes is able to tell that Watson was in Afghanistan almost as soon as they meet. In Ritchie's film Holmes, simply by examining Dr. Watson's fiance, can draw extraordinarily accurate conclusions about her life and her past.
Ritchie's Holmes is different from the character in the novel mainly in that the audience is much more exposed to what is going on in his head. For example, in the first fight scene, Holmes walks the audience through his exact plan of attack. In the restaurant scene, while he is sitting alone waiting for Dr. Watson to appear, we see (or hear) his world as a very chaotic and stimulating place because he is very aware of every single noise and disturbance around him.
Holmes is also much more active in the film than in any of the original stories. He gets into a lot of fights and is usually the one to have violent confrontations with any antagonists. This is probably because Ritchie wanted to emphasize Holmes's hyperactivity, as he did by exposing the audience to his thoughts. The film really put focus on the way Sherlocks mind works and Ritchie's adaptive decisions relating to the character of Holmes show that he is the center of the story.
Sherlock is a very interpretable character. Ritchie chose to include, or focus on, certain aspects of Sherlock that other interpretations did not. The fight scene is a good example to bring up when you talk about how Sherlock can be thought of in different ways depending on who is thinking of him. I also believe that Ritchie made Sherlock into a more energetic character, more willing to get into a rash situation in order to get the job done. Overall Ritchie’s version succeeded at capturing who I believe Sherlock is and did not stray far from the novel’s depiction.
ReplyDelete