People are voting emotionally.
If you don't like this, we can't be friends.
Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.
Sherlock Holmes has been retired for thirty years. Upon finally reading Dr John Watson's stories for the first time along with watching a "Talking Picture" depicting his last adventure, Sherlock decides to write the truth about his last case. Dr Watson had always been liberal with the facts, for entertainment's sake. Though, the last case is niggling at Sherlock's deteriorating mind... It must have been very important as it made him turn his back on the profession he loved. Will there be enough time to get it all down on paper before his memory fails completely?This is a nice "What If?" story. Writer, Mitch Cullen (who wrote the novel) and screenplay writer Jeffrey Hatcher do no disservice to the character Arthur Conan Doyle created. This is still the same Sherlock Holmes of the stories, though older, but maybe not wiser. Ian McKellen was a perfect choice for this aged character and he gives a brilliant portrayal. Though it's Laura Linney who surprised me the most. For me, she's never been a draw. However, I am pleased to say that as Mrs Munro, Sherlock's housekeeper, she is great. There was a slight moment when we first meet her and her accent slips into across between American and North Country. However, this is only for a few seconds. From there on in her accent is pretty good. Not perfect, though, not bad. One of my favourite scenes in the film is when Mrs Munro is discussing her late husband with her son, Roger (Parker). When Roger asks her if she's good at making up stories, her reply and the look on her face, along with the pregnant pause, really does show a whole range of emotions in just a few scant seconds - very well done. Milo Parker is a very strong actor who had to contend with working with a great cast, which he did seamlessly. The director, Condon, did a great job of not letting the character of Roger steal the show, which could have easily happened.Condon also does a fantastic job of filming. Using camera shots to add atmosphere and show locations to their best advantage. The part where Sherlock follows Anne Kelmot (Morahan) through London is a perfect example. The scene at the train station where she makes a pay-off is one of my favourites in the film. What with the steam filling the platforms and the shots looking between the moving carriages. It really does set the scene well.To be honest, I really couldn't find anything wrong with either the story or the film. As I've said before, I am not a fan of flashbacks. Though here they are used to tell Sherlock's last case as he tries to remember it and write it down. Then you have the remembrances of Japan where Sherlock has recently been looking for a remedy to his failing memory. These are expertly told and done in such a way that adds power and depth to the story... not confusion, which is the case with a lot of films. In a lot of movies, flashbacks add a disjointed feeling to the pace and structure. Luckily for the viewer, Condon is a master at weaving them into the story with seemingly effortless ease.This film is a must-see for all Sherlock fans, Mystery Lovers, Thriller Fans, and Armchair Detectives everywhere. This hasn't made it into my top ten movies, though I have to admit I'll watch it again... I may even consider buying a copy.
What a load of incomprehensible claptrap! Ian McKellen is a very good actor but this was full of very good actors that were not even given one minutes screen time. It is hailed as the mystery of his last case - what last case? There was no mystery as to what happened.
And as for Holmes visiting a remarkable undamaged Nagasaki only two years after the atomic bomb - what? In fact you could have cut the whole Japanese content and made not a jot of difference to the film.
This was just a shabby attempt to lure people using the Sherlock Holmes angle, and it turned into a maudlin heap of nothing.
I had my doubts about MR. HOLMES when I saw that it was based on a book by an American novelist and had a screenplay by an American writer. I've nothing against our American cousins, but when I sat down and watched the movie my worst fears were confirmed: although the film occasionally plays lip service to the works of Conan Doyle, this is utterly unlike any kind of Sherlock Holmes I've seen before. I didn't recognise him. It's like some American literary novelist's idea of what Holmes should be rather than an attempt to connect with the great man himself. And I know for a fact that there are American pastiche authors whose work will be forever ignored by Hollywood who can write much better Holmes than the one depicted here.The film's idea is to posit Holmes as an elderly man in his final years. The slow-moving narrative mixes together three separate story lines, two from his past and one set in the present day. And the problem with this film? It's so slow! Everything is dragged out to the most minute detail and none of it is interesting, at all. Ian McKellen is a good actor - although Bill Condon is a bit lazy, making almost exactly the same kind of film as his GODS AND MONSTERS from a couple of decades ago - but he doesn't play Holmes here, just some kind of wise old man.Each of the stories has flaws and faults. I was primarily interested in seeing Hiroyuki Sanada (one of my favourite actors) in the Japanese storyline, but it's very weak and simplistic and Sanada only shows up in a couple of scenes. The main mystery back story is depressing and unlike any of the cases that the literary Holmes investigated. The present day stuff is better, but the kid is annoyingly wise and chirpy, and Laura Linney's presence is a big distraction given her awful accent, which is all over the place. Overall, MR. HOLMES is a real bore, something that none of the original stories and few of the earlier adaptations were.
I went into this movie with two things in my favor. One, that I have loved all things related to Sherlock Holmes ever since reading the "Hound of the Baskervilles" as a young boy, and two, being a great fan of Ian McKellan, who I consider one of the United Kingdoms greatest actors. In watching the film, I am however reminded of what a great practitioner McKellan is at understating his ability. His performance as an ageing Holmes, slowly finding the simplest of mental tasks becoming difficult, to be a study in just how awful at times the process of growing old can be, and may be one of the finest of his career. I am disappointed at some of the reviews that have been posted on the site here, mainly because as usual they have been posted without understanding the truth of such a movie. It was never intended as a typical Holmes tale, but more a look at what his life might be like as he comes to grip with the twilight of his life, and as such is quite simply an extraordinary exhibition of acting excellence. I would also like to point out the performances of both Laura Linney, who we see all to little of and is a wonderful actress, and an excellent turn by young Milo Parker who is not overshadowed by Mckellan, but who in fact interacts delightfully with him and only increases the overall excellence of the movie.Slow, but delightfully so, and poignant, "Mr Holmes" should be enjoyed by all who enjoy movies not just for action or a "tall tale" but for the intellectual and emotional stimulus with which only truly great performances can illicit from the viewer.