Robert J. Maxwell I can't say it's a disappointment because I had no particular expectations, so I couldn't have been disappointed. Yet there were too many odd elements in the film. It was disturbing, really.First, and most important, Ben Snyder as Sherlock Holmes doesn't pack enough juice into the role. It's not that he gives a poor performance, just that he's miscast. It's easy to be spoiled after a diet of Basil Rathbone and Jeremy Brett, true, but Snyder is too short, a little frail, and has a high piping voice that, with the aid of the poor sound, tends to cloak the dialog. He's not Sherlock Holmes, although he'd probably make a fine subordinate character -- not a greengrocer, maybe, but a greengrocer's shop assistant. Gareth David-Lloyd does better with Dr. Watson and Lestrade is about right.It was directed by Rachel Goldenberg. Along with her DP, she decided to shoot it all in a kind of gloomy sepia atmosphere, in a London where the sun never shines. Lots of old-fashioned industrial junk in the settings, giant gears wheels, walking beams, and perambulating mechanical dinosaurs. She spends about ten minutes on a scene of Watson clambering up and down the face of a cliff that would have been more effective in half that time. There are some noisy clashing flashbacks to events that last only an instant and come straight from CSI. And there are a few insignificant anachronisms. (The telephone wasn't widely accepted in 1888; it came into use after it was adopted by Queen Victoria later.) It owes little to Conan-Doyle except the handful of principal characters. Holmes gets to pull of two or three of his amazing deductive stunts, including diagnosing a case of mercury poisoning (or something) in a cadaver he's no more than glanced at. Even here, Mycroft has become Thorpe, for some reason. It isn't insulting, an offense to one's sensibilities.If there's nothing else on, and if you're not a purist, it's worth watching, but it's not worth seeking out.

SnakesOnAnAfricanPlain WOW. I watched this as I hadn't seen a bad film in quite a while, and Asylum never fail to disappoint. But here they did fail. It was genuinely well written and also a lot of damn fun. Watson recalls the story of Sherlock that has never been told. After a number of monster attacks around London, ranging from giant octopus to mini-tyrannosaur, Holmes is drafted in to solve the case. As always, the mystery must come to a logical conclusion of some sorts. So how did Asylum manage to create an impressive piece of entertainment? First of all, they managed to get some genuine talent. Snyder, David-Lloyd and Keating all give memorable performances and are faithful to their characters. They take it seriously, but also have fun, but never forget that this is just a knock-off meant to cash in on the Hollywood release. The script develops the characters very well, and the villain has a reason to be the way he is. It's almost emotional at times. By the end, when a giant mechanical dragon takes to the skies, it completely had me. This has the same quality, in both writing and production, of a very good Doctor Who episode. I hope The Asylum put just as much effort into future releases.

carflo I have seen quite a few low budget scifi/horror movies lately and about the highest rating I gave any of them was a 3, but this Sherlock Holmes was good, very good. I had never seen or heard of any of the actors, but they were all also very good, especially Watson who did a fine job. Holmes was as usual, quirky and arrogant, but then, that's how he is supposed to be. The sets and settings were very nice and most of the outdoor scenes were beautiful. But the best were the special effects: the monsters and the Rube Goldberg machines. My husband like the dragon best, but as a dinosaur fan, my favorite was the so called raptor. I say 'so called' because it did not look at all like a raptor, but it did look like a beautifully done miniature T-Rex. We both liked all of the Rube Goldberg machinery used by the master criminal. If you get a chance, watch this Sherlock Holmes. You'll probably like it like we did.

TheLittleSongbird Sherlock Holmes is not a good movie by a long shot, but in comparison to some of the other movies Asylum has churned out it is not that bad either.I do agree it does have its problems. The film is low budget, and some of it does show, as some of the production values while not terrible are not great. Some of the editing could have been better, while the film is dully lit and some of the sets, locations and costumes are just okay if somewhat uninteresting. The dinosaur and dragon are quite good though. The film is too short, and I think too rushed as well, and while it was nice to listen to the soundtrack was forgettable soon after. Ben Syder does do what he can with the iconic detective known as Sherlock Holmes but I couldn't help thinking in terms of mannerisms and appearance he was miscast.However, the direction was decent, as was the script which had some nice touches without being entirely exceptional. While it does have its holes and quite strange in its feel, the story is an interesting one and entertaining enough if you don't think about it too much, the villain is enjoyable and there are some good performances from Gareth David as a more quiet and composed Watson and Dominic Keating. Elizabeth Arends is lovely, and the climax was diverting and much better than I expected.Overall, there is nothing outstanding on display, and those who are looking for a faithful adaptation will be disappointed. But it is mildly entertaining with some good things if you don't take it too seriously. 5/10 Bethany Cox