By now, I figured that director Guy Ritchie would be wearing out his fame as the director of Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch.. His last two films haven’t been anything to write home about and though we’ve still to see his latest offering, RocknRolla, now a days, more often than not, I read his name associated with his wife and less about Ritchie the director. Until now.
Variety has news that Ritchie has signed on for Sherlock Holmes for a 2010 release. But don’t hold your breath for classic mysteries; I have a feeling that’s not what we’re going to get. According to the article, Ritchie is working on a script, based on an upcoming comicbook Sherlock Holmes which features a more adventuresome Holmes who makes use of his skills as a boxer and swordsman.
I haven’t read a lot of Arthur Conan Doyle’s classic stories but from the bits and pieces I have read and heard, I always thought Holmes was an intellectual, not so much an action star. Can’t say this change surprises me much. Who would really want to see a movie about a guy who depends on his smarts rather than big action sequences to solve mysteries?!?
Shelock Holmes was an avid boxer in the stories, and was on numerous occasions called upon to use his pugilistic (boxing?) skills to subdue the badguys
Definitely. Holmes novels play out a lot like Bond novels. Or vice-versa, I suppose. The action is usually appropriate. They don’t read like a Michael Bay script, that’s for sure.
I think it might be safer to say Holmes could be an action star when he chose to. He was reportedly a skilled boxer to the point that he is recognised by a prize fighter as the amateur who fought three rounds with him. I don’t recall fencing ever being listed among Holmes’ skills, but then it isn’t beyond the realm of possiblity for a gentleman in Victorian England.
No way… Downey eying up the role of Sherlock? Hmm…
Pathetic. This is among the worst ‘using-known-franchise-to-cash-in-on-generic-shit’ examples I have heard of to date.