Powerful

Let's be realistic.

Fantastic!

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

A young private detective Sherlock Holmes becomes famous overnight when he discovers and kills the most dangerous man of England; Professor Moriarty. The fame is short lived as a series of killings start that indicate Moriarty being still alive. Holmes sets out to discover the truth with a help of Doctor Watson, a mortuary who takes interest in Holmes' cases.I watched this movie "Sherlock: A Case of Evil" (2002) during sort of a Holmes obsessed time in my life, even when I had heard lots and lots of bad things about it. To tell you the truth, movie is not all bad. Production value is decent, sets and costumes nicely Victorian, and music, while a bit modern, not at all distracting. The plot also had some nice things going on for it, I thought the idea of Moriarty inventing heroin was clever, and there are some touches for Arthur Conan Doyle's stories like the rifle-stick and the game Sherlock and Mycroft play.So the story is not the worst thing here. The characterization is. This film wants to be sort of beginning for Holmes career as the famous detective we all love, wanting to explain his drug addiction and why there is no romance in his life. However, as the film starts Holmes is hot-headed party favorite who likes to have a different girl every night (sometimes two). His sudden change at the end to the Holmes of Doyle's stories is not a least bit realistic. It also doesn't help that James D'Arcy isn't least bit interesting. Well, he's not as annoying as Matt Frewer but still horribly miscast here. I can understand they wanted to make Holmes younger but they should have found someone else.Richard E. Grant seems a bit wasted in this movie, playing Holmes' brother Mycroft. I can't believe that he's already appeared in two Sherlock movies (other being The Hound of the Baskervilles with Richard Roxburgh) and not having played Sherlock himself, even when he has the perfect looks for the part. On the other hand, I did like Watson in this movie, played by Roger Morlidge. It's interesting to see that Watson doesn't become Holmes' best friend instantly but actually dislikes the detective very much first. Gabrielle Anwar as Holmes' supposed love interest is just a wallflower.The highlight of this movie for me was Vincent D'Onofrio's portrayal of Moriarty. It's a bit sad to say so because he is awfully campy and theatric, nothing like Professor Moriarty from Conan Doyle's stories, but he does play a competent villain. Though God only knows what kind of accent he is trying to have.All in all, "Sherlock: A Case of Evil" is not the worst Sherlock Holmes movie I have seen and while it certainly could be a lot better with very little effort, it does make a nice evening watch. However, if you really want to see a film of Sherlock Holmes' early years that actually tries to keep characters faithful to Arthur Conan Doyle's stories, watch Barry Levinson's 1985 underrated movie "Young Sherlock Holmes" instead.

Just about everything about this film is awful. They've hashed up the plot and characters so badly that it almost unrecognisable as holmes, lacking all the brilliance that made the doyle stories.the casting of holmes played by some actor that looks about 19 years old with wooden acting to match and non-of the attributes that make holmes holmes, makes the entire film completely unconvincing throughout.other negative reviews are spot on, there are so many flaws its just embarrassing, .....an 18th century police swat team, impulsive sex scenes!!.Watch the jeremy brett as holmes for a more accurate portrayal in the TV series.there a reason why this film is on at 2am on a tuesday morning on itv3, its utter rubbish.

Many reviewers have pointed out just how terrible the film is and, in particular, that this "Holmes" is nothing like the real one.It's also full of terrible gaffes. "Serial killer"?! This expression dates from the 1970s, apparently coined by the FBI. The scriptwriter failed in many other ways to hit the Victorian modes of speech essential to any film set in the period.What really got me, however, was the phony newspapers. These were nothing like real Victorian ones. They had laughable banner headlines of the type otherwise seen only in Superman or Batman films. Some of them were printed on little sheets of paper, very far from the broadsheets of the time.Watch this only if you really have too much time on your hands.

I caught this on television last week and my initial thought was how awful it was and then fascinated at what was Victorian style car crash television. Even the talents of Richard E Grant were kneecapped quite literally with a laughable side story of Mycroft Holmes lurching around in callipers with a pale and wan expression. The best of the worst was Moriarty. An American actor, who, presumably learned his English accent from James Mason films, or to put it more accurately, Eddie Izzard doing James Mason. I wonder upon occasion why producers, directors and financiers do not take one look at the script and realise it is a turkey. Production values aside, a lot was done in terms of costume and set to make this succeed, but it should have been put in a shredder way before the poor, out of work actors were forced to put this rubbish on their CV. No redeeming features whatsoever, but for exactly that reason a compelling watch just to see how bad it could really get.