Thanks for the info. It's been years since I've seen a movie about Holmes. 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Baxter" <truthseeker...@hotmail.com> 
To: "SciFiNoir2" <scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com> 
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 3:20:58 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: RE: [scifinoir2] What if Actors' Roles were Switched in "Sherlock 
Holmes"? 






Keith, I've always been able to see Holmes' emotional complexity, regardless of 
medium. He craves a challenge to drive him forward. Without it, he stalls, and 
he shows his vulnerability in his addiction to cocaine. Much like Downey, which 
is why I cheered his casting in the role. The two are like souls, in a very 
real sense. 

"If all the world's a stage and all the people merely players, who in bloody 
hell hired the director?" -- Charles L Grant 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUxw9aUVik 





To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com 
From: keithbjohn...@comcast.net 
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:41:36 +0000 
Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] What if Actors' Roles were Switched in "Sherlock 
Holmes"? 






But back to my point, is Holmes in the books as emotionally complicated as 
Downey's portrayal? The movies I've seen all have Holmes are more stoic than 
Downey. Not a Vulcan or anything, but more controlled. So, do you think Law in 
the role would have dictated a less demonstrative Holmes? 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Omari Confer" <clockwork...@gmail.com> 
To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 3:03:59 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] What if Actors' Roles were Switched in "Sherlock 
Holmes"? 




Law doesnt have the emotional depth to pull off Sherlock. Plain and simple. 



On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Keith Johnson < keithbjohn...@comcast.net > 
wrote: 








After seeing the movie last Sunday, I was wondering about the casting. Downey 
and Law are really good, but why did Ritchie cast them that way? Law, who's 
taller, a bit leaner, and has a bit more of an intensely thoughtful look, would 
seem at first glance to be the natural choice to play Holmes. At least, he 
probably on the surface appears closer to the tall, lean, serious Holmes of all 
those movies i saw as a kid. Downey, with his shorter stature, lined, worn 
face, large expressive eyes, and tendency to look comical, serious,and slightly 
"off" all at once, would seem to be a good fit for a slightly comedic 
Watson--the guy who comments/critiques/jokes from the sidelines as the 
oh-so-serious Holmes goes about solving the crimes. 

Indeed, i can see a time before Downey's return to such lofty heights, where 
another director would probably think it natural to cast the dapper and 
handsome Law as Holmes, and the quixotic Downey as his funny sidekick. Wonder 
how such a movie would have turned out? Would the casting have dictated a more 
traditional take on the characters? Would Rithie's slight twist on the 
traditional movie treatments of the characters still have worked if the roles 
had been switched? 




-- 
READ MY BLOG 
http://centralheatingblog.blogspot.com 
STRING THEORY 
http://stringtheory.podbean.com 







Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now. 


Reply via email to