Sherlock Holmes
Studio: Warner Bros. Pictures
Rated: PG-13
Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Rachel McAdams, Mark Strong, Eddie Marsan
Director: Guy Ritchie
WorkNameSort: Sherlock Holmes
Our Rating: 4.00

London detective Sherlock Holmes and his embattled sidekick, Dr. Watson, have been favorites of the big screen almost as long as there has been a big screen. Since the turn of the century, not a decade has gone by that was untouched by the deductive master and his filmed exploits, but it seemed that Holmes was an unwanted presence in America in the 2000s. Part of that cold shoulder can be attributed to a Bush-era ‘war on science,â?� a right-wing denunciation of elitist reason and logic. Perhaps it could also be chalked up to the worldwide hit TV show House, a blatant retelling of the Holmes myth (the titular character, played by Brit Hugh Laurie, even lives at Holmes’ 221B address) that sated our need for mystery-solving.

But it’s a different time now. Science is back, and with it, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s drug-addled cutup. And what a welcome return is presented here by the inimitable Robert Downey Jr. Sherlock Holmes is a briskly paced, witty escapade that pits the detective and Jude Law’s John Watson ‘ the pair effortlessly convince us they’ve been together for far too long ‘ against a set of black magic’worshipping, politically powerful uprisers. Led by the villainous Mark Strong (who ironically also plays the evil Conroy in The Young Victoria), the coven attempts to instigate a coup through the use of fear, a panic brought on by the smoke and mirrors of their so-called mystical evil.

Throwing a wrench into things is mousy Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams), a con artist who shares a past with Holmes and is under the employ of a shadowy professor (though that character, whose mere mention is sure to delight Holmes fans, is never seen).

There are thrills, laughs, damsels in white and a dog (assuredly not a hound), and it’s all tied together by director Guy Ritchie (Snatch, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels) in a yarn that at times feels like a throwback to the mega-actioners of the ’80s, when leads could get away with being incorrigible cards as long as they had someone by their side to keep them grounded. Although the last act gets bogged down in excessive franchise talk, the film delivers on its own merit as an exciting, scientific romp. Note to executives: The quality of the film up to that point invites unqualified sequel thoughts; you don’t have to give us anything more than that to make us come back for more.

This article appears in Dec 23-29, 2009.