Let me start with the elephant in the room. Is the bromance of the same epic level as the first installment? Well, objectively, it’s more prevalent. Subjectively, it’s either better or worse, depending on your appreciation for homoeroticism.
The story starts with Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) and Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) playing the same game of disguised detective and the playfully lawless. No doubt this was to get the audience back in the mood for Downey’s take on the detective. It has the slow motion breakdown of the fight. The fight ends and Holmes meets up with Adler. A crisis is averted and the audience learns quickly that it was part of a greater conspiracy. The plot continues to wind and hint and show the full crime that is taking place but without spoiling anything. Watching a movie is a passive act. This movie challenges this passivity like the previous Ritchie/Holmes movie did.
As suggested earlier by the reflection on the bromance, the characters are well written and expertly played. It should be noted that the movie is completely stolen by the Sherlock’s brother, Mycroft (Stephen Fry).
Also, I would like to state my pleasure with Guy Ritchie’s take on commercial movies. His prior movies were fun but this series challenges the audience when they expect a simple action movie, as the trailers seem to suggest.
So, how does this stack up? Is this a sequel a worthy effort? Absolutely.
Soon: The Hunger Games