Everyone has got a bit of the post-Christmas blues, although mine is mostly being generated by the mountain of chocolates and baked goods that I still have to get through before they go stale. If you are feeling low, I recommend a trip to the cinema. It’ll get you out of the house, stop you worrying about the fact that there will be no more Gavin and Stacey (or David T as Dr. Who, or X Factor, or Strictly Come Dancing etc etc) and help you to burn off some Christmas weight*. I did just that, and it made me feel momentarily better, before the realities of our frost-bound, snow-covered nation returned, their persistent presence intensified by the brief escape to another world. And here is what I thought of what I saw:

Sherlock Holmes

I was excited by the trailer when I saw it back in the summer, and I’m pleased to report that Guy Ritchie’s irreverent take on the classic Gentleman detective is just as much fun as the hype would have you believe. It’s also the best movie that Ritchie has made since Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. Robert Downey Jr. is on top form as Holmes, and Jude Law is a likeable Watson. But make no mistake, this is Downey Jr.’s film all the way, and even his slightly flaky accent doesn’t spoil things.

Shot with Ritchie’s traditional flare and love of the slow-mo/fast-mo action scene, the well-paced plot and over the top set pieces are actually paired with a funny, fresh script.  I never thought I’d use the word ‘fresh’ in that way, but it’s the only appropriate term. So in short, Sherlock Holmes is the perfect remedy to any lethargic sentiments that you have become burdened with after the festive period. I give it four violins out of five.

Nine

Filming theatre can be problematic, and some adaptations of stage musicals ditch any theatrical conventions in favour of screen-friendly alternatives. Others just portray what would happen on the stage without any real ‘adapting’ of the source material for the cinema audience. Nine goes for something in between the two.

Directed by Rob Marshall, who also brought us Chicago and Memoirs of a Geisha, and staring a frankly ridiculous line up of triple-A movie stars, it should really sparkle. And in many ways it does. But the main problem with Nine is that the actual musical numbers are forgettable at best, and at worst distracting and irritating.

The second problem with the actual songs is that most of the actors are not particularly good singers. Judy Dench does a nice bellowy number that doesn’t require much talent, and Daniel Day Lewis’ leading man (who seems to be as narcissistic as the actor himself) has a kind of novelty Italian accent which masks his unconvincing vocal performance. But no one is truly outstanding, which is a pity. In fact, Fergie of Black Eyed Peas fame has the strongest performance, which you would expect from someone who is a professional singer, used to the studio environment in which the songs were recorded.

Marshall sets all of the big numbers in a half-finished movie studio, and that is where they stay, locked on the stage away from the main action. He intercuts significant points in the film with the musical numbers, whilst matching the characters’ real dilemmas with their all-singing, all-dancing alter-egos who exist only on the scaffolds and frescos of the set. Stylistically it is artfully balanced, and a mixture of techniques are employed with flare, creating a visually interesting but musically bland film. I did not dislike Nine, but I was nowhere near loving it. You may feel similar.

 So, two films to finish off 2009, and many more to come. 2010 should be interesting.

 

*That’s a lie, but a convenient one to believe.