Irregularities on Baker Street

Sherlock Holmes is one of literature's best-known characters. He was never a real person, and if you go to Baker street in London to locate his house, you would instead find a bank that takes over the entire block. Despite this drawing of Holmes [fictional] and author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle [real person], Holmes exists only in stories and on film. I bring this up because of my inner conflict revolving around Guy Ritchie's new Sherlock Holmes movie starring Robert Downy Jr.

If you don't read about upcoming movies, then you don't know that this movie is being made right now, but it is. Jude Law is playing Watson, Downy Jr. is playing Holmes, Rachael McAdams is Irene Adler, and that's all we know. This movie is being based off a graphic novel by Lionel Wigram and will portray Holmes as a more adventurous, action-type protagonist. Based on these pictures it looks like the movie will Portray Watson with no alterations from his literary past, but will in fact portray Holmes as a disheveled tramp. Downey Jr. already knows how to play this role, so it should be an easy retread for him. I'm not saying he's a bad actor, I'm just unimpressed by his ragtag image as Holmes. It all ties in to the portrayal of Holmes in this movie, and I'll start you all off with a little info about literary Sherlock.

Sherlock Holmes as originally envisioned by Conan Doyle was a pretty regular London gentleman of his time, the late 1800's. He was a genius at deduction, played the violin, never had any romantic entanglements, (although he was attracted in some way to Irene Adler - it never came to anything tangible) , and he sometimes enjoyed imbibing a 7% solution of cocaine. Leaving out the fact that cocaine was perfectly legal at the time (why do you think they call it Coca-Cola?), thereby stating my opinion that Holmes was never a lawbreaker, his drug usage was defined by the times and has nothing to do with "coke-heads" of the here and now. Guy Ritchie has already said that he intends to play up the drug use. As far as my own deductions are concerned, what with the admission that it will be an action movie, that someone has been cast as Irene Adler, and the trumped up drug use, I don't think this movie will appeal to anyone who is a real fan of the stories. It might get some younger people to read a story or two, but once they see how boring the tales are compared to the movie, they're going to grow tired very fast.

Background on Irene Adler: She appears only in one story, "A Scandal in Bohemia", and is mentioned by Holmes in a few others, but Holmes and Adler never get together or fuck each other, which I'm sure they will in this movie. Their relationship in the stories can be related to the relationship that Grissom and Lady Heather have in CSI: a relationship of respect, interest and admiration, not lust and carnal desires. Another note about the cocaine usage in the original stories: Holmes never used it while he was working on a case. It was always strictly on his own time. This movie is going to increase his drug usage and I won't be surprised if we see Holmes bump a line or two.

To some people that might be an exciting revisionist take on the character. I personally find it more exciting to think that there is someone who has qualities that I respect and admire and envy who can casually use a drug for recreation without it taking over his life. But I guess that message is too risque to put out to the public. God forbid that we impart any message other than if you're in the same room as some substance, then you are tainted for life and will probably die young. Better to let the kids know that if anyone has ever used a drug at all, then they were probably hard up for it all the time. Maybe Downey Jr.'s Sherlock will resemble Tyrone Biggums more than the sometimes snobbish, always calculating and proper Holmes of literature. Here's hoping we get some scenes of Holmes beating a crack-whore or hocking Mini-Disc players for $8 a pop on the street to support his habit.