Saw SHERLOCK HOLMES on Christmas. I was BORED. Absolutely bored during the film.

The story's engine just didn't move. The first act break, the mid-point, the climax all pulled me in, but I was bored to tears between them. Just bored.

All of Blackwood's "magic" (except the first and last instances) happened off-camera. It would have been GREAT to see some of his magical feats ourselves only to see how Holmes figures out just how he did it. But we were kept in the dark, and then at the very end we hear a big speech about how it all happened. Ugh.

Downey Jr.'s accent seemed fine, but he had TERRIBLE enunciation. Could hardly understand him, and the fact that the theater's (I was home from L.A. in the Chicago suburbs) sound system was so low I could hear people rustling in their seats.

Set-pieces seemed a little forced and inorganic to the plot although they were, for the most part, engaging.

I give it 1 1/2 stars out of 5. And maybe if I see it again (and can hear it), I'd give it an extra star.

I fell asleep about 20-30 minutes in then woke up maybe 10-15 minutes later and watched the rest. It just took forever to set up, I had to keep asking myself okay what is his goal or mission in this because by then he wasn't really actively doing anything, though I knew what he would be doing later down the road it just took a long time to get there. It seems like just a lot of witty banter between Holmes and Watson. My fiance wanted to watch it so I went, I would have rather seen something else but as a female I think I picked the last like 8 movies so I better let him have his one ;)

Well, I wasn't quite as bored as the others – in fact, putting aside any Baker Street Irregular expectations I had for what "Holmes" out to be like aside, I thought it was a fairly entertaining and fine flick.

Structure wise, I'm not going to be terribly harsh on it either. I went in knowing the film would just be a vehicle for action sequence followed by clever banter followed by Holmes demonstrating his detective instincts followed by yet another action sequence. The film does all of that more than sufficiently. I also think Holmes' instinct, inborn into character/archtype – as a detective who notices everything, follows his instincts, and only stops to explain things after the fact – provides more than enough coverage for some of the plot's weaker moments, when we're left wondering "What's he doing? Why?" etc. I was even alright with being left as an audience member in the dark for some of the things as they happened, like Blackwood's magic, because of this. Normally you wouldn't tolerate this kind of "Reveal What *Really* Happened, After It Happened" thing in a film, but I think it works with Sherlock Holmes.

The only thing I really want to know, though, is how on earth Rachel McAdams' character gets from the Parliament Building to Tower Bridge so quickly, at the end of the film there. I live in London, and there ain't no way you're going to manage that in just a few minutes.

The last thing, though: Mark this, the entire film is just a set up for the "real" Sherlock Holmes magic, to come with its sequels. I don't want to reveal much, but there's more villainy at work in the story than we're initially led to believe – and it looks like with the film's BO haul this weekend, we'll definitely see it in future films. Like "Batman Begins," I can easily imagine Ritchie and his writers viewing this film simply as an Act I to a full trilogy of Sherlock Holmes films.

Scott, I liked "Sherlock Holmes." Robert Downey Jr. is fun to watch on screen. Great cinemetography in spots. Especially Lord Blackwood's eyes in the gallows and the end shots of London.

Was FAR MORE impressed with "Nine" (Director: Rob Marshal. Main stars: Daniel Day Lewis, Marion Cotillard, Judy Dench) which I saw at a matinee yesterday. Very sexually charged film (Penelope Cruz, Fergie, Kate Hudson, Nichole Kidman), BUT it also has a very poignant message -- and a good one at that! One that fellow creatives MIGHT just be able to relate to... AND "Nine" has the best ending of any movie I can remember seeing in recent memory.

Best film of 2009? "Avatar" or "Nine" are both worthy selections.

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

Not a masterpiece, but no real complaints from me. Considering it's a big budget Sherlock Holmes movie designed to appeal to more than just fans of Sherlock Holmes, I think it was successful.

Pretty ambivalent about Sherlock Holmes... it's was well made and well acted enough and the script wasn't terrible but the whole enterprise just seemed pointless. It was revisionist to the point of have no connection to the A.C. Doyle characters and settings. My question is, why not just create NEW characters, a NEW British sleuth and sidekick that are simply an homage to Holmes??? (I know, I know, dumb question, product branding....)

E.C. is absolutely dead on about "NINE." I had very little expectations going in since I am a HUGE fan of Fellini's 8 1/2 AND the film got a little roasted by critics. But WOW, what a show... it was one of those film where you can catch yourself saying, "they don't make 'em like this anymore." Beautifully done.

I haven't seen it yet, but I will say that I really enjoyed the Sherlock Holmes script and am looking forward to checking it out.