User Score
7.4 out of 10

Generally favorable reviews- based on 305 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 23 out of 305

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

  1. Dec 19, 2011
    10
    really good! i really like that you have to think harder with this part. part 1 told you everything, and was simple, this one makes you think harder, and it was really epic! slow-motion scene in the forest was awesome, fantastic humour to x)
  2. Dec 16, 2011
    10
    I liked this as much as the first one. That's saying a lot, it was one of my all time favorites. Great fun . The action flows very well and a cool surprise ending. Awesome movie.
  3. Dec 18, 2011
    10
    This movie was very thought provoking. I loved it, but I can see how other people would classify this as boring. It was a long movie. Don't go in expecting it to be like the first one, it's not in more ways than a few. Most of the battles in this are mental. Didn't really care for the fire fights, but even with the gun battles, there was always an underlined theme.
  4. Dec 17, 2011
    9
    Shut up critics. You don't understand good film. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows has a complex storyline, and it's great acting and gentle humor makes it a hit. Plus, I loved the end. THE END ?
  5. Dec 17, 2011
    4
    Guy Ritchie has managed to take anything that could be found fun in the first installment and use it to death to the point of monotony. Game of Shadows is really the same movie as the first: an extremely Hollywoodized, action-oriented take on the classic detective. While the first was fairly enjoyable, with a great performance by Downey Jr., this one has scrapped any mystery whatsoever in favor of a Victorian era, Steam Punk actioner. There is a bit of redemption however, with the last twenty-five minutes to half an hour being intense and fairly clever, as well as some decent action sequences. It doesn't exactly outweigh the awful performance by Stephen Fry or the fact that Robert Downey has now worked all originality or quirkiness in his character to death. And of course, the upsetting fact that they set it up for a third movie. Expand
  6. Dec 17, 2011
    3
    the first one was great, and this one was horrible. It had like three cool actions scenes and dry comedy throughout. But the movie stretched way too far. People were falling asleep in the theater and booing the movie. I really didn't like it.
  7. Jan 16, 2012
    10
    This film was amazing.I enjoyed every part of it.It was very humorous at times and sometimes shocking. I would strongly recommend this film.I actually prefer this film rather than the first one!
  8. Jan 26, 2012
    5
    It's witty and clever, but far from cohesive. Apparently Sherlock is not only a great detective, but he can see the future as well? The scenes where he knows what is going to take place are absurd. The ending is also beyond ridiculous. I hate it when directors act as though we, as the audience, are morons. It was fun to watch, but silly. Downey Jr. is a genius of an actor, and the saving grace of this movie. He manages to salvage something positive from this messy film. Expand
  9. Dec 16, 2011
    8
    Some movies you watch in order to see beauty; some movies you watch in order to think and contemplate; some movies you watch so that you can be entertained. "Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows" is certainly in the third category, and it knows it. This movie is about entertainment and not much more. Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law perform their parts very well as Sherlock and Watson. I would rate the movie more highly but I think that it could use some tightening in its plot. Nonetheless, the bedlam of the action sequences married to the erudition of the movie's wit make for good cinema. Expand
  10. Dec 21, 2011
    10
    Still doing a great job at incorporating elements from Doyle's books, and Moriarity was played perfectly. It amazes me that critics liked MI:6 better than this
  11. Dec 21, 2011
    10
    I like reading the critics reviews because they further help me understand that movies are primarily about entertainment and that the majority of America cares about just that fact. Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows was simply very entertaining. Kudos to Guy Ritchie and the cast taking it up a few notches. From start to finish the intrigue of how this one will end never disappoints, the action is first rate and Robert continues to embody the Sherlock Holmes character. See the movie, its entertaining! Expand
  12. Dec 25, 2011
    4
    God, if I could put this in simplest terms this was an extremley boring movie and I honestly couldn't wait till it ended. The movie does take extreme intellectual ability to understand which is what makes this a boring movie also a silly premises and plot, though action at times also clever scripting and acting which saved the movie from total demise, other than that the movie was to long, too boring, and to hard to understand. Expand
  13. Dec 26, 2011
    10
    these critics know nothing about good movies, this film better get a higher score or there will be mess, anyway a range of action, mystery and suspense make sherlock holmes a great night out
  14. Dec 26, 2011
    8
    If I listened to critics, I wouldn't go see anything. SH: A game of Shadows has a complex storyline, average acting, gentle humor, and a surprise twist ending. THE END ? Oscar or Not? No.
  15. Dec 22, 2011
    10
    A superb film, even better than the first. I found it hilariously funny, very gripping and despite what some might say about Holmes being too much of an action man - it is faithful to the original character. He was never supposed to be a sleuth, sitting at home solving mysteries. He only lounged at home in between cases - never by choice. Holmes always was a man of action. In Conan-doyles books he took part in high speed chases, firefights and all sorts. Ok so he never pumelled the hell out of anyone with his bare hands - but I always felt that he should - seeing as he was an accomplished boxer. Anyway - the user reviews are much more in line with how the film actually plays. Most of the critics who say the film isn't faithful to the original text have never even read holmes. Expand
  16. Dec 16, 2011
    9
    Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law return once again as Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson in “Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows“. In this installment, a series of bombings across Europe has positioned the nations of the world on the brink of war. Holmes is convinced that there is a criminal mastermind behind the numerous, seemingly unrelated events and he believes it is renowned scholar James Moriarty (Jared Harris). Watson, well-accustomed to Holmes’ eccentric and erratic behavior, is dubious of Holmes claims. Besides, Watson has his upcoming wedding to focus on, and only deigns to spend time with Holmes at the promise of a stag party at an upscale gentlemen’s club. While the bachelor party includes an entertaining Stephen Fry playing Holmes’ brother, Mycroft, Holmes has ulterior motives for taking Watson to this particular club. Early in the film, Holmes had cleverly intercepted a message from Irene Adler (Amy McAdams), that led him to a fortuneteller named Madam Simza Heron (Noomi Rapace), a woman Holmes believes has been targeted for death by Moriarty, who just happens to be working at the gentlemen’s club. Eventually a meeting with Moriarty is arranged for Holmes. The two intellectuals spar with one another verbally in a civilized manner, with menacing undertones. Holmes isn’t able to convince Moriarty that Watson is no longer a partner in any of his endeavors and, Holmes is forced to take drastic measures to ensure the doctor and his new wife stay out of harm’s way. From Paris to Germany and other European locales, Holmes, Watson, and Simza and her gypsy friends race against time to uncover the diabolical plot that Moriarty has set for their demise in his quest to drive nations to war. The film is an absolute delight and is a rare sequel that is even better than the previous film in the series. Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law have amazing chemistry with one another and their timing is absolutely perfect. The duo deftly mix action and comedy as well as the serious subject matter of the plot line and are utterly captivating and enjoyable to watch every step of the way. Rapace continues to impress in a much softer character than her Lisbeth Salandar role in the “Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” Swedish trilogy. and is poised to become one of Hollywood’s new leading ladies. Having become familiar with Harris’ work on the series Mad Men, I was delighted to see him expertly portray such a complex character as Moriarty: a gentleman scholar of impeccable upbringing and education who is also a twisted and evil genius. Harris plays Moriarty perfectly and never lets you forget the dark and sinister side of him without ever becoming a campy or cartoony vaudeville villain. Guy Ritchie returns as director and lets his stars carry the film. The action has been ramped up this time around with some spectacular action sequences but the action never overshadows the character-driven story. The film was well-paced and an absolute thrill ride from beginning to end mixing fantastic action and some great humor for a very winning combination that is not to be missed. I am already looking forward to future outings of Holmes and Watson on the big screen as this was a truly enjoyable experience that shows you how action comedies are supposed to be made. 4.5 stars out of 5 Expand
  17. Dec 19, 2011
    10
    An awesome movie - Sherlock Holmes has the ability to keep you at the edge of its seat with its extreme unpredictability. Not so much that you lose control of the plot and you just sit there looking puzzled and confused, but to keep you intrigued of what might happen next. It's one of those movies that actually makes you think - you yourself may have turned into a Sherlock Holmes unravelling the mystery of what both Sherlock and Dr. Watson are solving. So much darker and creepier tale - but is still enjoyable for the imminent teens because it does not make them feel stupid, but neither is it too much for them. This movie also goes deeper into Sherlock's and Watson's relationship, I think they make such a good team, so funny, so brilliant, like there's an unbreakable bond between them. It still manages to pull off an excellent line of gags - I laughed and laughed so much I wished I could laugh at it all over again when it finished because it was so hilarious. One unmissable moment involves a man and some drag, and don't forget to look out for the surprise ending, which fascinated and entertained for what might come next. It achieves both sides - its technical side is perfection, and the literary and artistic skills don't come amiss, unlike some movies nowadays. And this is what I call a real movie, and a really good sequel to what came before. A thrill ride of a movie taking you from one place to another - miss this and you miss the biggest and best rollercoaster of your life. The critics certainly don't know what they're missing - don't even believe one word of what they're saying - see this and be overjoyed that you did listen to common sense. Expand
  18. Dec 18, 2011
    10
    The second chapter is better than the first for quality fiction and for entertainment. The actors are really good, and Moriarty is a real villain. Excellent slow-motion effects, set design, costumes ... amazing film! Recommended.
  19. Dec 19, 2011
    1
    I am not sure I saw the same movie as others reviewing this trash. I am an avid movie goer who enjoys a variety of movies. I did enjoy the first Sherlock Holmes movie. I thought it was fresh and fast moving. This movie was extremely difficult to follow. Additionally, the characters were not well developed. The end of the movie tried to tie everything together. However, by then nobody cared! I had a difficult time staying awake. From the comments heard from the other members in the audience, I was not the only one. Don't waste your money. If you must see this, wait until it hits TV. Expand
  20. Dec 20, 2011
    8
    While I think they could have toned down the action bit a little bit, I thought the movie flowed really well. Jude Law and Robert Downey Jr both had excellent performances, as usual. The end had the whole theater laughing, myself included.
  21. Dec 22, 2011
    9
    It was clear that the critics no nothing about movies. One is to wonder how they even got a job. This movie is mixed with mystery, suspense, humor, and all around fun. Robert Downey Jr. wastes no time in making this action packed film full excitement. Well worth the $10+ at a movie theater.
  22. Feb 12, 2012
    8
    Complex story line. Decent acting. An amazing adventure, full of thrills at every corner. What more could you want?
  23. Dec 16, 2011
    6
    I probably laughed out loud a good 30 times during the film, which is many more times than I expected to, but it just felt bloated around the middle. I still love the action sequences, and Downey Jr. is made for this role, but it could be tightened up in the 3rd iteration.
  24. Dec 20, 2011
    8
    SH2 offers a great blend of action and mystery, and it's worth a few laughs. RDJ, Jared Harris and Stephen Fry are all phenomenal. The ending left a few things open to question, but I'm sure that will all get cleared up in SH3. Overall, I think most people who enjoyed the first one will enjoy this one as well.
  25. Dec 17, 2011
    4
    Not awful, just not worth watching. Admittedly, I wasn't a fan of the first, but I wanted to see where they went with a sequel. Unfortunately, they retain the same problems that made the first movie uninteresting. The plot is so convoluted that most audience members will stop trying to figure out what's going on to try and just try to focus on the film's over-saturated action sequences.
  26. Dec 18, 2011
    5
    I enjoyed it as a thrill ride and fun action flick. My wife really liked it and would give it a 9 out of 10. I was too distracted by one of my biggest pet peeves to rank it above a 5. As a "gun guy" I can't abide seriously flawed firearms details. If as a filmmaker you choose to make a big deal about the firearms the characters are using perhaps you should pick one that is contemporary to the period not a Luger P08 that won't be invented for nearly two decades, not to mention the sub-machine gun that's at least a quarter century out of time. Give Taran Butler a call or better yet call me and I'll consult for free! Expand
  27. Dec 23, 2011
    5
    The potential for this series is great but no one seems wiling to take advantage of it. Here we have two great actors in Robert Downey, JR and Jude Law and the result is a TV miniseries. This film is no improvement on the first which may be my fault for not knowing the Holmes/Moriarty story better. Ritchie would have done himself some good if he had laid the foundation for that rivalry. In addition, Law is not that good at being the straight man to Holmes. Law could have been left out of the film and I would not have noticed. Lastly, is Ritchie turning Moriarty into the a Bond super villain? Let's hope not as that is what destroyed that series. Expand
  28. Dec 22, 2011
    4
    This sequel has very little of what made the original so much fun. Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and Dr. Watson (Jude Law) talk way too much and most of it's not witty. Worse yet, the plot is confusing and convoluted. The action sequences are edited so fast and blurry that's it's impossible to tell what's going on. Director Ritchie has thrown around plenty of his stylistic flourishes, but they just add flash and noise. There's nothing about this film to recommend it. Expand
  29. Dec 19, 2011
    6
    I'm giving it a pass - barely - because it was never boring. I'm still not convinced Guy Ritchie is the right director for Sherlock Holmes. I admire his visual style, but there was too much distracting slow motion and super fast word play between all the characters. I still have the same problem as I had in the first film about turning Holmes into a kung fu fighting super hero, but Hollywood has decided the average movie-goer in America has the attention span of a mosquito so the more action the better. They also threw a woman in the film for no reason, she is absolutely wasted. Still, Robert Downing Jr. and Jude Law do have a chemistry, there are some laughs, and a lot of action. Just don't expect much if you are a fan of the Arthur Conan Doyle books. Expand
  30. Dec 26, 2011
    6
    An improvement over the original. My audience actually clapped, I think because the ending was clever, more so than the rest of the film. It's good they killed off Holmes' love interest early so they could concentrate on the real romantic relationship between Watson and Holmes. Not sure why they tried to make Downey look like the Joker in Batman in one scene.
  31. Dec 28, 2011
    5
    Guy Ritchie delivers his lurid best. I don't think that Moriarty is the worth enemy for Holmes. I got dizzy, lousy acts. Don't enjoy the talk, "the game," enjoy the slow-motion action scene, the forest scene is my favorite.
  32. Dec 28, 2011
    6
    Even though there are now two films in Guy Ritchie’s version of Sherlock Holmes, I am still getting accustomed to the athletic, street fighting Holmes as opposed to the merely cerebral genius who used to chase suspects by horse and buggy rather than bash their brains out in back alleys. In Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, the villain is more formidable, the action consumes more screen time, and the jokes are more cringe inducing. Sherlock (Robert Downey Jr.) has noticeably upped his drug habit with side references to cocaine and routinely drinks embalming fluid rather than boring old brandy. Why the sudden surge for uppers? First, Sherlock is matching wits with Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris). Moriarty appears to match Holmes man to man intellectually; however, he has follows no moral code or displays any hint of empathy whatsoever. This makes his the most dangerous man in Europe. I will not divulge any plot points concerning his evil deeds because that is half the fun of a Sherlock story, following the trail as he discovers clues which lead him to the next location. Second, Dr. Watson (Jude Law) insists on going through with his marriage, a prospect Sherlock frequently reminds him will destroy his manhood and shatter his well-being. Sherlock’s interactions with these two characters, Moriarty and Watson, define the high and low ends of this film. When Sherlock and Moriarty share the same room, real tension emanates from the screen. Their verbal sword play is a credit to the writing and the actors who joust for tactical advantage just by using metaphors. Two scenes between these men jump to mind. Early on, Sherlock analyzes Moriarty’s handwriting while Moriarty warns Sherlock of the dangerous path he is following. I will not describe a later scene between the two gentlemen, but it is the most effective in the film as they mentally assail one another. The low and tedious end is Sherlock’s interactions with Watson. The relentless double entendres about their â€relationship’ lead the audience to question whether or not Sherlock is homosexual. For a wisecrack or two, this would provide levity and amusement. Unfortunately, the script persistently wails against this dead horse of a joke. A homoerotic double meaning pops up about every 30 seconds when Sherlock and Watson share the screen. It soon grows dreary and began to test my patience, especially during an extended sequence with Sherlock in drag. What always ends up bringing the script back on track is what Sherlock is known for, his fascinating method of deductive reasoning. Before he makes a move, the script may flash forward as he meticulously plans his next position in a street brawl or it may flash a few minutes back in time to show the audience just how he set up the bad guys to fail. Sherlock is always one step behind Moriarty who regularly seems to be the smarter of the two; however, if you are the individual planning the executing the scheme, those following you will always appear to be lagging behind you. I slightly recommend this new Sherlock mainly for the enjoyment of the Sherlock vs. Moriarty moments and the fascinating moments when Sherlock pauses to explain the situation to someone (usually the audience) as to what and why he is taking a particular course of action. I hesitate to strongly recommend this film because of the awful dialogue between Sherlock and Watson and because of the standard Guy Ritchie cinematography style. Guy Ritchie is known for inventive and momentum shifting action scenes. Sometimes bullets fly faster than the speed of light and then shift to â€Matrix’ time so the audience can watch it pierce someone’s clothing. Shifting between fast and slow motion in action sequences is helpful to determine the placement of good and bad guys, but after a particular amount of time, these shifts become significantly noticeable where instead they should be only slightly perceptible. When the third or fourth action sequence began, I was prepared and expected the momentum shifts which instead of drawing me into the scene actually had the opposite effect and took me out of it. There are certain expectations and pitfalls a second film in a series runs into. Will it have the same mood and presence as the first film? Is it just there to take up space to make it a trilogy? In A Game of Shadows, Sherlock’s character is a bit more interesting because of the drug habit and especially because of the villain; however, Watson is beginning to draw eye rolls instead of applause as the sidekick. Expand
  33. Jan 1, 2012
    5
    The second installment in Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes franchise is more action-packed than the first, and is just as funny. It's also on a far grander scale, as the great detective launches into a game of wits with his arch-nemesis Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris in a piece of perfect casting). Whilst the stakes have been increased, and there are a good deal more explosions this time round, A Game of Shadows has lost a lot of the charm the first film had. Robert Downey, Jr. has well and truly grown into his role - in the first film it felt like he was finding his feet, discovering who the character of Holmes really was, but this time round he is completely certain of himself, and his incarnation of the iconic literary character is mesmerising. As previously mentioned, Jared Harris makes the perfect Moriarty, both believable as an academic and as a criminal mastermind, and always menacing, and the scenes of "intellectual fistycuffs" between Holmes and Moriarty are without doubt the highlight of the film. Unfortunately Jude Law's Dr. Watson is now a little dull. In the first film he was essential to Holmes' investigations, serving as a combination of best friend, carer and bodyguard, but this time round he seems to have been brought along for the ride as an afterthought. He serves little purpose other than running around and firing the odd shot while Holmes works everything out. He's now just a big moving target with a moustache for evil henchmen to shoot at. And Jude Law forgets his character's limp on an alarmingly frequent basis. The relationship between Holmes and Watson has also devolved from an amusing "bromance" into full-blown homo-eroticism. Other characters from the first film aren't given the screen-time they deserve - Rachel McAdams' Irene Adler gets a couple of short scenes, and if you blink you'll miss Eddie Marsan's Inspector Lestrade. The performances of series newcomers Noomi Rapace and Stephen Fry are both competent but uninspiring. The main problem with the story of A Game of Shadows is not that it's uninventive and predictable (which it is), but that the pace is inconsistent - alternating between complex action scenes and quieter moments where Holmes tries to figure out exactly what is going on results in the story having a rather jarring stop-start feel. In addition, because of the excessive use of innuendo, sometimes the film resembles a Carry On! a little too closely. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is still entertaining for the most part, and has great performances from Robert Downey, Jr. and Jared Harris, but a combination of reduced roles for some central characters, uneven pacing and some laughable double entendre makes the film far less than it might be. Here's hoping these problems will be addressed in the sequel that will undoubtedly appear at some point in the near future. Expand
  34. Dec 20, 2011
    9
    First off, i do not agree with the critics whatsoever. This movie was veryy good. Robert Downey Jr. is back and better than ever as the always funny and incredbily intelligent Sherlock Holmes and a very well made sequel to the first sherlock holmes. The story kept me entertained from start to finish, the action was mindblowing, and the acting by the 2 lead stars Downey Jr. and Mr. Law was on par, same with the supporting cast. Loved this film from the very start to the very end. Must see film, 9/10 Expand
  35. Dec 17, 2011
    8
    If you liked the first one then you will love this one! Downey and Law team up once again to unravel a mystery and combat evil in Victorian Europe. The supporting actors are once again excellent except for Noomi Rapace, who is lifeless and can't act a lick. Her performance was almost as bad as Rachel McAdams' in the first movie. Rachel comes back (but only briefly) as Irene Adler leaving Noomi to stink up the main female role. The saving grace for the girls is Kelly Reilly, who once again shines as Watson's fiance/wife. The action is almost non-stop and the "face to face" confrontations between Holmes and Professor Moriarity (played to perfection by Jared Harris) are superb. I'd ignore the negative reviews and consider just who didn't like this movie. They are probably the same critics who swoon over the crap that winds up being nominated but never winning during awards season. Expand
  36. Dec 28, 2011
    10
    I thought the movie was great fun. As long as you do not expect to see the classic Sherlock Holmes in the books I think you will be pleasantly surprised. The whole theatre was laughing and enjoying the movie and I was too.
  37. Dec 25, 2011
    9
    Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is .......(Ow WTH) I Love It ! I Love It ! I Love It ! I Love It ! . Its SUPERB . The whole film is so awesome and exactly what i wanted,more wider then the first one .It had some same things like the first one,most of the time it goes bad for sequels but it was does so well. None Stop action and (You Know!) Just brilliant .I am a big big fan of the first film , so i wan a bit of worried but Ritchie did it again . He once again proved that he is really good . Nothing to say about Robert Downey Jr. , He is AWESOME . Jude Law was great . He did really amazing work , he actually succeed to stole screen beside Downey . Two beautiful lady Noomi Rapace & Kelly Reilly did amazing work as well as Rachel McAdams .Stephen Fry was hilarious . Jared Harris did great jod playing Pro.J.M. but Paul Anderson was perfect (The).Slow motion was great , and it was a good story . Really looking forward to the second sequel (hope it will be in 2013). Expand
  38. Dec 21, 2011
    5
    Rarely do we see a sequel outstrip the original, and "Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows" is no exception. There appears to be a desire to reproduce some of the ambience of a Harry Potter film, which I noticed in the first Holmes project as well. In the original film, there was a pronounced and very dark occult theme; in the sequel the occult theme is lessened but vaguely represented by a gypsy character played by Noomi Rapace (from "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo," original Swedish production). She reads Tarot cards and hangs out with a gypsy band of wild, unbathed, petty thieves. She adds a colorful touch to the plot, although we see only a fraction of the intensity she generated in the Dragon Tattoo film. Jude Law's Watson seems to be as prevalent as Robert Downey's Holmes. Moriarty, played by Jared Harris, and Holmes are engaged in a violent physical and mental conflict to outwit each other. Moriarty is the incarnation of evil; Holmes is the hero and the good guy, a mantle he accepts with humor and a modest sense of grace. As a period piece set in 1891, there is much attention to detail--dress styles, ballrooms, weaponry, automobiles, etc. But the action-packed film is greatly dependent on shootouts and physical violence--dialogue and subtle intrigue cannot carry the plot. No matter how many times Holmes gets pummeled, he always bounces back in the next scene with only one or two scratches on his face, even after a giant tower practically falls on his head. His genius is characterized by a strange ability to note every detail with lightning speed, portrayed by fast-paced camera cuts. Action scenes are often frozen in slow motion, like a silent dream, then sound and normal speed are suddenly resumed. These camera tricks may be necessary to distract the viewer from the dullness of the plot. Despite the authenticity, Holmes says something about Watson getting a "nosh," which is a little startling. True, the Yiddish word, "nashn", which means "to snack," is derived from Middle High and Old High German; nevertheless, as a slang word that slipped into the English language, it can only be traced back to the 1950's. Too late for the very Protestant Sherlock Holmes, unless the Jewish community in London gave the Brits a head start on Yiddish expressions. Rachel McAdams reappears in this sequel, only to have her character killed off in the first fifteen minutes of the film. Surprising, since A-list actors never get killed off right away. Did McAdams have a busy schedule, or did she get fired by producer Susan Downey after sharing a rare, onscreen kiss with the producer's husband Robert Downey, Jr.? (It is a bit of a running joke among Downey fans that his wife, also his producer and boss, does not like to see him do love scenes.) The ending is an unembarrassed attempt to prepare us for Sherlock Holmes 3. And jealous and insecure wives aside, in the end the best reason to see this film is to have another opportunity to lose yourself in the large, soul-filled, liquid brown eyes of Robert Downey, Jr. Expand
  39. Dec 26, 2011
    7
    Much better than the previous film: I could understand everything RDJr said this time, and the action sequences were more easy to follow (just!). The central relationship between Holmes and Watson was beautifully done and it looked great. In all, a perfectly entertaining night out.
  40. Dec 17, 2011
    8
    It kept me more entertained than the first one. There is certainly a lot more action. Not only is it bigger, but it is also even better than the first.
  41. Dec 18, 2011
    8
    A game of shadows starts fairly slowly and is slightly confusing at first as it doesn't continue the cliffhanger from the first one- which seems strange. Its slow start is however made up by what follows- the antagonist in the form of professor James Moriarty is a brilliant match against Sherlock and the banter and a clever game of cat and mouse is outstanding between them. The action set pieces are amazing including a train and a breathtaking slow motion escape through a forest that is that good you can hardly breathe. The films ending however is clearly the best aspect of the film in which an outstanding showdown between the professor and Sherlock takes place over a physical and somewhat metaphorical game of chess. While the film starts not its does find its steam and from then on never fails impress and amaze. Expand
  42. Dec 26, 2011
    8
    I was pleasantly surprised by this movie. Although i enjoyed the first one I didnt really think it was that great, and seeing the trailer for this one I was not terribly excited. But Downey Jr. as ever carried the show with solid support from Jude Law, Jared Harris and Stephen Fry. Good humor, good action, a fun if somewhat shallow holiday movie.
  43. Dec 17, 2011
    8
    The beginning of the movie is kind of boring and just plain action with less content but the 2nd half pays up for it with more chess moving.. the climax scene with Sherlock and Moriarty is just pure awesome.
  44. Dec 16, 2011
    8
    I just went and saw this last night at a premier. I'd read a lot of the reviews so I wasn't expecting much and was really pleasantly surprised. The movie was a lot of fun. I think Law and Downy Jr. have a great rapport and do a tremendous job. Is it the English Patient? No, and it was never intended to be some critics need to understand some films are just meant to be fun.
  45. Dec 26, 2011
    6
    Like the previous Sherlock Holmes movie I had no idea what was going on until the ending when everything came together, however overall this movie has good action scenes and is entertaining.
  46. Dec 28, 2011
    7
    A Game of Shadows didn't have quite the same appeal as the first as there's a bit too much unnecessary talking, and started to drag a little towards the end (numb ass and a bit of shuffling in my seat...), but was still enjoyable to watch. The fight scene breakdowns are back and are really good, especially the last! Best section by far though is the forest run (seen in the trailer), the slow motion, fast spins and explosions were great! If you liked the first, you'll probably like this too, but prepare to be a little let down I think. Expand
  47. Dec 20, 2011
    9
    I just saw this movie last night and was blown away. It was way better than the first one. The storyline was incredible, and the actors were amazing, not to mention the amazing action sequences. Guy Ritchie has made yet another amazing movie. Alot of people don't like the Sherlock homes movies because they are not true to the book. I think that it is a great adaptation, and it was very well done. The only problem I had was that Sherlock Holmes' characterization was not the same as it was in the first film, and I thought they could have found a better actor to play Moriarity. Other than those things the movie was amazing. Expand
  48. Dec 18, 2011
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A truly poor sequel. Ritchie takes the device of Holmes being able to triumph physically through rapid intellectual analysis pod the situation, which worked in the first installment, and beats it to death here. The charm of Conan Doyle's books is that the reclusive cerebral Holmes can observe minute details which illuminate the truth of crime scenes, interrogations, and the rest of criminal investigation. In order to pander to a broad (and presumably dull-witted) audience, Ritchie has turned Downey's performance into that of a whirling martial arts sensei. Moriarty is no hatcher of labyrinthine schemes here but merely a run of the mill (by today's standards) defense contractor. The ham-handed finale was the final insult and, for me, His Last Bow. Expand
  49. Dec 21, 2011
    5
    Sadly the sequel failed to live up to the first installment of the franchise though it is not without merit. In this new film on the mystery solving detective, Shelock Holmes must uncover a plot most foul devised by the evil Professor Moriarty and foil it before Europe is thrown into the grips of a World War. The strongest part of the film is its cast lead by Robert Downey Jr as Holmes and Jude Law as Dr. Watson who give respectable performances and work very well together. Jared Harris proved to be almost perfect for the role as the evil professor and Stephen Fry provides some excellent comic relief. The film also has top notch production design and effects and another good score by the awe inspiring Hans Zimmer. However the movie tries to be too complicated and intricate and at times the plot gets muddled. Worse still are some of the jarring action scenes, which constantly alternate between slow and fast motion leaving the viewer exhausted. Then there are the confusing scenes when Holmes seems to visualize every fight he gets into before the actual fight takes place which seems very redundant to me. Furthermore the film makes Holmes seem unrealistically intelligent. For example, in one scene Holmes notices a wine and a cement spill on the floor of a cellar and this somehow leads him to the correct conclusion that there is a secret exit in the cellar if one pushes a certain lever on a coat hanger. Still it's worth seeing if you are a fan of the first film even if it falls a little short. Expand
  50. Dec 25, 2011
    8
    I enjoyed this movie much better than the first. I do think Game of Shadows is an appropriate title, however, I felt there should have been more of that going on in the film. The plot was transparent at each step. Downey and Law's acting compliment each other so well you'd think this is who they are in real life. Very well paced movie.
  51. Dec 27, 2011
    10
    This was the most pleasant movie experience I have had in 2 years, after having seen the previews I feared this would be Sherlock Holmes on speed. Instead the movie augmented what was good from the first movie, and generally just surprised the hell out of me with a great plot, great acting, and the perfect balance between action and real acting.
  52. Dec 30, 2011
    10
    I have got to say, the critics AND users were a little harsh on this VERY SLIGHTLY flawed diamond. this movie was entertaining and very action packed. harsh critics rate it bad and only say they fell asleep, giving no backing to why is was terrible. I see no justification in that. Now the reasons why I said the movie was slightly flawed are't even worth mentioning. if you get a chance to watch it, please, watch it. Expand
  53. Dec 31, 2011
    10
    Phenomenal movie! Intense action, amazing filmography, good plot, great acting. A must see. Witty and filled with clever British humor. Keeps you on your toes.
  54. Jan 1, 2012
    0
    The actors are great as usual. But the director needs his head examined. This movie was horrible! What a waste of time, not to mention money. The first RD Jr. Holmes was great, but this one should be avoided. It will make the 99 cent box of cheap DVD's at the Supermarket rather quickly.
  55. Jan 7, 2012
    10
    The movie was brilliant and the actors were even more brilliant! I really enjoyed this movie: in my opinion the people who don't like it actually don't understand it.
  56. Feb 12, 2012
    5
    The movie was good but the ending kinda killed it. The pity I had was quickly vanished when Sherlock was still alive. This movie had potential but thanks to the anti-climatic ending, potential no more.
  57. Apr 18, 2012
    9
    Had to write a comment seeing a ridiculous zero score by the SF Chronicle. I have seen so many bad movies lately (including some Oscar noms.) but this ain't one of them. What do critics expect Bergman? It started off a little shaky but soon had soon had me hooked. Robert Downey and Jude Law are great as usual, and loved the convoluted plot. And what a pleasure to see Noomi Rapace waltz through a marvelous role as a gypsy. All in all super fun all the way to the end. Hats off to Guy Ritchie for another winner. Expand
  58. man
    Jan 14, 2012
    7
    I am being 100% honest when I say this: I never saw the first film. Therefore I had no idea what to expect from this when I walked into the theatre. Afterwards I felt rather impressed with this interesting and intriguing film that delivers on all fronts rather well. Mystery wise, I thought the film did well with the case that Holmes and Watson were trying to solve. The acting was good and Robert Downey Jr. was frequently hilarious. But the best part was the well-paced action that was carefully put into this movie to make it really shine. The film's ending wraps up everything perfectly(maybe.) Judging from what I've seen from this well-made mystery, my best guess is that you don't need to see the first one to appreciate this already great sequel. See this! I recommend it! Expand
  59. Jan 7, 2012
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. My expectations werent necessarily low, but I was very pleasantly surprised by how brilliantly written, meticulously directed and fantastically edited this better-than-the-original sequel was. Critic response hasnt been very positive, so I expected some level of disappointment, but I left disappointed in the lack of praise this movie has received. The cast is downright perfect, as it was the last time, but what improved this version over the extremely wonderful predecessor was the extensive insight into Sherlock's detective mind, something I considered lacking in the original. The relationship between Holmes and Watson was more deeply built, as was Holmes' relationship with his adversary. Moriarty was a perfect counterpart and a joy to finally see on screen. Other than the length, I have very, very little criticism of this intellectually stimulating, action-packed feast for the senses. The getaway scene from the armory was enough to praise Ritchie, and this is coming from a not-so-interested-in-action-movies kind of guy. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is a masterpiece in a genere not often represented or respected. Expand
  60. Apr 16, 2012
    6
    Reviewing this in real time; It begins 'elementary' enough, by minute 22 I've 'deduced' that this ride is going to be 99.9% visual, so I'm now removing my thinking cap and settling in for 2 hours of style over substance. It's very pretty. Every shot would make a decent screensaver. Very little of the dialogue seems to matter. OMG it's see-Say, they keep saying exactly what we're already seeing. You could watch this with the sound off. Minute 51 and I'm still not letting myself think about what I'm seeing, that would ruin it. It's still very pretty to look at, though. I think this is what you would call a "visual feast". BTW, the acting is fine, everyone is squeezing as much tonal modulation as possible from every line. Emote, baby, emote. Just to underline the most glaring error so far, Sherlock Holmes is and always has been the 'Thinking Man's hero'. He's wasn't Indiana Jones, he's wasn't Bond, he's wasn't Batman. But now he's all three. Okay, now back to the film. It got really really pretty for a while and now it's just back to regular pretty.We're at the point where the audience is supposed to think, "Uh oh, s#!+ just got real." Bombs, canons, Gatling guns, GERMANS! A ballet of explosions! Death...sadness, loss...resurrection? Aww, BFFF's. That was fun to watch. Okay, let's regroup and begin building the third act. Surprisingly I now care (mildly) about the principle characters. Still no use for dialogue, you know everything because you can see it. Ha! Ritchie just tried to make a political statement about war profiteers. Cute. Hm, final conflict was also fun to watch. Final punchline aaand that's a wrap. Okay to summarize, it's all about style, there's no mystery or very much story for you to get absorbed in, you just follow the action to the end. Guy Ritchie is not deep but he does have an eye for visual detail and when he gets to stop worrying about storyline and just lay out cool visuals he nails it. Early in to this real-time review I started thinking of this film as a high priced escort, pretty to look at but no fun to talk to. Well this one was pretty enough so you didn't need to talk to her for 2hours, 3 minutes and 27 seconds. And now that she's gone you can't hate on her. She is what she is. 6 out of 10 because I didn't feel frustrated when it was over. AND it was really pretty. Expand
  61. Jan 1, 2012
    0
    This has to be the worst Sherlock Holmes movie I ever saw. The story is uninspiring (to say the least) and advances in fits and turns. Dialogue is poorly written and astonishingly boring for the most part. The plot is so transparent, that you could watch another - far better - movie looking right through it. There was literally one scene, that managed to interest me and it's far towards the end of the movie. And about 5 minutes long. Expand
  62. Dec 29, 2011
    6
    The rush for this movie comes from the success of the previous one. Nice photography, excellent scenery, same music, as well as the two main characters Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey) and his friend Dr. Watson (Jude Law), his lady friend, Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) , died poisoned at the very early scenes. A first success does not imply a second one, that what typically happened. In this second version it is more of a satiric Sherlock Holmes who makes fun at the first place, he overestimates his brightness of mind against adversaries and events. Life is not a one person brain capable of solving all mysteries that easily and fore-sightly. Two hours are spent in this movie following beautiful shootings and scenery in a non convincing acting or scenario. I went out with a main feeling, something is missing. Expand
  63. Feb 12, 2012
    6
    Sherlock Holmes was a marvelous movie. It had action, humor, style and wit amongst things but it also had substance in it's story. And that's were SH2 comes up short for me. The story isn't as absorbing as the original however it terms of action and entertainment in trumps it by some manner. A Game of Shadows picks up from it's predecessor with Sherlock hot on the heels of Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris). The beginning is frantic and sets up the tone for the film and also includes a brief cameo from Rachel McAdams,playing Irene Adler. Holmes suspects Moriarty to be behind some seemingly unrelated business acquisitions, murders and terrorist attacks and in doing so takes on Moriarty in a "Game of Shadows." The plot is difficult follow at times and you will often be left wondering what is going on although the final third of the film comes together very well leading to an awesome ending that I didn't see coming. What SH2 has in abundance is sheer entertainment and amazing action. The explosive set-pieces are outstanding and really capture your attention drawing you into the film, it's almost as if the story is secondary infact that's largely the point, Guy Ritchie succeeds in the action department but the story is lacking. Robert Downey Jr. is once more in fantastic form as Holmes bringing that charm and personality to the role, Jude Law also impresses as Watson delivering another fine performance. Noomi Rapace, best known for The Girl With... trilogy, comes on board and there's even an appearance from a certain Stephen Fry! A Game of Shadows excels in it's set-pieces extravaganza providing some of the best explosive sequences your likely to see however the story loses its focus and as a result is hard to follow until the closing stages which ultimately pays off with a fabulous finale Sherlock Holmes style. Expand
  64. Jan 7, 2012
    1
    Such a dull and boring movie. The only thing that is possibly interesting at all are the fists fights due to the obscure filming. I would rather watch Bridesmaids than this garbage, and Bridesmaids was one horrid piece of crap. From about 10 minutes in I was ready to walk away, and that feeling didn't change. The story was boring, Rachel Mcadams was in it for about 5 minutes. The jokes weren't funny and the action was barely enjoyable and fancy. Worst movie of 2011 and 2012 at present. Expand
  65. Feb 7, 2012
    9
    This movie is awesome, mind blowing, amazing, i don't know how else to describe it. The execution, sound effects, the atmosphere of the nineteenth century have been done most efficiently. The story has been conveyed very well to the audience throughout the film. I don't understand why the critics have insulted this beautiful piece of art by giving it a 48. I think, the only thing that kept me from giving this movie a 10, is that the conventional Sherlock Holmes approach was not there, and the story could have been a little more complicated for Sherlock Holmes. This movie can be watched how many ever times a person desires to. Expand
  66. Feb 5, 2012
    6
    Like the first Sherlock movie, Sherlock 2 looks great with good editing and a visual style but does not have a compelling plot or characters you care that much for. There are some charming moments but for the most part Sherlock 2 was underwhelming. I recommend Sherlock 2 if you liked the first movie but don't expect too much as its only ok and is not too memorable.
  67. May 15, 2012
    10
    I give this movie a solid, easy 10. It was fast- paced and had a more compelling plot than the previous movie. I particularly like how this movie gave you all the clues in such a way that in the end, you had a fantastic moment of blissful realization when you saw how the whole puzzle fit together and saw Holmes' plan. I would definitely recommend it.
  68. Jan 5, 2012
    3
    I'm no fan of the first Sherlock Holmes flick, and now the second installment only reduced my liking of the film series. This is definitely a Guy Ritchie film, it has boisterous action, choppy editing and what not, which does nothing to advance its already mediocre plot. The "humor" is quite corny and lacks comedic timing, and the script itself was a miss. Polished production designs and efforts from the cast are not enough to save this one, as it was one big mess. Expand
  69. Apr 22, 2012
    9
    This was a great followup to the 1st Sherlock movie. Costumes and locations shot are awesome. I don't understand how people can't be entertained by this movie. Every time there's a Sherlock vs Moriarty moment, the ambiance is over-saturated with snobbishness and the "I'm better than you" syndrome, which is so typical of a good Sherlock story.
  70. Jan 2, 2012
    8
    If you enjoyed the first one, then this one is worth the time to see. I would not say better than the first, but very close. Downey and Law deliver solid performances.
  71. May 14, 2012
    7
    Quite disappointed. Liked the first film but this was a let down. The film was like a world tour with not enough time spent in London (a big draw of the novels is Victorian London), too much rushing around, too many explosions, too many set pieces that weren't important to the plot (the whole train sequence), not enough detective work going on other than Sherlock being almost supernatural in being able to figure things out straight away. Not sure what the point of the gypsy woman was other than a bit of eye candy. The villain was disappointing - see the recent BBC TV version of Moriarty for a far more dangerous and chilling villain. Best part was the interplay between Holmes and Watson but there wasn't nearly enough of this. Just lots of travelling between exotic CGI locations and random battles. Expand
  72. Feb 8, 2012
    6
    Rien de bien neuf à l'horizon pour cette suite, à part un scénario plus conventionnel et un ensemble bien plus spectaculaire. Sinon, ce Sherlock Holmes 2 est comme son prédécesseur, c'est-à-dire un blockbuster qui a son public tout comme les gens qui sont réticents au résultat fourni. Faisant parti de ces derniers, j'ai eu droit à un film d'action rondement mené et superbement interprété, mais qui devrait s'intituler autrement, n'accrochant pas du tout à cette version moderne du personnage et à ce côté action et mise en scène (ralentis, ambiance...) qui nous semblent incompatibles au Sherlock des vieux films que l'on préfère. Quant aux adorateurs du premier film de Guy Ritchie, il trouveront sans peine ce qu'ils sont venus voir dans cette suite et ne seront pas déçus. Expand
  73. Jan 3, 2012
    8
    The first few scenes of the movie confirmed my fears that it was a bit of a departure from the atmosphere of the first. The action is consistently high instead of masterfully ebb and flow, the setting is a bit unrealistically global (though with good reason) instead of meaningfully localized, and lengthy gunfights have replaced most of the proper beat-downs. What surprised me is that every scene thereafter completely justifies it. Sherlock is already deep into this mystery by the time the movie begins and by the time you catch up to what he's figured out about Moriarty's intention's, it'd have been ridiculous for him not to have brought along as many bullets as possible. All in all, I dare say that I'm more pleased than I probably would have been with a "more of the same" sequel. Like it's predecessor, the scenery is beautiful, the acting is great, the soundtrack's superb, the special effects well exceeded my expectations and the sets, costumes, and casting make it all work perfectly. Unfortunately, my high praise likely hinges on the condition that they don't make a third movie. As much as I'd love to see more, I'm afraid there's nowhere left to go but down. Expand
  74. Jan 16, 2012
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I really enjoyed viewing this second installment in the Sherlock Holmes franchise. The performances by Downey and Law were as fluid and enjoyable to watch, if not more, than their performances in the first film. The plot is as clever as ever and there is a nice blend of comedy, action, and drama that appeals to a wide audience. My only gripe is that I would have liked to seen some more of McAdam's character, Irene Adler, as her absent personality was evident, but one could argue that it helped separate the second from the first film. It definitely left Holmes with a motive and allowed him to concentrate more on ruining Moriarty. Expand
  75. Jan 6, 2012
    9
    This movie was extremely funny and creative, the thought into RD Jr. thought proccess into how he operates is just histarical you never expect anything to come out the way it does in these movies, pretty damn good movie!
  76. Jan 24, 2012
    10
    I really liked the second installment of Sherlock Homes. I really enjoy Robert DJ as Sherlock, as well Jude makes a marvelous Watson. I really hope there will be another
  77. Jan 6, 2012
    6
    Fairly decent film. I liked Jude Law and Robert Downey's performances and the screen "bromance" they had. It had its moments of humor, and I also liked the action and the slow motion added to the action scenes. However, I felt they had no reason to include Noomi Rapce, because she barely had importance to the movie.
  78. Jan 6, 2012
    0
    I would have really enjoyed this film, had it not been shot digitally, and not post-processed to the point of being so dark, it was a strain to make out exactly what was on the screen. Not that post-processing is a bad thing -- it was put to good use in Se7en by Brad Fincher, but when the screen is S-O-O-O dark, and the action is so jerky (due to digital photography), that you find yourself asking yourself exactly what you made out of the last scene (multiplied by the amount of scenes in the film). There is one scene set in full daylight about 3/4 of the way through -- and to give you an idea, set your monitor brightness to 5% -- now you have an idea of how dark this film is. There is no twist or turn in the screenplay. It is so predictable as to be laughable. Stephen Fry was a pleasant addition, but his part is woefully under-utilised. I found the original film to be a surprisingly refreshing film, albeit with too much CG, but action packed and humorous, with plenty of wit. This film does not rate in comparison, or on its own. You could convert this film into 37-D, and it would still be one dimensional Expand
  79. Dec 19, 2011
    6
    Fails to capture the magic of the original, long and drawn out, too many fight scenes, not as good as it could have been. Robert Downey plays a great part, some parts of the story where too drawn out.
  80. Jan 11, 2012
    10
    I gets better than the first one. I really enjoy it. It is more funny, smarter and it has more action, which must say that it was some amazing, you can´t breathe int hose scenes, a very good film.
  81. Jan 4, 2012
    8
    Robert Downey Jr is best as always. The slow motion scenes are just Awesome.I will say it is better than the previous one. Amazing film everyone should watch it once.
  82. Dec 29, 2011
    9
    The ones who give this movie a low score are nuts and they are morons. This is perfect movie for who is not familiar with Sherlock Holmes. When the movie starts you feel a intense feeling in yourself when yet another bomb attack is produced. I come from Holland and in he cinemas here there are much good reviews and reactions. So if you found it a worst movie from Sherlock Holmes, i think you should go to the glasses salesman ore the optician. Expand
  83. May 1, 2012
    3
    I wonder how this got such a high score. I didn't find it funny, or engaging or compelling. It didn't interest me at all. Enough said. When I find a movie THIS boring, I can't help but give it a low rating.
  84. Dec 31, 2011
    7
    This movie is good,not great good the first movie was fresh fast funny and the best thing that IT WAS SMART,this movie deffer,as the lead RDJ is great as ever he just own Holmes i really want to see him in more movie's but back to the movie it's slow it's spread like butter on too much bread all the fun thing's in the first movie are stretched so far it's killing it, but the cast save it by some funny moments, and the movie has very few smart moment's in it the whole movie is more action oriented than mystery ,of course the first movie had some action but it was smart action this movie goes like "Call Of Duty" action sequence in.....i'm gonna be honest i happens quite a lot so yeah if there were more : There were never any..........You put............and then...........and that's all and less : sniper............mortar's.........bam bam bang bang...so yeah if you liked the 1st Sherlock Holmes you owe it to yourself to watch the 2nd it's not that great but it's worth...but i recommend as a movie of this season : Mission Impossible : Ghost Protocol Expand
  85. Jan 1, 2012
    7
    First things first..... I loved the movie. For all the fans of the detective from Arthur Canon Doyle's book, this version of Holmes is blasphemous. For all those who got the first taste of the great detective after watching the first installment, this movie is one hell of a joyride... Take your pick. For the original Sherlock Holmes fans.... Sherlock Holmes, the great detective, does not deduce anything in the movie. There is no mystery to solve here,no clues, no surprise elements.While the first part had not one but many puzzles to solve, this time around, the story is plain vanilla. Here, Holmes is on a mission to stop Prof. James Moriarty from committing a dastardly act (no spoilers this time). In the movie, Holmes is more of a brawler, master of disguise, cross-dresser & thief than a detective. There is precious little to "deduce". The script requires him to speak wittily, fire guns, run on rooftops,trains & woods and dress weirdly. He does what Ethan Hunt and James bond do (but for the dressing weirdly bit). What he does not do in the movie is not anything like what he does in the novels / stories ( 4 long & 56 short stories). To read further, please check into - http://filtercoffeechronicles.blogspot.com/2012/01/sherlock-holmes-end.html Expand
  86. Jan 2, 2012
    10
    This movie was very thought provoking. I loved it, but I can see how other people would classify this as boring. It was a long movie. Don't go in expecting it to be like the first one, it's not in more ways than a few. Most of the battles in this are mental. Didn't really care for the fire fights, but even with the gun battles, there was always an underlined theme.
  87. Jan 4, 2012
    7
    While perhaps not as taught as the first movie, and sad to see some major characters being killed off, I thought this movie was a fun romp. There were definitely uneven points in the plot, but on the whole I laughed pretty hard at the interactions between Holmes and Watson and enjoyed the stylized Guy Ritchie action scenes. I've heard some complaints about the choice of actor for Professor Moriarty, but he was definitely creepy and intelligent enough to pull it off. I just wish Noomi Rapace hadn't been so underutilized. Expand
  88. Jan 4, 2012
    9
    Terrific adventure with fine acting from the stars, and plot twists that will have you leaning half out of your chair. One of the best characters is Moriarty; the actor does a perfect job of communicating both the man's intelligence and his coldness as a sociopath. The movie is also very funny, with Mycroft and the butler providing good supporting roles. There's a lot of comedy in the film, only a few confusing points but very tense plot twists. Fans of mystery will have a lot to enjoy in this film. Expand
  89. Jan 5, 2012
    9
    I liked the first of these movies and loved this one. I really enjoyed the dialogue, the humor and the pacing. Gorgeous detail in the costuming and machinery enhanced the feel of the film. I enjoy the rougher feel to the Victorian age that these films capture as I believe it is closer to the reality of London in this era. You do need to pay attention if you want to solve the mystery with Sherlock Holmes as the film progresses but that is part of the attraction for me. Definitely recommend this film, a great combination of plot twists, humour and action. Expand
  90. Jan 6, 2012
    9
    More witty, humorous and action packed than the first one,it also had one of THE BEST endings you ever likely to see in any movie of any genre....!!!
  91. Jan 6, 2012
    10
    This movie does what you expect...it has action, adventure and sexy men! What more do you want out of a movie that is billed as nothing less. If you expect this to be the Sherlock Holmes of literature, it's not and never was meant to be. Enjoy it for what it is!
  92. Jan 6, 2012
    2
    A frustrating movie- I was hoping it'd turn into a steampunk film, but it stayed wholly in period. There was a promising "underground railway being built here" sign on Baker Street, but this didn't turn up later in the film. There's no chance for the viewers to try and solve the mysteries themselves; there's lightning-fast flashbacks as quick explanations are offered. The film is very dark throughout; almost all the action takes place at night. The editing is very fast at times, which creates confusion and disorientation in the viewer. There are some good scenes, the Moriarty character is used well and there are some good confrontations between he and Holmes, with a chess metaphor running between them. There's a nice use of the final scenes of Mozart's "Don Giovanni" in an Opera House scene. If the film had been slowed down and more mystery added to it, I would've enjoyed it a lot more. Expand
  93. Jan 7, 2012
    2
    The worst movie since Sucker Punch. Despite the fact it steals many things from other (good) movies, this film is not just boring, but doesn't contain any exciting or unsuspected moment. Bored from the start to the end.
  94. RSA
    Jan 8, 2012
    8
    Though not as brilliant as its prequel, 'Game of shadows' is pretty gripping in the later part. Especially, dialogues between the Sherlock and Moriarty duo, were top-class, and the way each try to outwit one other, is what that makes the plot pretty interesting. And especially the ending moments and the climax (THE END?) was brilliant!! As Guy-Ritchie said in his 'revolver', 'you play better playing a tougher opponent', this time Sherlock really gets better, playing Moriarty!! Hope Guy-Ritchie ends this series on a high note !!! Expand
  95. Jan 10, 2012
    6
    My very first cinema encounter in 2012 is the sequel of a reverberating bromance action flick of Sherlock Holmes and his lover Dr. Watson, two years after the triumph of the unorthodox trio - Guy Ritchie, Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law - of rebooting the household name into a bankable cash inflows, this time, at the same Christmas/New Year season, the threesome orgy revels in a more unrestrained burlesque, while all the detective-related mind-trickery is watered down in spite of Prof. Moriaty's existence (an underrated Jared Harris). The film has some self-consciously insipid moments during its 129 minutes running time, for the hefty action sequences, either those slow-motion or pre-mind fighting is overly abused, which functions eloquently in the first episode, nevertheless, the same question here, do we really need Holmes to be an action star like Bruce Lee? (anyway, it could not be worse than WITHOUT A CLUE 1988, a slapstick farce of a swapped identity.) In the face of that the old trick fails to avail for the second time, the ace is that a gay-implied two-player eclipses all the rest of the film (I cannot bring to my mind what’s the scheme of Moriaty in a crystal clear detail), and the bickering between these two lovebirds is the thing in its own favor. Against all odds, it's a relief that Robert Downey Jr.'s charisma persists although barely enough to satisfy his loyal audience, and a dramatically emotional twist also propels the film to an overall mediocre level near the very end, Jude Law also has no need to curb his "innocent-looking" acting skills, which may be a stretch for him after turning 40. What is totally in dismay is the female characters, apart from Rachel McAdams’ opening cameo, The original rising star from THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO, Noomi Rapace’s Hollywood debut is awkwardly plain, an insignificant and tawdry Gypsy girl, to be sidelined without any glamor, god bless her in the upcoming PROMETHEUS 2012. Expand
  96. Jan 11, 2012
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I had high hopes for this as I liked the first film however I was wrong there is far to much going on and the film makes No sence the only good bit is the gun battle in the train where he chucks mrs Watson in to the river To sum up this is too long and to boring Expand
  97. Jan 13, 2012
    8
    While the story isn't as good as, say, the original books, the movie's still a load of fun. The acting is superb. The writing is dandy. The action is as chaotic and cerebral as ever. It's certainly a step above other action films, if a little low for Holmes's grand adventures. Still, a movie is a movie, and it's a damn good on.
  98. Jan 15, 2012
    7
    Good blockbuster fare but nothing too memorable. Lacks the surprise factor of the first and just a little too much slow-mo. There are worse ways to waste a couple of hours.
  99. Jan 25, 2012
    5
    'Observancy is a dying art.' So sayeth the late, great Stanley Kubrick regarding the self-perceived genius of his final film. He was talking about the tiny details inserted into every scene of Eyes Wide Shut, leaving the sharp-eyed viewer with more questions than answers with every viewing. Sherlock Holmes' ability to notice these fine points, and the camera's ability to linger on them just long enough to give you a fighting chance of solving the problem before he does, is one of the few quality aspects of this film. As for the rest of it, A Game of Shadows adheres to the typical conventions of a sequel. That is, bigger, louder and more ambitious, but ends up being nowhere near as fun as its predecessor. With Dr. Watson (Jude Law) happy to have the events of the past behind him, he makes plans for his long-overdue marriage. That is until news spreads regarding a series of mysterious bombings in and around London. Never one to work alone, Watson is again dragged into the deep end by the crafty Holmes (Robert Downey Jnr.). And so, with the help of Holmes' highly inappropriate brother Mycroft (Stephen Fry) and Simza the gypsy (Noomi Rapace), they are led to Holmes' greatest adversary, the evil but equally cunning Moriarty (Jared Harris). If that sounds more like a trailer blurb than a synopsis, it is because attempting to explain this plot in detail would only result in digging a deeper hole. One of the strengths of the first instalment (trying to steer away from the word 'original' here) was a plot that was balanced enough to keep the viewer's attention without seeming too simple, and allowing for some enjoyable interplay between the utterly immersive Holmes and Watson. This time around, however, director Guy Ritchie substitutes substance for style, placing great importance on keeping the film moving from place to place to place with very little deduction in between. These efforts to keep the audience's mind occupied actually end up having negative effects, as the film degrades into more of a visual spectacle, and less of a romping mystery, with every passing scene. In fact, from the absurd set piece involving a firefight on a train halfway through the film, the rest of the story seems to almost give up on anything that could even be considered rational or believable. Suspension of disbelief is a key requirement when watching films like this, sure, but Shadows takes things to new levels of foolishness, wasting the chance to deliver a fresh, clever sequel. Despite these occasionally over-the-top moments, the action is mostly well directed, albeit with a tendency to overuse slow motion and crash zooms at key moments. Holmes' re-imagining as an expert martial artist is still fun to watch, and his methods of predicting his opponent's entire move set before the fight has even begun are more refined in this film. His prior planning to prevent poor performance meets its match during the climax when we see Moriarty studying Holmes in the same way, resulting in the film's best moment by a long margin. Speaking of our hero's arch-nemesis, Moriarty's presence is disappointingly underwhelming. The best villains are able to invoke a feeling of dread even when off-screen, but it seems this much-lauded mastermind is content to be the office general; watching the good guys fight off hordes of faceless henchmen while he sits in his swivel chair, stroking his cat and practicing his best 'I've been expecting you.' Again, this is not the actor's fault- the character simply suffers from inadequate screen time to develop a truly menacing persona, while other insignificant side characters clog up the scenery (not including Rapace's Simza, who has the whole hippie-gypsy dread thing going on to great effect). But, for all its pitfalls, it would be unfair to give this film anything less than a straight average score, particularly in the light of almost all other blockbuster franchises still alive today. Yes, RDJ's characterisation has regressed from 'charmingly pompous' to 'borderline psychopath' in the last two years, but he and Law still try their darndest to make it work. *There's nothing I love more than a bit of feedback, good or bad. So drop me a line on jnatsis@iprimus.com.au and let me know what you thought of my review.* Expand
  100. Jan 21, 2012
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Great movie, right until the ending. The fact that he survived a fall of hundreds of meters into a river and didn't die from the impact is just too far fetched. And Irene Adler is an unnecessary character. She gets 10 minutes of screen time then dies. It was pretty good the rest of the time Expand
Metascore

Mixed or average reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 38
  2. Negative: 5 out of 38
  1. 40
    The only reason to put yourself through Guy Ritchie's overblown, inelegant Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows is to see Jared Harris, who plays Professor Moriarty, in a chilling low key.
  2. Reviewed by: Connie Ogle
    Dec 19, 2011
    50
    Something of an overlong, overblown, disorganized mess, despite being slightly better than its predecessor.
  3. Reviewed by: Peter Rainer
    Dec 16, 2011
    42
    What this film really celebrates is crunch-and-thud video-game-style action, not especially well choreographed by director Guy Ritchie.