User Score
7.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 545 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 30 out of 545
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Feb 14, 2013
    2
    The first one was an amusing little action flick, even if it had nothing to do with Sherlock Holmes. This one doesn't even try to be a good movie, and they've stopped pretending to be Sherlock and Watson altogether. Terrible movie.
  2. 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 jokesSuch 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
  3. 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 towardsThis 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
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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 thenI 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
  7. 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 andI'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
  8. 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 findI 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
  9. 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.
  10. 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
    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
  11. 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.
  12. Mar 24, 2013
    0
    Painful to sit through. The plot line seemed to jump from place to place like it was created by a fourth-grader.
Metascore
48

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.