PlatinumRead Just so...so bad

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Hattie I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

Cristal The movie really just wants to entertain people.

FlushingCaps I videotaped this film when it first aired and kept it on tape, now DVD ever since. I think it is outstanding for a TV movie. To have the "real" Holmes brought back in the late 20th Century requires the film to have some humorous scenes and they had plenty of them. I also liked the plot, the drama portion, I mean. It wasn't obvious, yet it was executed with care so as to be logical all the way through. Some shows are ruined by plots too obscure to be followed or too obvious to entertain. This script was exactly between those types.Holmes was quick to pick up on our modern world, yet totally befuddled by some things--just as anyone would be if actually put in that situation. Tonight I saw another "Holmes in the modern-world" movie, the Larry Hagman "Return of the World's Greatest Detective," which I somehow never saw before. I gave it a 4 of 10 as it had holes in the plot and really only made me chuckle a couple of times. The film reviewed here towers over that earlier work, and is better than a similar TV movie made not too long after this one. This film moved around, not only to England, but to various places in the U.S. The Hagman film takes place all in Los Angeles. It's almost like they had $300,000 in the total budget and had to pay Hagman $275,000, so their location shooting could go no farther than Mulholland Drive in L.A.If you like Sherlock Holmes, I highly recommend seeing this movie as soon as you can.

darth_borehd OK, The concept sounds far-fetched--yet somehow it works! This movie has definite charm and appeal. It's obvious it was meant as a pilot for a TV series. If it had been picked up as such with the same cast and crew, it would have rivaled Remington Steele and the other mystery/action shows of the time. If you find this version, I very much recommend it to mystery and Sherlock Holmes fans. Beware of the remake though! This same script was remade with a different cast in 1993 and it totally flopped with same material. It just goes to show how important directing and casting are to making a good movie.You can see the reviews of the 1993 version by going here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108117/

rlarnold62 I love this TV movie very much, as I am a major fan of the illustrious detective. The acting was superior and I found the show had a perfect mix of suspense and comedy. The only thing I didn't really like was that it had to be Moriarty that caused the whole thing. It couldn't have been Moriarty himself that tricked Holmes, as he was dead long before Holmes could have ingested anything! If they had said it was Moran or someone who tricked Holmes into falling for a trap Moriarty had been planning before his death, that would have made more sense. Overall I loved it! There is nothing wrong with this movie, if you love Holmes and are not a purist, then this is the movie for you!

thedoge Revived from self-induced cryogenic sleep by Dr. Watson's great grand-daughter (the fetching Margaret Colin), herself a PI in Boston, Holmes (Michael Pennington, very well cast) joins her to solve a mystery in typically Sherlockian fashion. The mystery plot is a good one and the script is littered with Sherlockian in-jokes and references. Highly recommended for Holmes fans.