Colin Crosby Heritage Tours

Sherlock Holmes

I went to the cinema recently, to see the new version of "Sherlock Holmes".

Anybody who knew me in my previous incarnation as a cinema manager over a long period of years will be surprised to learn that I rarely venture into a cinema these days.

Mainly, it`s because things have changed so much over the years that I find myself tut-tutting at the drop in standards, and uttering the immortal words "that would never have been allowed to happen in my day". Specifically, the Odeon in inner city (not City Centre) Leicester actually hurts me with the sound system`s murderous assault on my head.

However, Cinema De Lux in the High Cross development in the City Centre is a different matter, being much better managed and dispensing more human levels of sound.

It was Cinema De Lux that I visited with my wife Anne, our eldest son Neil, his fiancee Becca and our youngest son Robin, to see "Sherlock Holmes", directed this time by Guy Ritchie.

Yes, I did enjoy it. Robert Downey Junior (of whom I first became aware when he played Charlie Chaplin) played Holmes rather differently from most of his predecessors, showing a more vulnerable side to his character, and I felt that this was a perfectly justified move.

Jude Law was pretty believable as Watson, indeed sometimes carrying Holmes in his more depressive moments.

What I found difficult to accept, however, was the idea of Holmes and Watson as an unbeatable fighting machine, although Holmes` working out of exactly how to cause maximum physical pain and damage to the bruiser he was fighting was cleverly achieved.

And at the end Ritchie made the usual mistake of film makers in Old London Town, by assuming irritatingly that all the famous places in London (in particular the Houses of Parliament and Tower Bridge) are just around the corner from each other.

Nevertheless, I found the film very enjoyable.