MovieChat Forums > Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011) Discussion > How has this movie got a 7+ rating? It's...

How has this movie got a 7+ rating? It's utter trollop.

posted 13 years ago by worxpace
130 replies | jump to latest

I rented this on the fact that 85,000 people had given it a rating of 7.6. After watching Guy Ritchie and Robert Downey Jr mangle their way through one of literature's greatest characters in what has to be the worst adaptation of Sherlock ever put to film, I thought I had to be off my rocker.

I wish I had read the NY Times review of this first, because the writer there nailed it. This was over-stylised, inane and really un-engaging. I want my 2 hours back.

[–] caulfield_17 13 years ago

Funny you should say that OP, when I saw the trailer I figured "this will be crap I can just tell. And why are there so many explosions?" but then I saw the movie and actually liked it. It was almost like a really corny so-bad-it's-good kind of movie that Joss Whedon pulls off. I rather loved it I've only read two Sherlocke Holmes books though, so not particularly enamoured by them and the entire Holmes enterprise, so perhaps that's why I liked it; it was a whimsical deviation from the books.

Obviously it's not high art, but good for what it was.

[–] Qaoz 12 years ago

worxpace wrote:
After watching Guy Ritchie and Robert Downey Jr mangle their way through one of literature's greatest characters in what has to be the worst adaptation of Sherlock ever put to film, I thought I had to be off my rocker.

The first movie didn't give you an idea of what direction Guy Ritchie was taking this series? This isn't the refined gentleman Holmes as seen in various television series, it's the crackpot genius Holmes from the books, sprinkled with a bit of Hollywood action to appeal to a broader audience.

If you didn't realize this by the end of the first movie then you didn't really lose those two hours of your life as you spent them learning a valuable lesson. If you did indeed watch the first movie, I'd refer to my original question and ask you again why you spent two hours watching something you knew beforehand you'd dislike.

In the end, if you feel you wasted two hours, you have only yourself to blame.

[–] spoildbrt 12 years ago

I haven't seen this movie yet but plan to in the near future.
My question to the OP ..do you know what "trollop" means??

[–] Spifflock_Holmes 12 years ago

My question to the OP ..do you know what "trollop" means??

"Utter trollop" is a not uncommon expression in the Land of Eng. Google it and you'll see what I mean.

See also: complete strumpet, total slattern, entirely too harlot for words, and the whoremost.

(Okay, those I made up. But I'm perfectly serious about "utter trollop." My UK-born wife assures me that it is, in her words and with her emphasis, "very English.")

----

Lazy + smart = efficient.

[–] spoildbrt 12 years ago

I know what trollop means..that's why I asked..I just don't get how it can be applied to a movie

[–] Spifflock_Holmes 12 years ago

I know what trollop means..that's why I asked..I just don't get how it can be applied to a movie

Which is why I answered your question. I know you know what trollop means. What you clearly didn't know (since you implied, quite erroneously, that worxpace, the OP, doesn't know what it means), and what it was the purpose of my post to tell you, is that utter trollop is a fairly common expression in England.

Do you know what bollocks means? There's no more difficulty about calling a movie (or anything else) trollop than there is about calling it bollocks. (Or pants.) It's not literal.

You might as well ask how someone could apply the word sh!t to something that is not, in any literal sense, made of fecal matter. (Or dilapidated to a structure that isn't made of stone. Or noon to a time that isn't the ninth hour. Or . . . )

----

Lazy + smart = efficient.

[–] spoildbrt 12 years ago

Thank you Mr Holmes. In Canada if anyone called something..other than a female.. a trollop it would be questioned. maybe if the OP had said "an utter trollop" it may have made more sense. The missing indefinite article ..AN...is what made the phrase an odd choice of words.

[–] Spifflock_Holmes 12 years ago

The missing indefinite article ..AN...is what made the phrase an odd choice of words.

Aha, now I understand. Yes, it makes trollop sound like a substance (like codswallop).

I suppose there's a distant analogy in awesome. That's not a substance either, and the word's not even a noun. But we can say a good movie (or anything else) is "made of" it.

So there we are. Movies are mixtures of two substances: trollop and awesome.

----

Lazy + smart = efficient.

[–] spoildbrt 12 years ago

Good point. At least you didn't say an awesome trollop :).
And now that we have that out of the way..did you like the movie?
I have yet to watch it but I think it will be on the list for this weekend.

[–] Spifflock_Holmes 12 years ago

And now that we have that out of the way..did you like the movie?

I did. It goes a bit more in the "action-comedy" direction than the first, but it has very much the same flavor; if you enjoyed the first one, you'll probably enjoy this one too, and if not, not. I'm a longtime fan and regular re-reader of the original stories, and I like both films.

(Opinion seems to be divided about which one is better, and I actually don't have any opinion about that myself; I think they have different strengths and weaknesses, but I don't know which one I think is better overall.)

----

Lazy + smart = efficient.

[–] spoildbrt 12 years ago

I loved the first one.I like Robert Downey Jr. and Jude law
I am sure this one is better than a lot of the tripe this has been hailed as awesome.

[–] boxerrebellion 11 years ago

Your rather interesting explanation notwithstanding, I think the OP did not use the word (s)he intended... which happens when one is trying to sound 'higher' than one is.

[–] kitia98 12 years ago

Everyone here is crazy. But this movie is a stinking pile of poo.

[–] gabeper78 12 years ago

Troll

Si vis pacem parabellum!

[–] Heero14 12 years ago

This is funny. I wanted to make a topic asking the opposite question. Why did this movie only get a 7.5 rating? I thought it was brilliantly made, way better than the majority of the stuff that's being made these days.

[–] patrick-413 12 years ago

I agree!

[–] r_alexander89 12 years ago

Last word of title says it all. Troll OP

[–] Packyman 12 years ago

agreed. i turned it off after 30 minutes and i didn't feel bad about it. hollywood clap-trap.

[–] patrick-413 12 years ago

"Trollop"? I know you were trying to sound intellectual and all, but your thesaurus let you down there.

And I just watched this movie last night and it entertained me thoroughly. The acting was witty and fun, the style was exactly what I expected after the first movie, and the action was again remarkable.

I've read every Holmes story several times (I've even got two different annotated sets) so I know the source material as well as or better than many. And frankly I think they've done a bang-up job. It's a LOT closer to the material than the later Basil Rathbone movies (which weren't even done in the correct period!). Sure it's different from the original but it's not like they've added things that weren't there in the characters, just turned the dial to 11 - and frankly if you go into a Guy Ritchie movie thinking it will be otherwise you're deluded.

[–] Blue_Afternoon 12 years ago

I switched it off 2/3 of the way through. What a pile of garbage. Fight/escape, fight/escape, rinse and repeat, an American trying to pull off such a quintessentially British character was painful to watch, and before anyone starts, Brits playing Americans are just as bad, very little plot, a wooden performance from Noomi Rapace and Jude Law really should hire a voice coach. Thank God for Jared Harris and Stephen Fry.

I think the OP meant TRIPE, and I concur.

Robin Hood Country....

[–] sydnee_man 12 years ago

I just rented this movie and I feel the same way you do! I believe this movie spent way too much time trying to be clever and not enough time actually telling an interesting story. What a waste of time and talent.

Follow me on twitter @sydsmoviepicks