Post by Feologild Oakes on Jul 11, 2020 10:24:52 GMT
England, 1884 - a world on the brink of change. On the morning of her 16th birthday, Enola Holmes (Millie Bobby Brown) wakes to find that her mother (Helena Bonham Carter) has disappeared, leaving behind an odd assortment of gifts but no apparent clue as to where she's gone or why. After a free-spirited childhood, Enola suddenly finds herself under the care of her brothers Sherlock (Henry Cavill) and Mycroft (Sam Claflin), both set on sending her away to a finishing school for "proper" young ladies. Refusing to follow their wishes, Enola escapes to search for her mother in London. But when her journey finds her entangled in a mystery surrounding a young runaway Lord (Louis Partridge), Enola becomes a super-sleuth in her own right, outwitting her famous brother as she unravels a conspiracy that threatens to set back the course of history. Written by Netflix
I've read the first book in the series. I thought it was okay but nothing special. It has an obvious feminist tone with Enola having to rebel against the constraints placed on women in Victorian society. I don't think I'm interested in any of the sequels or the TV series.
"I prefer reading to writing. Reading changes your worldview. Writing changes absolutely nothing. Except, of course, when it makes you rich." Michel Houellebecq
Thanks for mentioning this , Feologild . Well there are lots of spinoffs of Sherlock Holmes that distort the essential Conan Doyle reading guide . Personally , I did get tired of reading the same set of Holmes books over and over again . The first 5 times holds your interest but then it becomes ingrained and eventually laborious to read them .
Anyway , there are some interesting Holmes versions . Guy Ritchies & Robert Downey Jnr's Holmes movies which are set in the right period but have a modernised interpretation of Victorian sleuthing . Or Ian Mckellen's Mr Holmes , an ailing forgetful Holmes trying to remember his last most important case . Or Benedict Cumberbatch's modern Sherlock Holmes .
There is also a set of similar AgathaChristie mystery adventures out too .
ENOLA HOLMES is an entertaining and well-acted but overlong movie. It's supposed to teach the importance of intelligence and reasoning, but the title character at times over-explains (by talking to the camera) what should already be clear to anyone paying attention, ironically dumbing the scene down. There are overt anti-sexism messages, including Enola saying she doesn't want a husband. That could've been interpreted as "I think that love is an obstacle" (something her brother Sherlock would probably say) and/or "I want to remain a child," but no, she develops feelings for a viscount named Tewkesbury. Also, this 16-year-old seems happy when others look at her as an adult. Even Inspector Lestrade mistakes her for a 20-year-old. It's a good way to tackle feminism, because it shows that reaching maturity doesn't always have to do with a person's love life/sex life. A young woman accepts her beauty as an external factor, so she wants to share it with the world, without letting that define her more than her personality, intelligence and strength. She finds her own voice in a mostly misogynistic setting without claiming that all men are evil. In fact, Tewkesbury wasn't a love interest in the Nancy Springer book this is based on (he was actually younger), so I consider this change to be an improvement. Speaking of page-to-screen changes and of male characters portrayed in a positive light, Sherlock is now a caring brother. I'm sure this will piss fans off, but I don't think it's a radical departure from the Arthur Conan Doyle novels nor the many other adaptations. The reason why his anti-social behavior was always highlighted is because he didn't want to be an asshole; he wanted to be an emotionless genius. He wanted to come off as a misunderstood eccentric, but he didn't want to be completely alone. Besides, some of his previous incarnations had brief moments of vulnerability. And if this incarnation was going to lower his guard, why not with just 1 person? And why not a relative? And even then, there's still a distance. Sherlock tells Enola that he cares about her only once and he does so with a lot of hesitation. He never hugs her or kisses her and he never makes an effort to understand her point of view. He tries to make sure she's not in danger, but that's part of his profession. He does that with everyone else.
For years, whenever I watched a scene where a criminal is trying to drown someone, I thought "Come on! Pretend to be dead and they'll leave you alone!" This movie actually does that (with Enola and the evil henchman Linthorn), so it immediately earned my respect. During the climax, Linthorn attacks Enola and she causes him to fall and die. All of this is too intense compared to the relatively tame violence in previous scenes. By the way, why doesn't it affect Enola? Even if it was in self-defense, being responsible for someone else's death should be a big deal, at least the first time.