Young Sherlock Holmes

We can consider 1985 to be a crossroads in the filmography of Amblin Entertainment, as well as in 1980s films for children and adolescents. Over the course of that year, the company released four films, Fandango, The Goonies, Back to the Future and Young Sherlock Holmes. Whereas The Goonies and Back to the Future turned out to be huge hits that either set or bolstered trends for years to come, Fandango and Young Sherlock Holmes unfortunately failed with viewers, though today they are seen as minor cult classics and generational icons. Unlike Fandango, which was targeted at young viewers on the verge of adulthood, Young Sherlock Holmes was supposed to appeal to a category that is now called tweens. The film, which is about the escapades of youthful versions of the famous master of deduction and his faithful assistant, was in some ways a proto-Harry Potter (Chris Columbus’s involvement in the early Harry Potter films is illustrative of the producers’ ingenuity). Like those hits of the new millennium, this film was able to build on the continuity of its audience’s interest, as many children had read the classic Sherlock Holmes stories and were now supposed to get variations of their favourite heroes updated for their adolescence. New motifs involving relationships at school, first love and the ambition to leave one’s mark on the world are at the forefront. On top of that, we can add the film’s concept as a variation on the iconic adventures featuring Indiana Jones, which is manifested in the grand adventures in the second half. The question is why the film was a flop in its time. On the one hand, it can be said that, unlike Harry Potter, the young Sherlock didn’t have such strength of continuity, as the audience hadn’t grown up with him and thus didn’t have such a close relationship with him. Or perhaps the filmmakers were just ahead of their time or went into the wrong medium, considering the success of Young Indiana Jones on television in the early 1990s. On the other hand, part of the reason that the film didn’t catch on could be the weight of the subject matter itself, which paradoxically keeps the film from going in other directions. In any case, the fact remains that, just as Fandango stood at the end of the era of more brooding and melancholic adolescent films, the failure of Young Sherlock Holmes brought action adventures for older youths to a halt for many years. (18/05/2014)

Wingardium levio… Ehm, elementary. It is more than paradoxical that Columbus was implicated in a significantly better adaptation of Harry Potter movies than when he was responsible for their regular film adaptations. From the appearance of the characters through the course to the atmosphere, music and style. A decade before the release of the Philosopher's Stone. Otherwise, it's exactly the children's adventurous ride that one would expect from a production from the Amblin´s team, which also magnificently captures the essence of the undetective Holmes stories. If you want to complain about something, then perhaps just a terribly annoying (all the more unnecessary) story of old Watson and the finale, which, despite the emotions and tangible danger compared to the rest of the film, does not work that smoothly. (22/08/2018)

I can't help but just not like the whole idea. If I agreed to play the game, did John Watson have to be there? It doesn't make much sense in terms of mythology. Overall, it just bothered me to take this story as something from which Holmes' behavior subsequently stems. It must be admitted, however, that the beginning, for example, is impressive when it comes to the special effects. (04/07/2017)

When I see that the year of making is from the middle of the 1980s and it features names like Barry Levinson, Chris Columbus, and Steven Spielberg, whether I want to or not, I have to be alert. It probably can be no other way. It’s a shame, though, that young Sherlock and the future Dr. Watson were such rookies that it was sometimes very difficult to plow through the 1980s feel. And that is despite the fact that under different circumstances, I really like it in movies. But the problem probably lies in the fact that I didn’t see this movie as a child and only saw it as an adult for the first time. In that instance, the whole premise has a completely different significance and even though it has the names of those creators written under it, it is sometimes difficult to get used to the pretty obvious naivety, which really doesn’t bring you joy while watching. But it is undoubtedly well shot. If it was a better and more exciting story, I wouldn’t be afraid to say that Chris Columbus already knew in the 1980s how to make a Harry Potter movie, whom the world hadn’t even known yet. The similarity of the atmosphere and the locations is truly remarkable. (02/08/2017)

Harry Potter. Without the magic and the brooms. Holmes must have been an inspiration for J.K. Rowling’s stories about our well-known sorcerer. After all, even Watson resembles a small, if chubbier, Radcliffe. But back to Holmes. The story is thrilling, if a little predictable, and will leave you breathless. The special effects by ILM are very high quality (the glass knight is the first completely computer generated character ever) and the hallucinogenic scenes are quite respectable to this day. From an acting point of view, I have nothing to complain about, and the music (especially the chants in the pyramid) stirred my heart. Holmes is like a long-lost gem of the adventure movie genre, and I'm glad it finally found his way to me. P.S. The post-credits scene is really worth it. :-) (17/01/2010)