When the fabled Star of Rhodesia diamond is stolen on a London to Edinburgh train and the son of its owner is murdered, Sherlock Holmes must discover which of his suspicious fellow passengers is responsible.
Concerned about his friend's cocaine use, Dr. Watson tricks Sherlock Holmes into travelling to Vienna, where Holmes enters the care of Sigmund Freud. Freud attemts to solve the mysteries of Holmes' subconscious, while Holmes devotes himself to solving a mystery involving the kidnapping of Lola Deveraux. Written by
James Meek <email@example.com>
The character of Professor Moriarty (Laurence Olivier) is described in the opening credits as a "Controversial mathematician, his paper 'The Dynamics of an Asteroid' enjoyed a lengthy European vogue (see 'The Final Problem')". See more »
During the railroad pursuit, the trains are seen on two tracks that are about to merge. Holmes states that there are no points left to switch. However, the coming together of the two track lines necessarily involves a switching point. And, in fact, that set of points is visible soon thereafter. See more »
[Last lines; after meeting unexpectedly on the boat]
Journeys alone are always so tedious, don't you find? 'Specially when they are long.
Will this be a long journey?
That all depends. But I do think it will seem shorter if there are two of us... don't you?
I hope it will not seem too short.
See more »
In the opening titles, there are footnotes concerning many of the characters. See more »
Very interesting for Sherlock Holmes fans--though NOT a perfect film
I really enjoyed this little fantasy film about the supposed treatment Sherlock Holmes received for his cocaine addiction from Dr. Freud. This is awfully strange, having a real-life and fictional character interact together, but the writers were able to make it work.
Up front I should let you know that I am a huge Sherlock Holmes fan--having read all the stories several times. In most of my reviews for Holmes movies, I am very critical because they take such liberties with the stories--and almost always ruin the stories. At first, I was reticent to see this story because of this--after all, it's NOT based on a Conan Doyle story and the last such film I saw (THE PRIVATE LIFE OF SHERLOCK HOLMES) was terrible in places because it took too many liberties with the character (especially at the end of the film). However, despite my reservations I saw the film and am glad I did.
At first it did bother me, as the film did SEEM to contradict many of the Holmes stories. However, through the course of the film, they were able to explain away all these differences very well--in particular, Holmes' hatred for Professor Moriarty. Additionally, having the fictional character be psychoanalyzed actually was pretty cool--though Freud's analysis almost always took months or years, not a few quick sessions.
Up until the last 10 or 15 minutes of the film, I was very pleased with the movie but then the film had a serious flaw that knocked off a point. The sword fighting scene at the end (interesting, by the way, in a Freudian sense) was totally unnecessary and totally distracting. It was like another writer took an intelligent script and added a macho idiot fight scene for no discernible reason. Had it been me, I would have had Holmes simply shoot the guy--not pad it out for no apparent reason. Additionally, while it was integrated into the story later, the whole tennis match sequence seemed contrived and silly. Still, with so much to like, both these scenes can be overlooked.
An excellent film for Holmes lovers. Additionally, psychology teachers and therapists will also appreciate the inclusion of Freud.
By the way, Charles Gray plays Holmes' brother, Mycroft in this film. A decade later, he played this same character in the Jeremy Brett series as well.
7 of 8 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?