Movie review: Mr. Holmes

Sherlock Holmes remains one of the most popular fictional characters ever created, even more than 160 years after his supposed birth in 1854.  Two current series, CBS’ Elementary and BBC’s Sherlock are direct variations on Holmes, while TV series like House used him for inspiration (House’s address was even 221B, if there was any doubt about his parentage).  What has fascinated generations is that magnificent mind of his, mightier than any magic hammers or indestructible shields that modern superheroes wield.

So imagine Holmes teetering on the edge of senility.  It’s like Tony Stark battling evil armed with a pocket calculator.

That is the premise of Mr. Holmes, based on the novel “A Slight Trick of the Mind.” Set in 1947, Holmes is 93 years old and has just returned to England from a trip half way around the world to Japan.  He went there seeking a cure for his memory loss, because he is desperate to remember exactly how he solved his final case.  He assumes it did not end well, because he subsequently exiled himself to Sussex to tend bees for 35 years, but he has only fleeting memories of the people involved. 

He is aided by the son of his landlady (Laura Linney, not playing Mrs. Hudson, who has passed away) and her son Roger (Milo Parker, who is excellent).  McKellen works nicely with the young actor, showing Holmes’ initial skepticism about children before warming up to the lad.

McKellen, of course, gives a masters’ class in acting.  I am frequently curious about actors of a certain age playing roles where they are feebler, either mentally or physically, than they actually are.  McKellen, who plays Holmes as a feeble but vital 93 year old and also as a dashing 60 year old, captures both roles perfectly. Watching him play Holmes as a weak old man is sometimes painful to watch, like visiting a close relative in an old age home (excuse me, “assisted living facility”).

The film marks a return to more cerebral filmmaking for director Bill Condon, who once did Oscar bait like Gods and Monsters (with McKellen) and Kinsey (with Linney), but has since dabbled in musicals (Dreamgirls) and drek (two of the Twilight Saga pictures).  He is always pushing our sympathy for Holmes’ plight but never making him the subject of pity.  For a movie about a nonagenarian the film moves at a brisk pace, and the flashbacks to Holmes’ “younger days” are nicely filmed in a way that is distinct from the scenes with 1947 Holmes.

I mentioned that Parker does excellent work as Roger, Holmes’ partner in these exploits.  His chemistry with Holmes is critical for the plot to work, and he makes the audience understand why a stand-offish Holmes would come to trust the boy.  Linney, a three time Oscar nominee and four time Emmy winner, is a bit underused in her role, but since she worked with Condon before (and her accent is acceptable) that can pass. 

This movie is a relief for anyone who is beginning to tire of Johnny Lee Miller’s Holmes pulling clues out of thin air while generally behaving like a sociopath (at least Benedict Cumberbatch’s Holmes has the decency to call himself “a high-functioning sociopath”).  The original Holmes was always portrayed as brilliant but not a miracle worker, and a 93 year old Holmes nicely maintains the mundane ratiocination while not having to explain that he can identify 135 different types of moth, or some such nonsense.

It’s nice that McKellen, one of the greatest actors of our age, can cash in on the X-Men films and the Lord of the Rings movies and then be able to do work like this.  Come to think of it, Holmes and Galdalf are sort of similar, wizards that enjoy astonishing people with a twinkle in their eye all the while harboring dark secrets.