Advertisement
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)

Enola Holmes [Netflix]

  • 25-08-2020 2:21pm
    #1
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 27,161 Mod ✭✭✭✭ pixelburp


    Carrying on the long tradition of Sherlock Holmes adaptations sidestepping the titular character himself, here's a trailer for Netflix's latest stab in the blockbuster dark.

    The 4th Wall breakages already look phenomenally irritating but that could just be me; plus I'm not sure what's more distracting, Bobby-Brown's fake English accent, or Henry Cavill playing Sherlock Holmes. That has to be the first-time the detective is played by a brick shíthouse? :D



«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,802 ✭✭✭ Mr Crispy


    Peter Cushing could handle himself!

    And I thought MBB was actually English?


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 27,161 Mod ✭✭✭✭ pixelburp


    Well holy shít. So she is. Still sounds fake though :cool:

    Peter Cushing vs. The Witcher. Sounds like a lost Hammer Film to me!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,434 ✭✭✭ DMcL1971


    Looks like great fun to me. I'm looking forward to it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭ CastorTroy


    Well he's been portrayed recently by Iron Man, Doctor Strange and a hacker so why not Superman?
    One of my favourite Holmes films is Young Sherlock Holmes.

    I'll watch this. Seems like it could be entertaining
    And seeing her with the letter tiles just makes be think of Setec Astronomy


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,863 ✭✭✭ mikhail


    pixelburp wrote: »
    Well holy shít. So she is. Still sounds fake though :cool:
    I doubt that's her natural accent.

    It looks like it could be fun. The character looks like a bit of an anachronism to me, so I'm curious to see whether it stays wacky enough to let me just roll with it. I'll definitely be more sympathetic to it if it doesn't reduce Holmes and Mycroft to figures of fun: it'll be more interesting as a story if they remain formidable.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,205 ✭✭✭ p to the e


    pixelburp wrote: »
    Well holy shít. So she is. Still sounds fake though :cool:

    See RP
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Received_Pronunciation


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,537 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Dades


    Might be watchable. Big fan of Henry but I suspect he's not in it as much as the trailer suggests.


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 27,161 Mod ✭✭✭✭ pixelburp


    The trailer has surfaced a lawsuit from the Conan Estate against this picture: claiming that in showing Cavill's Holmes as having "emotions" the Estate can claim copyright on this character, as they only retained copyright on later works. IP law is truly an ass; public domain should automatically kick in X years after the death of the author and that's that.

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/conan-doyle-estate-sues-netflix-coming-movie-sherlock-holmes-sister-1300108
    In the latest lawsuit, the Doyle Estate alleges that the difference between the public domain stories and the copyrighted ones is emotions.

    "After the stories that are now in the public domain, and before the Copyrighted Stories, the Great War happened," states the complaint. "In World War I Conan Doyle lost his eldest son, Arthur Alleyne Kingsley. Four months later he lost his brother, Brigadier-general Innes Doyle. When Conan Doyle came back to Holmes in the Copyrighted Stories between 1923 and 1927, it was no longer enough that the Holmes character was the most brilliant rational and analytical mind. Holmes needed to be human. The character needed to develop human connection and empathy."

    And so Sherlock "became warmer," continues the complaint, setting up the question of whether the development of feelings is something that can be protected by copyright and whether the alleged depiction of Sherlock in Enola Holmes is somehow derivative.

    This isn't the first time that the Doyle Estate has attempted to leverage the last remaining stories. In 2015, the plaintiff sued Miramax over Mr. Holmes, a suit that was later settled.


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 10,553 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Fysh


    pixelburp wrote: »
    The trailer has surfaced a lawsuit from the Conan Estate against this picture: claiming that in showing Cavill's Holmes as having "emotions" the Estate can claim copyright on this character, as they only retained copyright on later works. IP law is truly an ass; public domain should automatically kick in X years after the death of the author and that's that.

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/conan-doyle-estate-sues-netflix-coming-movie-sherlock-holmes-sister-1300108

    Hilariously, the series of YA books the film is based on started in 2006, so the ACD estate (who can get in the sea, as far as I'm concerned) are reaching a bit with this - either the books were a problem in which case ignoring them for 15 years is a bold legal strategy, or the books weren't a problem in which case neither is the film.

    Of course they're actually just looking for "go away money" on bollox grounds because there's chat about the movie, but it's nice to daydream about a world where this backfires and the judge in the case tells them to get lost...


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,537 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Dades


    pixelburp wrote: »
    The trailer has surfaced a lawsuit from the Conan Estate against this picture: claiming that in showing Cavill's Holmes as having "emotions" the Estate can claim copyright on this character, as they only retained copyright on later works.
    The producers must now be ruing the decision not to cast Mark Wahlberg in the role of Holmes.


  • Advertisement
  • Subscribers Posts: 36,035 ✭✭✭✭ sydthebeat


    Looks like a fun bit of fluff


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,205 ✭✭✭ p to the e


    pixelburp wrote: »
    The trailer has surfaced a lawsuit from the Conan Estate against this picture: claiming that in showing Cavill's Holmes as having "emotions" the Estate can claim copyright on this character, as they only retained copyright on later works. IP law is truly an ass; public domain should automatically kick in X years after the death of the author and that's that.

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/conan-doyle-estate-sues-netflix-coming-movie-sherlock-holmes-sister-1300108

    Wow. So they're claiming different variations of the same character based purely on emotions? Here's an interesting article from a few years back:
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/27/sherlock-holmes-copyright-ruling-public-domain


  • Registered Users Posts: 75,008 ✭✭✭✭ JP Liz V1


    Is Helena Bonham Carter playing Mama Holmes?


  • Registered Users Posts: 55,546 ✭✭✭✭ Agent Coulson


    I watched it this evening and enjoyed it.

    However it felt more like a pilot episode to a series than a feature film.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,561 ✭✭✭✭ flazio


    I seem to recall the last time someone gave Sherlock and Mycroft Holmes a sister, it didn't work very well. Hopefully this might be an improvement.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,514 ✭✭✭✭ ~Rebel~


    I watched it this evening and enjoyed it.

    However it felt more like a pilot episode to a series than a feature film.

    Wonder if that's almost how they see it? The first in a franchise of the 6 (?) books. Almost in the BBC Sherlock or Wallander mould of feature length episodes.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,606 ✭✭✭✭ ERG89


    Kinda trails off in the second hour with more of a focus on the Viscount plot than searching for her mother but I enjoyed the first hour of it. Couldn't help but feel there is a great Sherlock Holmes movie happening off screen when Cavill is not on camera.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,447 ✭✭✭✭ Thelonious Monk


    I wish it didn't annoy me but it does annoy me when they shoehorn black people into these things, it's so obvious they're doing it just to keep certain people happy. I'm pretty sure it wasn't normal to have black people walking around London in top hats in Victorian times.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,737 ✭✭✭ Hurrache


    Ignoring the black people for the sake of black people mad argument (like what the hell is that about, did I miss the fact that England bringing in slaves was a myth and London was as white as snow? ) it's a great fun movie. Millie Bobby Brown is brilliant in it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭ CastorTroy


    Yeah I liked it.

    Though did the housekeeper say Mycroft didn't have the smarts of Sherlock? The Arthur Conan Doyle has him smarter than Sherlock, if I remember correctly.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,941 ✭✭✭✭ Varik


    CastorTroy wrote: »
    Yeah I liked it.

    Though did the housekeeper say Mycroft didn't have the smarts of Sherlock? The Arthur Conan Doyle has him smarter than Sherlock, if I remember correctly.

    That annoyed me, Sherlock even thinks he's smarter other than when he was being obstinate about it.
    Hurrache wrote: »
    Ignoring the black people for the sake of black people mad argument (like what the hell is that about, did I miss the fact that England bringing in slaves was a myth and London was as white as snow? ) it's a great fun movie. Millie Bobby Brown is brilliant in it.

    Slaves being the word not random members of the gentry.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,737 ✭✭✭ Hurrache


    Varik wrote: »
    Slaves being the word not random members of the gentry.

    I might have misunderstood the movie somewhat, but I watched it as a bit of fiction, with a 16 year old girl going around kicking ass, hooking up with a young lad in the process, and solving mysterious riddles. I didn't realise it was a factual historical re-enactment.

    There was 2 black people in it, 1 played a porter, the other was a member of a woman's group. Neither were gentrified.

    The other, of Asian or middle eastern descent, who I figure some people have issues with because he was a bit darker than the rest of the cast, was a member of Scotland Yard, Not gentrified.

    Either way, the colour is irrelevant in such a movie.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,625 ✭✭✭ Midnight_EG


    The notion of coloured folk interested myself and my partner too as we watched this evening. Google tells us that by mid 19th century slavery was abolished and black people started to make successful advances in society, so I don't think the movie got it wrong in that sense?

    Now... I enjoyed Enola, but I felt the ending was very lacklustre... I agree that it felt like an episode rather than a movie.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,465 ✭✭✭ FunLover18


    Hurrache wrote: »
    Ignoring the black people for the sake of black people mad argument (like what the hell is that about, did I miss the fact that England bringing in slaves was a myth and London was as white as snow? ) it's a great fun movie. Millie Bobby Brown is brilliant in it.

    This film is set in 1884, fifty years after the slave trade was abolished in Britain. Where does this impression that London was "as white as snow" come from?


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,465 ✭✭✭ FunLover18


    I thought the movie was fine, the plotting wasn't great and the use of flashback to fill the audience in on clues was frustrating.

    I was also irritated by the line about Mycroft not getting the brains but given that ACD never even wrote a sister I'm willing to look over it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 614 ✭✭✭ Everlong1


    The notion of coloured folk interested myself and my partner too as we watched this evening. Google tells us that by mid 19th century slavery was abolished and black people started to make successful advances in society, so I don't think the movie got it wrong in that sense?

    Now... I enjoyed Enola, but I felt the ending was very lacklustre... I agree that it felt like an episode rather than a movie.

    I'm an old fart who grew up in the '70's when it was perfectly acceptable for British sitcoms to reference wogs and fuzzie wuzzies.

    I'm having trouble keeping up with our rapidly evolving culture wars. I thought BAME was now the hip acronym to use to describe anyone who's not a WASP? Is "coloured" now an acceptable term again? In my youth, "coloured" was the polite way to describe a black person, then it became an offensive term. Has the wheel turned full circle?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,802 ✭✭✭ Mr Crispy


    Everlong1 wrote: »
    I'm an old fart who grew up in the '70's when it was perfectly acceptable for British sitcoms to reference wogs and fuzzie wuzzies.

    I'm having trouble keeping up with our rapidly evolving culture wars. I thought BAME was now the hip acronym to use to describe anyone who's not a WASP? Is "coloured" now an acceptable term again? In my youth, "coloured" was the polite way to describe a black person, then it became an offensive term. Has the wheel turned full circle?

    Don't do that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 677 ✭✭✭ Tordelback


    I wish it didn't annoy me but it does annoy me when they shoehorn black people into these things, it's so obvious they're doing it just to keep certain people happy. I'm pretty sure it wasn't normal to have black people walking around London in top hats in Victorian times.

    Of course there were black people in London in the 1880s, what nonsense. But seeing as this an historical fantasy movie about a teenage detective who *definitely* didn't exist, with a Third Reform Bill that hangs on a single vote and an hereditary peer who takes his seat at 16 (age limit was 21) and a sort of Benz Patent Motor Car several years before such a thing existed, I'm not sure it matters. Have you previously bring viewing Sherlock Holmes and its spin-off as documentaries?


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 27,034 CMod ✭✭✭✭ johnny_ultimate


    Mod note: Can we please let people discuss the film without the thread getting bogged down by culture war tedium? Thanks.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,591 ✭✭✭ Homelander


    I enjoyed it. Felt like one of those Sunday afternoon classics you'd watch with the family that everyone could get some degree of enjoyment from.

    Not brilliant and definitely not memorable, but incredibly easy to watch and it has charm.


Advertisement