RAVE - Sherlock Holmes

So Guy Ritchie can only do style, not substance? Many directors can't even do style.

It's not exactly Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Victorians, but Ritchie trademarks litter the cobbled streets. There's the stop-go action, the slo-mo, the cheeky humor - all filling in where there should be a better plot.

It's fun, funny and slick. The problem is, the story never really develops. There's no build-up of tension, just wham bam, thank you ma'am.

What stands out is the superlative scenery. Ritchie doesn't do 19th Century London the way Upstairs, Downstairs did it, or the way the original TV Sherlock Holmes Mysteries did it, with limited sets showing foggy back streets, and Baker Street shop fronts. No, this was expansive. Panoramic shots of London, main thoroughfares like Regent St, Piccadilly Circus, The Thames and everything around it. The sets were - and I hesitate to use this word - breathtaking. I looked closely for telltale signs of little wooden model buildings, but if that's how they did it, it didn't show.

So, definitely a fun movie, if not a masterpiece.

Don't be surprised if there's another Holmes adventure up Ritchie's sleeve, as there were plenty of pointers to this becoming a multiple movie franchise. I guess it all depends on how much coin this first one generates.