Sherlock Holmes does give the reviewer plenty of options on the Holmes based puns. In probing the homoerotic subtext we even get the Guardian crying about Holmesophobia (nice work – cheers). And all of this is hung on some sort of idea that the film either is, or isn’t, faithful to the source and that this is important. My take on this is as follows:
a) It is not important
b) It is not that faithful
c) It is as faithful as other versions
d) It is very entertaining.

And d) is what matters right? So what has surprised me in reading reviews, particularly British reviews, that fiathfulness to the book be damned. FAITHFULNESS TO LONDON is to be demanded. And whilst much has been said about them capturing a certain kind of grimy historical Victoriana, they lose every humanities brownie point for all of its assaults on geography. For example, why exactly would one take a Hackney Carriage from 221B Baker Street* to Pentonville Prison via London Bridge. For Holmes and Watson are seen travelling south across said bridge en route (all the better to show off the soon to be important Tower Bridge in construction.

I am not the kind of pedant that says things like this spoil the film for me. I know the realities of filming in London, however the fact that this is filmed in the studio and IN A COMPUTER means that they could for once make a reliable geography. The above trip seems like a sensible cab driving money spinner compared to the conclusion which suggests the following. That somehow one can get from Guy Fawkes old haunt, the cellars of the Houses Of Parliament, to Tower Bridge via the sewers in about two minutes. AND SOMEHOW IN THE PROCESS GET TO THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE RIVER IN THE PROCESS. And then to suggest that there would be a secret passage from the sewers to the top of the UNDER CONSTRUCTION TOWER BRIDGE.

Worth it for the fight obviously. Maybe they took the Thunderbirds Thames Monorail.

*Here seen as an address for an entire house, rather than, as Conan Doyle must have meant, a flat.