Actually good point, I'd forgotten how much the CGI annoyed me. Massively out of place!
Was rather good, innit?
Though the slightly fake CG rendered London reminded me of the Jackie Chan movie Shanghai Knights and thinking about it a bit more there are a lot of similarities. But shouldn't be unnecessarily harsh, sure the story has been done before and some of the gimmicks in the fight scenes where holmes is explaining his thinking is a bit overedited it is truly an entertaining movie and one I didn't quite expect from Guy Ritchie.
And I surprisingly enjoyed all actors in their roles, even the secondary police officers that were used more than regular in a movie of this kind. And the story fulfilled the one criteria I needed and that was for Holmes to explain everything that he had deduced. And I'm certainly looking forward to a sequel.
The problem I have with the 'deduction' is that at pretty much every juncture it required Holmes to have knowledge that the audience didn't - about plants and frogs and whatnot. Which is fine, but it means the audience can't guess along with the character. I like my detective stories to have me trying to piece together the clues as well.
Either that, or they were such massive leaps of faith as to barely be credible in the first place. Ultimately it made the film feel more like a super-hero flick than a detective story, because his ridiculous intellect just wasn't feasible. Highlighted, as you say, by his superhuman ability to slap people where it hurts.
Agreed, although i do i would give it a 85% primairly because of the acting, that was just superp.