Ellington

CASEY PHILLIPS: Director Guy Ritchie’s stylish, full-throttle films like “Snatch” and “RocknRolla” are some of my favorites, so when I heard he was directing a Sherlock Holmes movie, I was baffled but secretly hopeful. Traditionally, Holmes is a gentleman detective, which doesn’t seem compatible with Ritchie’s approach, but thanks to excellent casting, especially Robert Downey Jr. in the lead role, the film is a tremendous success.

Downey makes this movie. After you’ve seen him reeling around London in a drunken, super-intelligent haze, offending people as often as he impresses them, it’s difficult to imagine anyone else doing Holmes justice.

That should in no way be taken as a dismissal of Jude Law, Mark Strong or Rachel McAdams, all of whom fit their characters to a T as well. Law, in particular, plays well off Downey under the starched collar of Holmes’ long-suffering partner, Dr. John Watson.

HOLLY LEBER: I agree that this movie would be so much less without Downey playing Holmes as an eccentric anti-hero. His chemistry with the other players, Law and McAdams in particular, keeps the liveliness high.

The great thing about “Sherlock Holmes” is that it’s infused with humor, not in a slapstick way, but in the sense that the movie doesn’t take itself too seriously.

This is not to say that Ritchie and company have proceeded in a careless manner in creating the latest incarnation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s famed detective. Indeed, the attention to detail and stylization is impressive, from camera angles during a street fight to set decoration and costumes. There’s a great modern sensibility to the film while still capturing the look and feel of 1890s London.

CASEY: Yet the plot is classic Sherlock Holmes. The film tracks Sherlock and company as they unravel a confounding series of seemingly impossible arcane acts wrought by Lord Blackwood, a devious English lord played to the sinister hilt by Strong. Audiences will be left clueless until the very satisfactory conclusion, when Holmes neatly ties everything together with a bleary-eyed flourish. It’s wholly satisfying stuff.

HOLLY: I’ll counter you on that statement. The movie commits the cardinal sin of eliminating from the film an element of the action-packed trailer. A saucy moment involving Downey, McAdams and some stylish lingerie is missing from the final cut, leaving me thrown for a loop when the movie ended without McAdams coquettishly (and literally) losing her skirt. That’s a big pet peeve of mine — the last-minute cutting of an advertised scene, not the missed opportunity to see Rachel McAdams lose her skirt.

Other than that, yes, satisfying indeed. As a movie, “Sherlock Holmes” is chocolate rum cake: It won’t make your bones strong or provide great nutrients, but it’s sumptuous and wickedly delicious.