Sherlock Holmes and the Case of the Silk Stocking

2004
6.6| 1h39m| en| More Info
Released: 26 December 2004 Released
Producted By: BBC
Country: United Kingdom
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

The corpse of a shabbily dressed young woman has been discovered in the mud flats of the Thames at low tide. Police assume she's a prostitute, but Dr. Watson suspects something more and goes to his old friend Holmes, now retired and at very loose ends.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Britbox

Director

Producted By

BBC

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre
Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.
Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies
Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.
Paul Evans It seemed that prior to the Benedict Cumberbatch Sherlock franchise, The BBC tried its best at producing something different. The Hound of the Baskervilles several years earlier had been very good, this one seemed rather exciting. A really exciting premise, an original story, Rupert Everett, Michael Fassbender, Helen McCrory, and the return of the excellent Ian Hart as Watson.I like everything, bar the story, it's pretty poor unfortunately, it's like they didn't have the best script, so opted for shocks and fairly graphic scenes, sadly it just doesn't work, which is a shame, because all the elements I mentioned earlier are so good, Rupert Evans is absolutely dazzling as Holmes, I loved him in the role, superior to Richard Roxburgh who'd previously played him, in almost every department. He's intelligent, harsh, calculating, and a little uneasy, talk about fitting the bill.Such a shame the script, and poor ending let down what is a classy production, excellent music, gorgeous costumes, clearly money was spent on it, a shame it just doesn't quite work.6/10 (Most of that is for the brilliance of Everett.)
Darth-5972 ...and the worst Watson I have seen. Like others, I was eager to see another actor take on Holmes and Watson... Mistake! A poor performance all around. Jeremy Brett is the only Holmes, followed closely by Basil Rathbone. The perfect Watson... The "bumbling" Nigel Bruce. Shame that this rendition did not come up to the mark.The only redeeming feature of this film was the closing music by Johann Sebastion Bach. Plain poor. A Holmes written and performed for an American audience I suspect (Although I cannot prove !)
johnny-08 The character of English writer Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes is probably one of the most popular invented detective. He is very calm and has very cool attitude when he's trying to solve a murder. This movie will help you to like even more this brilliant detective. It's mostly because of the actor Rupert Everett who is very good in this roll. Also I have to say something about script. It's not the best that it can be, but it's good, because you cannot understand who is the murder till' the end. This movie takes place in London, where someone is killing young ladies from rich families. This case is been given to the best detective on the world,Sherlock Holmes. He has help from his friend Dr.Watson and from Watson's fiancée Mrs.Vandeleur. This movie is good because of the actors and script. Again I have to mention Rupert Everett who proved that he is very good actor. Also Ian Hart played well as Watson. Please look this movie with patience and watch a good performance from a fine actor.
shugaron316 As a huge SH fan,I've seen nearly every film about the Great Detective,good,bad,and indifferent. And I've seen a gamut of actors take on the role of Holmes,from the great(Jeremy Brett,Basil Rathbone,Christopher Plummer)to the good(Peter Cushing,Eli Norwood)to the so-so(Nicol Williamson,Ronald Howard)to the pits(Roger Moore,Jack Palance,Tom Baker,Matt Frewer). It's hard to define where Rupert Everett stacks up. He has the height,the cold clinical nature,the drug use down pat. But he is simply too young for this role. In 1902,when this story is set,Holmes would be in his late 40's,according to the Canon. This Holmes doesn't look to be a day over 30! And Ian Hart is totally miscast as Watson-he is too small and scrawny,tho he is shown to be a competent and forceful presence when need be. The plot itself is interesting-a tag team of identical twin psycho-sexual killers,and the London of 1902 is presented well-foggy streets,the chasm between the classes,and Scotland Yard's gradual acceptance of the SH method in their own work,tho it is surprising to see Lestrade,tho still an imbecile in his field,as a "ready to beat a confession out of you" thug. The notion of a woman shrink,especially one well versed in the mysteries of sexual perversion(and who smokes,also),would have been unthinkable to the stuffy Edwardians of that day. All in all,tho,not a bad effort.