SHERLOCK HOLMES:
In Search of the Source
Author Bio
Jeff Falkingham is a mystery lover and history buff who writes for readers of all ages who
share those passions. His hometown of Browns Valley, Minnesota, was the setting for his first work of
historical fiction, Sherlock Holmes and the County Courthouse Caper. This second book,
Sherlock Holmes: In Search of the Source, is a sequel, set ten years after the original.
Jeff has a B.A. in mass communications from St. Cloud State University and an M.A. in community and
organizational leadership from Augsburg College. He began his career as a sportswriter. For the past
twenty-five years, he has worked in corporate communications, marketing and advertising, most recently
with Northern Tool + Equipment in Burnsville, Minnesota. He and his wife, Bonita, live in Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, where they raised two children, Erik and Amy, both currently in college.
Jeff is featured in the Nov. issue of Eden Prairie Magazine
(look for "Fact Meets Fiction" -- No. 15 of 54 online Articles),
and led the Entertainment section of the Christmas week
edition of several Twin Cities Suburban Southwest newspapers.
Schedule of appearances and book signings
"Sherlock Holmes -- in Minnesota?" is the theme of Jeff's current talk. He's planned several appearances in conjunction with the new Sherlock Holmes movie that hit theaters on Christmas Day. Highlights appear below. Check back for more!- Thur./Feb.18, 6:30pm: Scott Co. Historical Soc., Shakopee, MN
- Sat./Feb.27, 10:30am: Writers' Fest./Book Fair, Bloomington, MN
- Sat./Mar.20, 1pm: Carver County Library, Chanhassen, MN
- Sat./Apr.17, 10am: Carver Co. Historical Soc., Waconia, MN
If you'd like Jeff to talk with your group, call 952-465-1662, OR --
Contact Jeff Falkingham at:
Jeff@cccaper.com
Jeff's review of the new SH movie
Sherlock Holmes has appeared in more than 200 films. It’s unlikely any of those films has been as heavily promoted as Guy Ritchie’s version. Does it live up to the hype? My answer is: Yes! In almost every way.The sets, costumes, makeup and art direction are all Oscar-worthy. They capture perfectly the flavor of 1890s London, as the city and its inhabitants struggle to move from the Victorian Era into the Industrial Age. The cinematography is outstanding! The film features a number of visual images that will remain vivid in your mind for days. Unlike the promotional campaigns of many movies these days, not all of those scenes appear in the trailers you see on TV. The musical score, from Beethoven to Haydn to the Irish Rovers to several haunting original tunes from composer Hans Zimmer, matches the mood of the on-screen action in every instance.
The editing, as you’d expect from Ritchie, is fast-paced, almost frenetic at times. There’s rarely a dull moment. Early in the film, a “pause” device is employed to show us how the great detective’s mind works. It is used sparingly enough to make it extremely effective, not to the point that it becomes an annoying distraction. Ritchie also uses “flashbacks” as they were intended to be used: as momentary flashes, rather than as extended episodes that interrupt the chronological flow of the story.
The story itself might be the film’s weakest point. It involves a scheme by a member of the House of Lords to take over England and restore the British Empire, including the reacquisition of former colonies “across the Atlantic.” The story also dabbles in the occult. This may appeal to some viewers, but could turn off others, as it all tends to get a bit confusing. Of course, Holmes explains it all in the end; but he does so in such a flippant, rapid, matter-of-fact manner that it’s not that easy to follow. There’s also a subplot involving Dr. Watson’s intention to move out of the apartment he shares with Holmes at 221B Baker Street, and into a home of his own with Mary Morstan, his betrothed. Morstan plays a surprisingly strong part in the film, especially considering the relatively few moments that she (portrayed by Kelly Reilly) is actually seen on screen. That brings us to perhaps the most controversial element of Ritchie’s film: the actors’ portrayal of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s characters.
Jude Law’s depiction of Dr. Watson is unlike any we’ve ever seen before. A former military man who became a surgeon, Doyle’s Watson was a man who did things “by the book.” His style, in writing as in life, was formal, precise -- one might even call it stuffy, or stodgy. He has been portrayed in film as everything from a loyal sidekick to a bumbling buffoon. Law’s Watson is none of those things. He is cheeky, brash and confident. In other words, he is a perfect foil for Holmes! I’m not sure Doyle would have approved, but I think Watson would have been flattered. After all, though he was a fervent admirer of Holmes’ superior intellect, the good doctor knew that he, himself, was equal to (or better than) the great detective in many other areas, including social skills.
The Irene Adler in Ritchie’s movie is a logical extension of the character in Doyle’s Scandal in Bohemia. As portrayed by Rachel McAdams, it is easy to see why she was always “the woman” in Holmes’ life. By the way, though there are references to other Sherlockian tales in the film (there’s even a tip of the hat to Edgar Allan Poe’s Raven), it is not necessary to have read the books in order to enjoy the movie. The film contains more than enough adventure, intrigue, and even romance, to stand on its own. Mark Strong as Lord Blackwood presents an adequate adversary. Even he admits, though, that Holmes will find a more fearsome foe looming on the horizon (or, more accurately, lurking in the shadows). Eddie Marsan is your typical Lestrade. Often viewed by Holmes as a hindrance, the Inspector occasionally manages to come through in the clutch, albeit a bit late.
Last but not least, we have Robert Downey, Jr. as Sherlock Holmes. Since Eille Norwood portrayed Holmes in 47 silent short films in the 1920s, every generation of Sherlockians has had its quintessential on-screen Holmes: the 40s had Basil Rathbone; the 60s, Peter Cushing, the 80s, Jeremy Brett. We were long overdue for another. I’m not sure Downey would have been my first choice. Downey’s Holmes is not as regal as Cushing’s. On the other hand, he’s at least as neurotic as Brett’s, and more physical than the swashbuckling Rathbone’s. Not entirely by chance, I’m sure, Downey even brings a bit of Charlie Chaplin to the role in a couple of short but memorable scenes. The actor’s timing, facial expressions and body language are all impeccable; his chemistry with the other actors is superb. In short, he worked for me!
I’m not sure we can infer that Downey’s Holmes will send a new generation of Sherlockians scurrying to the library in search of Doyle’s original works. But I’m confident in my deduction that many movie-goers will be eagerly awaiting the sure-to-come sequel. You can count me among them.
ON SITE: Among the historical places that author Jeff Falkingham visited for research were the Seventh Street Improvement Arches that link Lowertown St. Paul with Dayton's Bluff. Beyond the two old railroad tunnels lies the Swede Hollow ravine, once the site of a shantytown that served as a temporary home to thousands of immigrants. (Photo by Erik Falkingham)
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |