Sherlock Holmes 3 thoughts...
Not sure if the pending fact that Guy Ritchie’s “King Arthur: Legend of the Sword” may end up being the year’s biggest flop yet (as predicted by both Hollywood Reporter and Variety, both pretty good predictors…) is a very good thing for “Sherlock Holmes 3.”
On the one hand, it might send Guy Ritchie back to his one safe place where he’s pretty much guaranteed a hit, Sherlock Holmes.
On the other hand – if the extreme heavy-handedness and super-overwhelming noise and overblown bashing action scenes of “King Arthur” are any indication, would Warner Bros even want his hands on a Sherlock Holmes movie any more? Do we?? Has Ritchie reached a point of no return where studios won’t want to entrust him with big money to do big blockbusters any more?
Because I will tell you - as I posted last week, “King Arthur” is truly, truly terrible (elevated only by a sterling performance by Jude Law), and it’s amazing to me that any studio would sink $175 million into a debacle like this. So no, I do not think it bodes well for a Ritchie-helmed “Sherlock Holmes 3,” not at all. (Get ready for some horrendous “King Arthur” reviews – I haven’t even looked yet, but I know a bad movie when I see one. “Guardians” will wipe the floor with it…)
On the OTHER hand - RDJ has the power to get any director he wants. And his production company is running the show this time.
So if he wants Guy Ritchie for SH3, he will get him.