Skip to main content

Enola Holmes and the Case of the Elusive Identity


I’ve got to hand it to Millie Bobby Brown. She managed to realize a fantasy most avid young readers have had at one point or another. Growing up, she and her sister were fans of a childrens’ series called Enola Holmes by Nancy Springer, which re-imagined the Sherlock Holmes canon through the lens of the great sleuth’s teenage sister -also a detective. Then she went and became a big star on Stranger Things, and decided to use her new-found clout to will her dream movie adaptation into existence, waiting a few years just so she herself could age into the title role. Legendary Pictures got behind it, as did Netflix (eager to keep her in-house) and she wrangled some decent talent both in front of and behind the camera, with her sister and herself serving as producers. She even contributed significantly to the script by Jack Thorne -this is HER passion project. As a kid who read a lot myself and often imagined how I would make a movie of what I was reading, I can imagine the enthusiasm this whole endeavour must have garnered for her. And I can vicariously share it.
Enola Holmes is directed by Fleabag’s Harry Bradbeer, and Fleabag is clearly a big influence on the film. It employs the same narrative structure involving the title character expositing and commenting directly into the camera, though without a lot of the sideways glances or perfectly timed expressions that Phoebe Waller-Bridge turned into an art. The very modern winking sarcasm and self-aware sensibility used in these moments is also notably borrowed from that program, yet aesthetically the film owes as much to Victorian-set TV dramas with the occasional dose of Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes -not in the action scenes, of which there are few, but in some of the editing and pacing choices that look to reflect the styles of more kinetic directors.
It’s not a very lived-in world nor a very large one, but there is a charm to it. The London of this movie is the storybook London of something like Paddington (though not nearly as colourfully engaging), and the countryside where Enola grows up, that of a Jane Austen film. In this, the movie is afforded a semblance of the kind of period-set childrens’ films of the 1990s where atmosphere and whimsical ingenuity were often more important than the generally low stakes -like Newsies, The Little Princess, The Secret Garden, Madeline, and perhaps most especially various Annes of Green Gables.
The stakes aren’t terribly low in Enola Holmes, one of the two mysteries she’s simultaneously solving involves the life endangerment of a boy viscount called Tewkesbury (Louis Partridge). But even with this and her other enterprise -solving the disappearance of her political revolutionary mother (Helena Bonham Carter)- it’s difficult for the film to really break out on its own and become more than merely a Victorian Nancy Drew. Enola’s mystery solving is less observational than her brother, it’s more about finding patterns, decoding, and solving riddles -scrabble tiles play a big part in this. Without necessarily discounting the validity of this approach to detective work though, it certainly reads as more juvenile, and at odds with the films’ more serious ambitions, especially with regards to its political subtexts. There’s a thematic dissonance too in how the script so often stresses Enola’s individuality, her empowerment and desire to make her own way in the world distinct from her brothers -and yet she is pretty blatantly pursuing the same career trajectory and consequent reputation as Sherlock.
Sherlock is played by Henry Cavill in this film, and it’s one of the more interesting performances of the character, and one of the better ones from Cavill. Sherlock has the closer relationship to Enola, or at least more empathy than the exceedingly snobbish Mycroft (Sam Claflin), their kindred spirit coming from their mutual flair for deduction. He’s a degree kinder and more emotional than the character has traditionally been played too, and Cavill demonstrates the same classical charisma that worked for him in The Man From U.N.C.L.E., and which until now he hadn’t really recaptured since. The other stand-out performance from the film of course is Brown herself who, in spite of deficiencies in script, tone, and theme, is clearly relishing the role she no doubt wanted to play for years. Her enthusiasm and determination is palpably infectious, and it’s nice to see her acting with her own accent for a change, and in a part that’s far less heavy than what she usually has to play on Stranger Things. There are also noteworthy turns from always reliable British staples Burn Gorman, Frances de la Tour, and Fiona Shaw; and Susie Wokoma has a small but significant part as ones of Mrs. Holmes’ collaborators, who seems mostly there to call Sherlock out on his self-sustaining politics.
The political themes that underscore Enola Holmes are probably the films’ biggest gesture to modern adult audiences, particularly the very stark fact that the vital Reform Bill in the House of Lords needs the vote of the young Lord Tewkesbury to pass -and this is what has put him in danger. The progressiveness of the young vs. the conservatism of the old (both in people and institutions) hangs over a number of aspects of the film, and it makes clear that the old ways are dying out for a bright future being brought about by the likes of Enola, Tewkesbury, etc. It’s terribly transparent and simplified, but that’s to be expected given who the film is speaking to. And I was impressed with its willingness to condemn “impartial” beneficiaries of unjust systems (typified in Mycroft), and with just how radical Enola’s mother is, essentially trying to force twenty-first century feminism on the nineteenth, but not sparing her from criticism of her methods.
The messaging is a bit shallow for adults, as much of the film is, but it hits a lot of the right notes for kids. In that respect it has a lot in common with last years’ The Kid Who Would Be King, which also took a youth-focussed contemporary spin on a public domain British canon. Enola Holmes isn’t wholly an unnecessary Millie Bobby Brown vanity project; there is definitely an audience for it, and I think the film does well enough by them that they’ll retain it if the rest of us don’t.

Support me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/JordanBosch
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...