91Èȱ¬

A service highlighting the riches of the daily press.

In the past Paper Monitor has admitted getting rather wicked delight from reading a brutal review in the papers. It's not the nicest character trait but - as Tiger only recently admitted - no one is perfect.

So, apologises over with, lets get down to the dirty and delicious business of what critics think of Guy Ritchie's new film - Sherlock Holmes. Yes, the man who is so often on the receiving end of a battering from the critics is back again. Are you licking your lips too?

Luckily for Ritchie it seems the Guardian's Peter Bradshaw is off today. In the past he's demolished the director's cinematic efforts, calling "a muddled, pretentious bore". Nasty man.

gets the job of reviewing his latest offering. Good news for Ritchie? Put it this way, he probably would have preferred Mr Bradshaw. Her view is as follows:

"At least in the past Ritchie knew what he was making, even if it wasn't that good. This muddle of genres reflects a collapse in confidence in his ability to deliver anything."

The Times is not a fan either. While there are some words of praise, film critic says the film is "tension free" and "lacklustre". But there is some good news for Mr used-to-be-Madonna's-husband - Mr Hayles doesn't blame him, instead pointing a finger at the script.

"After the botched jobs of Revolver and RocknRolla it is a relief to see Ritchie directing someone else's script. Sadly, it's not a very good one, ill adviserly building a bespoke Holmes story from scratch and coming up instead with Scooby Doo."

For Paper Monitor the words "Christmas" and "presents" and "all at once" spring to mind when reading the reviews. Different ones probably jump into Guy's mind.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?