Charles Herold (cherold) This isn't just bad for a TV comedy, this is bad for a comedy film made by high school students.The very first scene, in which a Kissinger-esque character mugs and does a funny voice, instantly establishes that this will be broad, amateurish comedy. The next scene with a confused U.S. president confirms it.Things pick up when Sherlock and Watson arrive. John Cleese is quite amusing, and Arthur Lowe is marvelously funny. But the script is awful, and the acting is remarkably bad (outside of Cleese and Lowe, the only competent performance is by Connie Booth).Basically, you've got some laughs whenever Cleese and Lowe are around, and everything else is embarrassingly bad. I'm just shocked that this was made and actually broadcast to the world. It should have been burned, and the ashes buried.

Dakota100 I enjoyed this short film and recommend it to all who enjoy Cleese doing what he does best. Arthur Lowe's portrayal of a bumbling Dr. Watson is great as is Connie Booth's Mrs. Hudson. The plot is similar to that of the higher budget 1976 comedy film Murder By Death in that a gathering of famous detectives is empaneled to solve a crime. It differs in that Cleese and company depend more on sight gags than on a clever script. (At least one gag was lifted nearly intact from the the earlier film.) Another difference is that MBD's detectives come from literature's mystery genre and this film's detectives come from American television of that era.This film pokes good fun at a variety of world cultures with special emphasis on the USA. (Perhaps I am being overly sensitive.) I recommend that those unfamiliar with either film watch The Strange Case before viewing Murder By Death to avoid being mildly distracted by the similarities as I was.

jzappa The strange case has been made through studies that kids will laugh when presented with something out of place, like a funny face, if the face is made by someone with whom they are acquainted, but they will repel if it's presented by a stranger. This conveys that our reactions to inconsistencies, oddities, unanticipated discrepancies with normalcy and established ranks will differ in terms of particular circumstances. If the incongruity happens in a context where it's threatening, it'll dispose us toward a threatened reaction. This is maybe the seed of the horror genre. On the other hand, if the context is one that is distinguished as non-threatening, where the possibility of hurt and fear has been withheld, the scenarios are opportune for humor.We follow the attempts of Sherlock Holmes, Dr. Watson and various governments to stop all civilization from being destroyed, but everyone is too terminally stupid or apathetic to be successful at it. We need not worry about the targets of all the brutality and cruelty in blacker realms of comedy, including slapstick, because they're not completely human.It's an accelerated, often hilarious jaunt that heckles at just about everything mystery, espionage or potboiler in English and American media. Holmes, Bond, Columbo, etc., little more than a vaudeville act in breadth and elaboration. The peak of this film is Arthur Lowe as the guileless, blundering Watson, his stupidity and listlessness always counterblowing Cleese's temperamental ingenuity.

Josef Tura-2 You can do a lot with a little cash. Blair Witch proved that. This film supports it. It is no more than a sitcom in length and complexity. However, because it has John Cleese as Sherlock Holmes it manages to be hilarious even on a budget that couldn't afford a shoestring. The highlight of this film is Arthur Lowe as the sincere, bumbling Watson, his dimness and slowness foils Cleese's quick-tempered wit. If you ever run across the film watch it for a quirky laugh or two.