As a long-time Holmes fan, and particularly of the Jeremy Brett interpretations, I was fully prepared to dislike this one intensely. However, I did enjoy it and can recommend it, though with some warnings.<br /><br />As several have mentioned, the time warp is annoying for those who know the genre. While it's certainly possible that Holmes might have "come out of retirement" at a young age, this is pushing it a bit far. Holmes and Watson were at least in their mid- to late twenties in the 1880s, so an Edwardian (1903?) setting would have them each pushing 50.<br /><br />I don't recall seeing this Everett guy before, but I think they could have done better. However, after seeing poor Charlton Heston doing Holmes, I won't squawk too loudly. Everett seems to play up the jaded, effeminate Edwardian dandy routine a bit much for me.<br /><br />Aside from the earlier-mentioned telephone disparity and perhaps too-routine use of fingerprints, I was particularly aggravated by the reference at the end to James Whistler's famous work commonly known as "Whistler's Mother. Holmes refers to it as something like "Portrait in Gray," whereas the actual title is "Arrangement in Gray and Black (or Black and Gray)". If as screenwriter is determined to be that pretentious, he should at least do the research and get it right.<br /><br />The plot seemed to be "cheating" a bit to me, too, as others have mentioned.<br /><br />But I did like it, warts and all. Maybe a 6 or 7 out of 10.