"Sherlock Holmes" **1/2 (out of four): Guy Ritchie's frenzied, over-long "reimagining" of the much-adapted Conan Doyle character isn't quite the blasphemy you'd think, thanks to a solid cast and Robert Downey Jr's inherent likability as the title.

In a way, a lot about Guy Ritchie's "Sherlock Holmes" adaptation makes sense. I know, I'm as surprised as you are to hear me say that. But think about it. Long before he was the former Mr. Madonna, this director made his name plumbing the depths of London's gangland underbelly in cheeky crime stories like "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, "Snatch" and "RocknRolla". So it stands to reason that he might want to go old-school and take a crack at crime in the Victorian era through the eyes of its most famous detective. For the lead role, Mr. Ritchie has cast Robert Downey Jr. At first, that choice may raise an eyebrow, particularly to those familiar with the Basil Rathbone incarnation of the character. But if you need an actor who can portray the type of rapid-fire mental acuity of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's famed "consulting detective", Mr. Downey has that in spades. And as for Warner Bros. Pictures, well, I smell franchise. In fact the film's plot appears to be little more than a setup for subsequent movies. But more on that later.

Read more on BigPictureBigSound...