In "Sherlock Holmes" (2009, Guy Ritchie) an attempt is made to "modernize" the Sherlock Holmes franchise. Guy Ritchie continued this attempt in 2011 with "Sherlock Holmes: a game of shadows".

The modernization has a number of aspects.

There is a lot of action, while the old style Holmes resolved mystery's mainly by deduction and not by action.

The female character Irene Adler also exists in the work of Arthur Conan Doyle, but never as a love interst of Holmes.

The enemies are rather spectacular and do have spectacular aims, such as ruling the world. Compared to this the motive in for example "The hound of the Baskervilles" (an inheritance) is rather commonplace.

In the original stories Watson is a goody sidekick just to illustrate the intelligence of Holmes. In the Ritchie films Watson is a pragmatic character needed to counterbalance the eccentricity of Holmes.

All in all the Sherlock Holmes new style has a great deal in common with the James Bond format (action, beautiful women). For the traditional Sherlock Holmes fan (like me) the metamorphosis is a cultural shock, and (with the exception of the changing role of Watson) not a pleasant one. The final shootdown on the Tower bridge under construction is spectacular, but I do prefer the mysterious fog in Dartmoor in "The hound of the Baskervilles" (1939, Sidney Lanfield).