u/Natural_Date1955

I have been seeing so much criticism of this movie that I wanted to make a list so anyone could find it easily. The list includes my own thoughts and things I have seen on reddit. I try to explain the points when I can. This is in no particular order and contains spoilers.

• Poor grammar in an attempt to sound "old timey": "Will you take I to be your husband" is one example
• Mishandling of Moriarty's character in relation to her identity as a black woman: Her motivations for seeking the gold are unclear, making it seem like she is stealing it out of greed and ego, not to return it to the people it was stolen from. As a black person she would understand British colonialism, so why would she perpetuate its cruelty by not returning the gold? There is also the issue that a victim of colonization is the villain of this story, and is defeated, by the hegemony, in the end.
• Separating racism and colonization: POC characters are treated no differently than white characters, however the colonized Maltese are shown to face prejudice and oppression. It doesn't make sense that Mikiel is forced to walk behind the white women in the hallway, while Watson, a brown man, is allowed into a British official's office without question. The criticism here isn't necessarily that these historically white characters cannot be portrayed by POC actors, but that bringing up colonization in a movie where these actors have been cast seriously complicates the story and calls for more attention to be given to those POC characters experiences with racism/colonization. There is also the fact that this story is set in Malta, an island of people usually considered "white." This may be because the writers did not want to confront racism in their colonization story, but that is a serious misstep.
• Downplaying British colonization: Of course, this is a movie intended for younger audiences, so the true extent of Britain's crimes is much too heavy to get into, but many feel that this portrayal of colonization can give young people the wrong idea about what actually happened in British colonies. Many have also pointed out that this military cover up of the stolen gold would not be that scandalous, and most nobles and military officials would condone and be aware of such actions (and much, much worse). Tewkesbury would know about his father's and the crown's actions from a young age and be taught it was justified, but this is a shock to him in the film.
• Reducing Sherlock's intelligence: Sherlock's character is gutted in this film, somehow, despite being a genius, unable to escape from a knot tied around his wrist. He is never shown plotting a way to escape or to improve the situation using his mind, and is left completely helpless waiting around for someone to come save him.
• Makeup decisions: Enola is shown wearing a full face of makeup, complete with mascara, eyeshadow, lip gloss, and sometimes cakey foundation. Not only is this uncharacteristic, it is not accurate to the time period.
• Costume decisions: Some viewers find the wigs and costumes appear cheap and poorly styled. Many point out Enola's wedding dress at the end of the movie, where it looks cheap but is also period inaccurate with an off the shoulder look that would be inappropriate for the time. Enola is also always shown in dresses, which although period typical, is nothing like the Enola we were shown in the first two movies.
• Pacing/length: This EH3 feels rushed compared to the previous films and is much shorter than both of them.
• Tewkesbury as Enola's sidekick: Many people have taken issue with the line "You may kiss the husband" during Enola and Tewkesbury's wedding. This attempts to be a role reversal where Enola is humanized as "woman" and Tewkesbury is objectified as "husband" but many people have found this distasteful and a swing too far in the other direction. At the end of the film, Tewkesbury also decides to resign his role as a Lord, but this doesn't make sense based on who we know him to be. EH1 & EH2 showed us how he uses his noble status and power to be the voice for the underserved in his community, tackling corruption and humans rights issues. Why would he give that up? Is that really what he or Enola wants? The pair is portrayed as activist do-gooders in their own right, but how does Tewkesbury maintain that characterization if he has given up his influence? People have speculated that if there is another EH film, he will be nothing but Enola's sidekick due to this writing decision.
• Reducing Eudoria Holmes to comic relief: Some people have shared that they feel Enola's mother isn't taken as seriously as she was in the previous films, and their mother-daughter bond is not carried into EH3. Eudoria is supposed to be a strong character with a message for the audience, but in this film she is comic relief and a plot device.
• Flattening of Enola and Tewkesbury's romance: In EH3, the couple seem to have less chemistry and lack the banter, teamwork, and communication that made them work so well in the previous films. Their conflicts are resolved quickly without much thought from the writers. The characters and their relationship feel less alive.
• Lack of mystery and crime solving elements
• Editing: Stunt double cuts are obvious and fight scenes are unconvincing. Frequent cuts in general adds to rushed feeling. Some point Netflix's poor, soundstage lighting, while others think the setting improves the lighting.

This is not a comprehensive list, but it is what I could find! Please comment if you think I've missed anything and I'll be happy to add it.