r/Netflix_EnolaHolmes

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.

From the first two movies, we learn that Eudoria is a strong, smart feminist woman and a great mother who has a strong bond with Enola. In the third movie, she is presented as a terrible mother and as comic relief, which is what I think someone who didnt understand the first two movies would see her as.

The third movie completely erases all the character growth Tewkesbury went through in the first 2 movies. I feel like the first 2 movies placed importance in both Enola and Tewkesbury as characters whereas the third simply sees Tewkesbury as Enola's love interest and a character to move her story along.

The third movie definetly did not understand Moriarty and adding racial motivations to her character ruined the entire movie for me. I finished the movie feeling deeply uncomfortable after watching a black woman share her pain and resentment towards the world due to her race just to have a white woman, Enola, and other white people, completely ignore her and not even acknowledge anything she said. They could have just kept it simple and had her motivated by revenge or taken the time to understand her motivations from the first movie (she simply steals from terrible people so her taking the Gold in the third movie is very on par with her) but adding a racial layer to it and then doing nothing with that ruined the movie.

I feel like the people behind the third movie see Sherlock as better than Enola. They have him figure out most of the mystery himself before he gets kidnapped and the movie is basically Enola figuring out what Sherlock has already solved. Also, I dont think they understand the sibling dynamic between Enola and Sherlock because there is no way Sherlock would have hid everything from her after all his character growth and the evolution of his and Enola's relationship. I cant quite place if Sherlock's reactions to Enola getting married is on character either.

Theres a lot off about this movie and these are just the main things I noticed but it truly felt like this movie was made by people who either didnt understand or didnt like the first two movies.

I really loved the first two movies and expected the same from the third. Hell, I even had my alarm set for when it would drop on Netflix.

Third movie didn't meet my expectations AT ALL. It was downright boring. I know they tried to give us a history lesson but they really only scratched the tip of the surface and you know it's a movie when people so high in power actually get punished for their crimes.

And tell me why did Enola look like she was in a magazine? She was doing all these things yet her hair was perfect and makeup intact. I know I'm talking too much, but that 'suspenseful' ending where they left on a cliffhanger on who Rathe actually is was not it lol.

The whole movie was a mess, like it wasn't that bad but compared to the first two movies i was lowkey very disappointed. First of all the potholes were insane.

Also why did they dumbify sherlock sm 💔💔 The whole movie i was expecting him to have SOME trick up his sleeve but he didn't. Moriarty was HIS nemesis, not enola's!!! Sherlock shd have been the one to take down moriarty, not enola. If they wanted to make Enola shine they could have literally given her her own nemesis ☹️

Enola's charcater really disappointed me in this movie coz she literally stood Tewkesbury up ON THEIR WEDDING DAY. I understand her dilemma regarding marriage and given her character it would have been crazier if she didn't hesitate. But they could have shown it SOO MUCH BETTER. Like during the engagement maybe? The time in between the engagement and the wedding? She literally did not hesitate and said yes when he proposed but then left him standing at the altar

oh also Moriarty being a woman lowkey took me out lmfao

i just finished 3 and i absolutely loved it. i laughed, i cried, i did all the things. it was so fun. the ending made me wonder if we might be getting a fourth so i came over here to see what others thought. holy shit. yall are HATERS to the MAX. just absolutely nitpicking every little thing. do i think it could have been better? sure. but do i still think it was good? absolutely. not everything is that serious you guys are acting like this was a life or death movie and since it wasn't absolutely perfect how you imagined it, the planet is going to implode. anyways thats all. remember not to take everything so seriously and just enjoy things sometimes.

I've been a fan of the films since the first one came out. I had zero expectations for the thrid film. ZERO. IT STILL DISAPOINTED ME. I knew that we wouldn't have Daniel Pemberton, and we'd be getting a different director, and I was like "Fine, whatever," but...

Were the writers all high? What the hell was that. I was able to figure out just about every single plot twist.

"Moriarty moved the wedding to Malta. She got it brought up with Tewksberry's mom somehow."

"She's gonna pour the water on the ground."

"His dad was the one in charge of the operation."

I mean come ON! I'm a fairly stupid person. And I was calling plot points left and right! There were so many uncomfortable cliches I was half convinced I was watching a Hallmark! I loved the other two films because the twists and turns and surprises around every corner were all phenomenal. Not this one!

Oh, and the 4th wall breaks. Let's not forget about those. The icons of the franchise. The beloved 4th wall breaks. WHY THE HELL DID WE KEEP GETTING THOSE FROM OTHER CHARECTERS? And why were they soo unnecessarily long? First time it happened with Wattson I decided "Sure. Wattson can break the 4th wall too. That's kind of cool." And. It. Kept. Happening. Whyyyy? A huge part of Enola's charm was her spontaneously speaking to us, seemingly pulling her and the audience into a separate little world for a moment to think things through. Here, it was obvious that her breaks were noticeable to other characters, and it was painful. They must have thought she was crazy. Especially in the godfathers office when she strangled herself with a pretend rope and then later broke the wall with him? Did he think she was crazy while she pretended to strangle herself?

Not to mention Eudoria. They butchered her character. Felt like they made her comic relief rather than the brilliant, crazy woman she was in the first two films. She abandoned her own daughter at SIXTEEN and went into hiding, and you expect me to belive she showed up to said daughter's VERY PUBLIC wedding in the stupidest disguises possible, and then proceeded to stick to said daughter like glue and later OFFICIATE the ceremony? No! It felt like she was an entirely different woman.

And another butchered character. Moriarty. (You thought I was done, didn't you? Nope.) Her whole thing was being brilliant, playing a game, stealing from the rich while going completely unnoticed. Soo why was she just a violent manic this time? Mostly just bitter and choosing to reveal her hand pretty early on? And going after some gold? She lost all of her appeal as a villain, despite her actresses impressive work.

Actually, both she and Enola (Everyone, honestly) was being stupid. You're telling me you're just going to assume Moriarty isn't faking being knocked out? You're not going to check? Or tie her up? OR PICK UP THE FUCKING KNIFE LYING TEN FEET AWAY FROM HER? Aren't you supposed to be brilliant, Enola? On par with Sherlock Holmes? Because it feels like they've turned you into yet another "Girlboss" character. (Which the carriage-gun scene made painfully clear.)

Finally, there's Tewksbury. Yet another painful loss of this film. It felt like he and Enola lost all chemistry, which was one of my favorite parts of the first two films. And him renouncing his title as a lord? Look, I know the writters were trying to make it easier for Enola to marry him, but really, why? He was doing such good work and he gave it up because... he had a minor identity crisis? Because it turns out his father wasn't an absolute angel? Maybe THINK THROUGH SUCH A MAJOR DESCISION FOR MORE THAN A COUPLE DAYS, TEWKSBERRY?

Anyways, that's the end of my rant. I shall wish you all a good night and pray that none of you get haunted by nightmares of that awful film, because I certainly will.

So I just watched Enola holmes, and I could’ve sworn Moriarty was a guy in the original sherlock Holmes stories. Why is Moriarty a woman in this
version?

I don’t mean this in a negative way I just wanna know why they changed it

Suffice it to say, I’m a huge fan of the first and second movies. I was seated for the third one, and regrettably I have to say this one is pale in comparison to the first two. Could this be caused by the change of director? I’m not so sure. The writing and pacing are sloppy. One minute we’re concerned with the couple’s love life, another we were jumped to the narrative of an enslaved country which they didn’t wrap up well. We’re getting so many conflicts with no clear resolution, i.e. Holmes family estrangement, Enola’s internal conflict as a lady in society, and Moriarty’s discrimination.

The movie has the potential to be so much more, just like how the first two wrapped the feminism theme so perfectly with crime-solving while throwing in romantic and familial themes. The comedic moments are bearable, and I’m not so sure about the acting. Tewksbury seems like his head is not in the game for half the movie, Sherlock seems depressed, and Eudoria feels forced. They’re super talented actors, so I’m not sure where the issues lie. The only difference I spotted is the change of director, so I’d totally blame him.

2/10 so sad this franchise is ruined for me, will always love the first two tho

i watched Enola Holmes 3 last night lol, and I wanted to see if anyone had thoughts on it?? Try not to spoil too many things for people who haven’t watched it though

I get he wants to be normal and all that but doesn’t that mean he has to give up being in the House of Lords? Like he’s giving up making change and everything

YES, we'll morph an extraordinary, diligent, hardworking, 'literally need nobody' woman into marriage. Why? Because it suits the storyline and, oh, apparently every woman needs a husband!!!! Yes, pls kill me. I agreed to it and was literally screaming in excitement when Sherlock said she doesn't need to marry him or anybody, and that she's ruining her life by doing so. Enola, you should've listened to your brother!

AND OH? SHERLOCK HOLMES COULDN'T UNTIE HIMSELF FROM A ROPE? be so fr pls. I waited so long for this part and you'll ruin it like this? tch tch tch

On one hand, Tewkesbury’s renunciation of his title and departure from the House of Lords effectively undo the events of the first film. His own grandmother had tried to kill him just to prevent him from supporting liberal reform — and now, it turns out, her wish has been partially fulfilled.

On the other hand, however, the situation is far more complex. First of all, the Representation of the People Act of 1884—the very act in question — did not grant the right to vote to the entire population; 40% of men and all women were left out. Secondly—and most importantly — the third film deals with British colonialism, an issue toward which the aristocracy is "somewhat" more favorably disposed.

Perhaps the film should have emphasized this aspect — increasing Tewkesbury’s screen time and giving him a fully developed story arc. Here is how it might look: early in the film, the viscount raises the issue of the mistreatment of the indigenous population in the House of Lords but finds no understanding among his "colleagues." This incident compounds Enola’s anxieties about her future as an aristocrat’s wife and, in turn, fuels doubts in Tewkesbury himself. And in the end, the viscount discovers that his own father—whom the first film portrayed as a liberal and a reformer, and whom he respected and looked up to — had facilitated the theft of gold from Afghanistan.

Another of the perpetrators is a close friend — and the Viscount’s own godfather. It is also worth noting that, although the criminals were arrested, the sentence handed down was surprisingly lenient (thanks to Brigadier Sampson’s connections and social standing). This proves to be the final straw. Tewkesbury realizes that the English aristocracy has reached a moral dead end and that he will achieve nothing more in the House of Lords; the other lords remain too deeply entrenched in conservatism to support his initiatives. You must admit, in that case, renouncing the title and leaving the House would have looked different. I would also like to add that leaving the House of Lords does not equate to a final exit from politics. Ernest could run for a seat in the House of Commons. Its influence grew significantly towards the end of the 19th century, and by 1910, it would take center stage. The franchise’s creators could well portray Ernest as one of the "architects" of this shift—or even as a close associate of Prime Minister Asquith (though that is still twenty years away, there is no telling what timeframe the franchise might cover).

I’m not sure the creators will go down that path. There is a risk that Ernest might overshadow the main character — his current wife. But surely they won’t turn him into a loafer. There is still a chance to come up with something worthy for him.

First off I wanna say I really enjoyed the third film. The vibe completely changed with the original score changing to a more serious one and bright colours and pastels changed to ocean blues and whites giving off a more mature vibe. I also appreciated the switch up from the foggy streets of London to the sandy beaches of Malta. However, I have to say I liked the second movies mystery more than the third ones because their was more time to try and figure out the answers myself and I hope to continue that momentum in a possible fourth film.

Setting
The story starts back in the London were Enolas new married life is rooted. Driven by her career, Enola then ventures across the ocean to the jagged peaks and steep valleys of Afghanistan in an expedition with Sherlock to investigate a case.

The Wrath of Adeline (Enola, and Sherlocks Mystery)
In a boat, the Holmes follow the route of the The Wrath of Adeline on their way to Afghanistan and find out it is a British ship transporting stolen gold from Afghanistan and secret military files that hold Watsons past. Moriarty used the name professor Adeline Wrath as the name of Sherlocks kidnapper showing Moriartys scheme was inspired by this specific ship. This ship was the one Tewkesburys Father sank. The Holmes could find information in the ship that uncovers the secrets Tewkesburys father was trying to hide. Enola and Sherlock will follow Moriartys hidden network and face old regiments who would kill to keep their secrets buried.

Tewkesbury, and Watsons mission
Tewkesbury and Watson are tasked with returning the stolen gold back to authorities in Afghanistan. Watson brings military experience and knowledge of the region, while Tewkesbury uses his political negotiation skills. Together they face traps and corrupt officials who want to steal the gold before it reaches the authorities.

The Message (1880s womens rights movement)
While in Afghanistan Enola joins a local underground network of local Afghan women who are fighting for the historic 1880s marriage and inheritance reforms passed by Emir. Eudorias feminist network is connected globally to the one in Afghanistan. Inspired by battle field legends like Malalai of Maiwand. This partnership delivers a message that mirrors real world struggles of Afghan women today.

The Main Villain
Moriarty returns and wants revenge after surviving her defeat in Malta. After creating another brilliant prison break, she wants to dismantle the Holmes family as payback for ruining her scheme in the third film. Moriarty would target Tewkesbury especially since his family ties to the gold she failed to keep, and would send agents to ransack the wrath of information to blackmail the British government and ruin Sherlocks reputation.

The Climax
Tewkesbury, and Watson, and Enola, and Sherlocks paths collide. The clues Enola and Sherlock found would revel a dangerous ambush against Tewkesbury and Watson to kill them and take the gold. Enola and Sherlock must stage a frantic rescue to save them.

I just watched the 3 movie, and I personally really liked it. I was just really confused about the ending. Is Tewkesbury no longer in the house of lords? Idk if it was said in the original, but it was very unclear in the German dub .

How come Tewkesbury couldn’t change his name to Holmes? Why did he give up his title?

Just 1 rant. Sherlock holmes, couldn't untie himself from a rope! the heck

is anyone confused about the timeline of the third movie? Enola says “I have spent the last six years making myself worthy of the Holmes name” (I think I quoted that wrong) and moriarty escaped a year before the main plot starts but we saw that she escaped at the end of the second movie. what’s up with the weird time jump? how old is Enola now? idk if i missed something or if it was really unclear. help

was I the only one who thought multiple of the "photos" in the newspaper scenes were ai in enola Holmes 3?? im online a lot and so I find it very easy to spot ai. from what it looks like most if not all are ai generated slop! I can't attach images as Netflix doesn't allow screenshots. What is everyone else's opinions?