Taken 2: The Sequel

Sequels. There is typically an eye-roll and a change of intonation whenever the word sequel is uttered. But, as I have said before on this blog, I’m not really bothered by sequels. Yes, there have been utterly horrific sequels, but there have been utterly horrific films that neither had prequels or sequels, so why all the fuss about sequels?

I think the frustration with sequels is typically two-fold. First, many studios have shown that the sequel is merely a money-maker. The first was a success, therefore, the studios don’t have to put much thought into a follow-up and simply make money based off the success of its predecessor. Secondly, and I think this is more of the foundational issue, I think people hate it when good stories are ruined, and many a sequel have been responsible for that. The first one was great, you identify with the character, loved the story, and the sequel ruined everything you loved about the first. There have been some sequels that left such a lasting impression on people, they can’t even enjoy the first film anymore.

I, however, have always enjoyed and been excited about sequels. I grew up on the Star Wars and Indiana Jones trilogies, but also loved Karate Kid 2, Crocodile Dundee 2, and Home Alone 2. Now, I know those are somewhat nostalgic sequels that might not possess excellent quality, but we know there have been those sequels that rival their predecessor: The Godfather part II, Aliens, and Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back.

Not only do we have excellent sequels to look back on, I also believe studios are trying harder to hone their craft of sequels. They no longer simply see sequels as money-makers. I know some do [cough] Michael Bay[cough], but there are those sequels that care about their story; i.e., The Dark Knight, The Bourne series, and Sherlock Holmes. Let’s admit it, those are well-told stories in which the filmmakers have attempted to employ the same care they did with the initial installment.

I understand this discussion is being sparked by a not-so-great film, Taken. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoyed Taken. There are truths, which will be discussed tomorrow, that really resonated with me. However, I don’t think Taken will be a timeless film, it was somewhat of a made-for-TV-movie that made it to the theater.

My point is that we should show a bit more grace to sequels. Push the fact that filmmakers have ruined sequels to the side. We should all desire for stories to keep going. In my recent reflections on The Dark Knight Rises, I said we never want good stories to end because the best story never does. We were all designed for an eternity, whether that eternity is in the arms of Jesus Christ or in eternal torment, we have been created for an eternity. Therefore, there is still part of us that doesn’t like to function within the confines of time. We want the story to keep going.

While I do plan on seeing Taken 2, whether it’s in the theater or not I don’t know. I don’t think it will enter the discussion of all-time-best sequels. I do, however, know the best sequel of all time. Jesus Christ. In Romans 5:17-19 we read, “If, because of one man’s [Adam] trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who received the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in the life through the one man Jesus Christ. Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.” This is why Jesus Christ is referred to as The Second Adam. In this case, the sequel is infinitely better.

The Intelligence of Sherlock Holmes

I think we can now say that we have reached a point in cinematic history when sequels have reached higher quality.  I have not seen an advanced screening of the new Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, but recent years have shown that reboots and sequels are being taken seriously – The Dark Knight, Spider-man, The Bourne trilogy, Star Trek, Live Free or Die hard, etc. are proof that actors, producers, and directors are out to make entertaining and quality films.

Sherlock itself is a reboot and has taken on many different forms throughout the years, but Guy Richie’s version has proved to be a success.  Not only a monetary success (if it wasn’t there wouldn’t be a sequel) but an artistic success on various levels.  The cinematography brings an intriguing tone and feel to the reboot.  Two highly-talented actors (Downey, Jr. and Law) are capable of bringing two iconic characters to the screen with a freshness that makes audiences appreciate them among various generations.  The entertainment level is high, but it does not sacrifice story or character development to accomplish that.

All of that being said, I think there is a deeper level of appreciation which focuses on a characteristic of Dr. Holmes that causes this to resonate among audiences.  And I believe it’s the fact that Sherlock Holmes is one smart cookie.

Intelligence is something that has always intrigued audiences since the dawn of time.  All detective work calls for intelligence, and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s creation of Holmes (no matter which actor) certainly kept that as a commonality in each portrayal.  But it is this that draws audiences to detective work in general, and Sherlock Holmes in particular, the idea of intelligence.

Guy Richie did an amazingly creative job of highlighting this aspect of Holmes’ character in the film.  He did so by giving us a window into the detectives’ mind during moments of physical combat.  The audience was allowed to hear the thoughts of Holmes as he anticipated the physical assaults of his opponents.  Richie not only brought a nuanced aspect of Holmes’ intelligence to the screen, but also emphasized the stewardship of the mind as of primary value in the midst of physical confrontation.

One early example of wisdom is King Solomon.  His initial request for wisdom over riches was profound – profound enough that he received both – but his first recorded judgment with the mothers bickering over a child proved him to be wise beyond his years.  There is also the testimony of the Queen of Sheba [1 Kings 10] who affirmed his intellect in comparison to the rest of the rulers.

However, whether it be King Solomon or Sherlock Holmes, the mind, being such an aspect of interest, comes from the fact that we are created in the image of an intelligent Being.  The shorter catechism gives us a concise definition of this intelligent Being stating, God is a spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.  God’s supreme wisdom is of supreme importance when considering him.

For starters, it is his wisdom that is the foundation of all creation.  It was his idea to create, his words that caused creation, and his plan that redeems his creation, which all find their origin in the mind of God.  Contemplating the mind of God would have no end, and we certainly won’t scratch the surface in this blog post. Suffice it to say, we are created in the image of an infinitely intelligent God, and that image, though marred by sin, still causes an infatuation with the mind.

To me, this is what makes the character of Sherlock Holmes so timeless.  At Doyle’s creation of this character, it was the mind of detective Sherlock Holmes that drew audiences to him.  But it is the mind of God, impressed on men, that causes Doyle, Richie, Holmes, and us, to stand in awe of the original Creator of creativity.

Wednesday’s Weekend Poll

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows will be released this Friday. In this sequel it is said that Holmes and Watson have met their match. Their foe, Professor Moriarty, possesses a new level of evil and lack of conscience, which makes him their fiercest enemy. Therefore, we would like to know if you think that evil gives one an advantage. Please leave your comments below and check out our two-part post on Holmes tomorrow and Friday.