Critics’ reviews

Sherlock (2010)

8 reviews from 8 publications. Critics’ score 82: 7 positive, 1 mixed, 0 negative.

Back to our review of Sherlock

82
Positive
7
Mixed
1
Negative
0

The reviews lean firmly positive, and they agree on where the credit belongs. Nearly every critic singles out the pairing of Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, whose Holmes and Watson are described as the reason the series works. Steven Moffat’s script draws praise for wit and efficiency, and Paul McGuigan’s direction of the opening episode is repeatedly named, particularly the filmic camerawork and the on-screen text that flashes clues as Holmes reads a room. The move to the present day is judged a success rather than a gimmick.

The spread is narrow, with one mixed review and none negative. The Guardian is the outlier, finding the opener’s plot muddled and the whole thing slick but too clean, and less frightening than the stories it draws on. Smaller doubts appear elsewhere: that this Holmes is easier to read than earlier portrayals, and that the second episode is a step down from the first.

The Hollywood Reporter
21 October 2010 · David Rooney
85*

The review commends the inventive contemporary update, with particular praise for the chemistry between Cumberbatch and Freeman and the direction of the pilot episode by Paul McGuigan, calling it superior sleuth TV.

Read the full review →
The Telegraph
23 July 2010 · Serena Davies
85*

The critic finds the series electrifying thanks to Benedict Cumberbatch's charismatic, sociopathic Holmes and praises the witty script, fast pace, and successful transposition to the present day. A minor caveat is that Holmes feels too legible compared to classic portrayals.

Read the full review →
Variety
11 November 2010 · Brian Lowry
80*

The critic praises the clever modern reboot of Sherlock Holmes, highlighting the strong performances of Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman and the witty adaptation that captures the essence of the original with flair.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
26 July 2010 · Sam Wollaston
65*

The critic praises the clever modern update, strong performances by Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, and the spot-on Holmes-Watson relationship. The plot of the opener is criticised as muddled and less scary than the originals, making the series feel slick but overly clean.

Read the full review →
Paste
16 January 2012 · Shane Ryan
95*

The critic declares the BBC series the best show on television for its seamless blend of entertainment, intelligence, humor, and narrative. They single out the direction by Paul McGuigan, innovative visuals and text effects, and the pitch-perfect interplay between Cumberbatch and Freeman.

Read the full review →
Collider
24 November 2010 · Laura Kelley
90*

The review calls the modern BBC adaptation incredibly good and suspenseful, with standout chemistry between Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman. It singles out the strong performances, supporting cast, and the thrilling third episode with its Moriarty reveal as highlights of the first series.

Read the full review →
Den of Geek
25 July 2010 · Simon Brew
85*

The critic praises the fresh modern-day update of Sherlock Holmes, highlighting Steven Moffat’s witty and efficient script that introduces characters and plot threads while delivering engaging entertainment. McGuigan’s direction stands out for its unfussy, filmic camerawork, effective on-screen text, and steady handling of key scenes.

Read the full review →
NME
5 August 2010 · NME
80*

The critic praises Steven Moffat's work on the series for delivering addictive narrative puzzles and intellectual thrills that stand out from typical TV. They single out the visual clue-flashing technique and clever mysteries for making viewers active participants, while noting the second episode feels slightly less exhilarating.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate