Review: Sherlock Holmes (Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre)

Review by Daz Gale

⭐️⭐️ 

There are certain events in the calendar that help the average theatre lover keep track of the time. One such example is the opening of Regent's Park Open Air Theatre for their annual summer season - and nothing screams British summer like a particularly cold and rainy night. “Stiff upper lip” is a British institution, and so is Sherlock Holmes, so it felt fitting that this year's season kicked off with a world premiere play about that iconic detective, taking place mere minutes away from his Baker Street residence (an easy commute for him), but would Sherlock Holmes kick off the season with a bang and offer a masterstroke of deduction, or would it be a complete misfire?

You would have had to have been living under a rock for the last century to have never heard of Sherlock Holmes before. Created by Arthur Conan Doyle, the character first appeared in A Study in Scarlet in 1887 and has featured in countless stories and adaptations in the years since, with the success of the recent Sherlock series and Sherlock Holmes movies ensuring there is still an appetite for new and fresh takes on the character. That is where we find this world premiere set in London in 1890 as Sherlock Holmes tries to solve the mystery of an unknown woman and a mysterious jewel that have arrived at 221b Baker Street. What follows is an adventure full of twists and turns as Holmes and Dr Watson attempt to reveal the mastermind behind a deadly conspiracy.

If that sounds exciting, that is because it is based on the official synopsis of this production. When it comes to the actual story, I can’t be sure if that is what actually happened, such is the confusing and convoluted nature of it. Fresh takes on a character as iconic as Sherlock Holmes can be refreshing and further the legacy, as the BBC series proved, but this take well and truly misses the mark. This Sherlock is wildly unrecognisable from the distinct character traits that have made him the most famous detective of all time. Gone is his genius, replaced with a bumbling mess that suggests he is always on the brink of a breakdown. Though his iconic look is not a necessity, this iteration of Sherlock bears no resemblance at all, with the only connection being the name.

The question is - should that matter? Some Sherlock Holmes purists may not be a fan of these choices, but that shouldn’t influence the enjoyment of the story. Let’s assume you have gone into this play completely unaware of the lore of these characters and the world they reside in, and take it purely at face value for the standalone story it is. I’m sorry to say, it doesn’t fare much better that way.

Joel Horwood’s writing is frustratingly inconsistent, attempting to cram in multiple ideas in a story that doesn’t segue together at all. The tone jumps all over the place, and the dialogue proves inadequate. At times, it resembles a particularly underwritten pantomime, at others a school play by small children, yet there is a generous helping of four-letter words, all feeling at odds with the story. It begs the question, who is this iteration for? Is it for Sherlock purists? For the casual theatregoer who can take or leave the story? For children, or for adults? The answer seems to be all of them and none of them at the same time. This Sherlock seemingly doesn’t have the first clue about who he is, and the play resembles that, drastically lacking in its own identity. 

References to the local area, such as Baker Street, the zoo and Regent’s Park itself, give a meta feel to the production, but it overdoes these references, with its knowing wink becoming a bit too self-referential and losing the escapism. Though the use of Watson writing the Sherlock stories is true to the lore, it is played out far too heavy-handedly and could have benefited from a touch more subtlety. In regard to Horwood’s dialogue, lines such as “Well, if it isn’t tweedle-dum and tweedle-d*ckhead” set the tone perfectly. It just isn’t good enough, and it is a shock to see lines that amateurish on a stage as prestigious as this.

As a narrative, it just doesn’t make any sense, almost resembling a variety show. Bringing Sherlock to the theatre gives the production the opportunity to play up on this, but it all feels very random and pointless. The production is bookended by movement to something that sounds eerily like the Stranger Things theme, while a musical number pops up in the second act for some unknown reason. The moment this production well and truly jumps the shark is when Sherlock attends “the big show” so the audience can be treated to a group of circus performers. Now, don’t get me wrong - watching someone breathe fire is impressive, of course, but what business does it have here? Does it move the plot along, or is the entire thought process “oh that will give the audience something exciting to look at” - therein lies the problem with Sherlock Holmes. If this production doesn’t have the first clue in how to tell its story, how is the audience supposed to know how to receive it?

This confusion extends to the occasionally baffling direction. A bare-bones set makes the stage at Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre feel smaller than it ever has before, and it felt in desperate need of fleshing out. Leaving so much open space made the production vulnerable and completely exposed. Surely a key element to any telling of Sherlock is mystery and surprise - the nature of this staging eliminates that completely. Watching a character walk on from the side or a prop be moved into place rendered the drawing of the makeshift curtain completely pointless, always frustrating in its execution. The most perplexing decision was the prominence of the stage crew, always very clearly and deliberately in shot as they climbed the set to lower a rope or move any pieces along. It demonstrated a fundamental lack of understanding of how to successfully tell this story - a show such as Sherlock Holmes demands the pure escapism audiences relish in, and to constantly see the crew like this continually reminded us we were watching a show, and there was no point investing in the stakes.

While Sean Holmes has proven himself in his direction in the past, this was far from his finest hour, with each choice more confusing than the last. Cast members running around in circles and the clumsy execution of the dialogue gave this a pedestrian feel that acted as a disservice to the talents of all involved. Though a key sequence near the play’s climax is undoubtedly thrilling, it is also hugely flawed, requiring the entire audience to turn around to watch events taking place behind them. Unavoidable, perhaps, if they wanted this to land with the impact it did, but still an example of the questionable direction on display here.

Though the costume design wasn’t poor by any means, it felt completely at odds with the characters here, especially when it comes to the titular Sherlock, who paraded around in a fetching blue number that more resembled something he’d wear to bed. A bold choice, perhaps, but far from a successful one. As always, lighting at any Open Air Theatre is a highlight of any production there, and this was no exception, with Ryan Day’s gorgeous lighting coming into its own in the second act, particularly in one beautifully lit sequence.

Though the cast in Sherlock Holmes are an undoubtedly talented group, their talents seem to have been squandered here through questionable choices and direction that sabotaged their potential. Joshua James lacks the necessary gravitas as Sherlock Holmes, seemingly channelling a young Rik Mayall in his performance. For one reason or another, his performance disappointingly fades into the background, allowing others the opportunity to eclipse him. Jyuddah Jaymes fares slightly better as Watson - though he still has to battle some questionable choices, he at least manages to make a more solid performance out of it. Other characters come and go with a series of inconsistent accents and some unconvincing performances, but there seems to be a common thread in them being the victims of poor advice, never allowing their talents to shine through.

My trips to Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre are among my most anticipated of the year. There is always such a lovely atmosphere there in one of the most welcoming spaces in London, which ensures a great time even when the weather misbehaves. There is an almost romantic quality to sitting in Regent’s Park to watch theatre and immersing yourself in the magic it can bring. That is why this production proved so disappointing for me personally (though take this with a pinch of salt as theatre is, of course, subjective, and I'm aware of many others who loved this production far more than I did). Sherlock Holmes failed to live up to the high standard that Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre pride themselves on or make use of the aspects of the setting that make any performance so magical. The problem lies with conflicting visions, with different creatives having too many ideas that didn’t come together, leading to a muddled affair. I was hoping for something substantial with this take on Sherlock, but unfortunately, the resulting production is all a bit too elementary.

Sherlock Holmes plays at Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre until 6th June. Tickets from https://allthatdazzles.londontheatredirect.com/play/sherlock-holmes-london-tickets

Photos by Tristram Kenton