Who the hell submits this crap? - Sherlock holmes "Plot Holes"
I have serious problems with your list of "plot holes" for the Sherlock Holmes films. Mainly they are 100% tripe.
Q:Minor Plot hole: Sherlock Holmes meets his love interest Irene Adler in her apartment at the beginning of the movie. He is tricked by drinking a drug from what appears to be a sealed bottle of wine. This situation would be rather hard to solve. However, we are meant to believe that Sherlock Holmes who is in the presence of the only person who outwitted him twice before would trust a cup of wine before she takes a sip herself.
A:Why would Sherlock have any reason to suspect that he was going to be drugged. He is smart but he´s not all knowing. This is just stupid.
Q:Major Plot hole: Lord Blackwood fakes his hanging execution at the beginning of the movie. So obviously, Dr. Watson who is in charge of confirming his death will take his pulse instead of checking if the rope really broke his neck.
A:This doesn´t even make sense so I will not dignify it with a response.
Q: Major Plot hole: When Lord Coward brings Sherlock Holmes in his office in order to kill him, he decides to turn his back on Sherlock, stares at the wall for at least 15 seconds, and is then surprised when Sherlock engineered an escape plan while he was busy looking retarded.
A: Fail to see how this is a plot hole at all, never mind a "major" one. So every time a character does something foolish in a movie this is a plot hole? do you proof read the crap you put on this site?
Q: Major Plot hole: When Sherlock blocks the chimney in Lord Coward's office in order to hide in the smoke, he decides to continue talking to Lord Coward who could have simply spotted the origin of the sound and shoot him. However, Sherlock seems to have the power of a Dolby surround sound system in which he seems to be able to speak in any corner of the room on command.
A: Throwing your voice is a relatively easy vocal technique that Sherlock could easily have picked up. If you read the books you will understand that Holmes has studied almost everything that could help in dealing with crimes, and knowledge of throwing your voice could prove useful in solving crimes. If witnesses reported hearing someone speak from across the road or a different room etc he would understand that this would not neccesarily be factually accurate.
Q: Unaddressed Issue: Near the end of the film, Holmes reveals that Blackwood killed Standish by spraying him with an "odorless tasteless flammable liquid" that Standish mistook for rain. What would Blackwood have done if Standish turned against him and it wasn't raining outside? Holmes never suggests a back up plan therefore it's safe to assume it doesn't exist since Holmes is the world's greatest detective and obviously he would've found out what it was.
A: in the context of the movie why in gods name would Holmes explain a back up plan? we´re watching a film not a criminal prosecution. This is the way he was killed so this is what Holmes solved. I have no idea which intellectually inept individual submitted this to you but i suggest you proof-read what you put on your website as it seriously damages the integrity when you host abysmal drivel such as this.
Re: Who the hell submits this crap? - Sherlock holmes "Plot Holes"
Hanging breaks the neck of the person being hung by the placement of the noose . It would be obvious, especially to a medical doctor, that the person's neck was broken if he checked the body after death. If the neck wasn't broken, then the hanged person would have slowly and painful strangled to death. This would have been very visible to the spectators and could have taken as long 17 minutes ( as some hangings have).