MovieChat Forums > Mr. Holmes (2015) Discussion > Did Holmes actually remember Umezaki Sen...

Did Holmes actually remember Umezaki Senior, or was he just being nice?

posted 9 years ago by cathyweeks
42 replies | jump to latest

So, Holmes tells someone (Roger's mother, I think) that he wishes he'd lied to Mrs. Kelmot, or said SOMETHING to her to take the sting from her feelings, that it would have been better to have been dishonest, than to have left her feeling she had no option but to kill herself.

Immediately after that, he writes a letter to the younger Mr. Umezaki, telling him that he'd finally remembered his father. It immediately goes to flashback, as Holmes and some British official intervew Umezaki senior about letting him work for the British government. Then, it cuts to Holmes' letter, and you see him flesh out the details of the situation by grabbing information off the titles of some of his books.

On the one hand, it seems like he was lying, to make Umezaki junior feel better about his father abandoning him. It DID lead the viewer to that conclusion, given that it was right after he'd told someone that it's better to lie. On the other hand, because we see Umezaki senior ourselves in the flashback, it FELT like a real memory, merely padded a bit, to make for a better story.

Which is it? A wholly fabricated story, or a partially fabricated one?

[–] zandert33 8 years ago

I personally hate it when a movie spells things out in great details, when it shows flashbacks of things that just happened a few minutes earlier. I hate it when the editor of a film has to spoon feed things to the audience, and I can't make sense out of why they feel the need to do this.

Then I read a thread like this and I understand why. You can make things completely clear, clearly show something, and then explain it and people will still not understand it.

Holmes made the whole thing up. They show him looking at a random book on the shelf to help to create the story, he then tells the boy he "wrote a fiction". What else was needed to understand this?

[–] Mad Dog McLagan 8 years ago

Well I was a bit confused, but that's because the film broke with the conventions it had been using. Every previous occasion we got a flashback it was completely literal and to be taken as a given fact, which was handy for the audience since the storytelling had not been linear.

I assumed he was looking at the books because he could not remember the actual details, you know, since he'd been portrayed as unable to remember details all the way through the movie.

I had also been waiting for a revelation involving Umeyaki scr, after the scene where Holmes said "I should never have taken Umeyaki's case!" I assumed that was a faint recollection of his involvement, rather than a moment of senility with no significance. So I had placed undue importance on that moment and was actively waiting for the pay-off.

I also didn't draw the connection between the 'work of fiction' and the letter, since the film takes place over quite a period of time I wasn't thinking in terms of it necessarily being a day later or the same day. But I had been confused since Holmes was specific about saying his recount WASN'T fiction throughout.

So, yes, I missed out on a few hints but as somebody who frequently complains about films and TV shows hitting you over the head with things I hope I can be forgiven. I was also on Facebook chat while watching the film...

I suspect the problem is that you have too many paperclips up your nose

[–] ExTechOp (2756) 2 years ago

Mad Dog McLagan's right about the Umezaki story being the only "false flashback."

It might've been more clear had they just shown Holmes writing the letter with his voice-over narration.

However, besides the "Malay Straits" being obviously inspired by the book title, there was a moment during the flashback where Holmes pauses to invent details. INSIDE the flashback, Umezaki senior and Mycroft look back and forth at each other while Holmes himself freezes.

It's a subtle meta-gag, in which Holmes' flashback-avatar essentially freezes until his player's next move.

[–] yusef-ghanima 8 years ago

it's symbolic for the crappy william james pragmatism, that religion is fiction but it brings comfort to man. which is totally crap, because it will never bring peace to holmes if he didn't really believe.

[–] debabrata4747 8 years ago

He was giving Umezaki some closure,he did not remember and was making things up which can be seen when he took the name 'Malay Straits' from the title of the book on his writing desk, After remembering what happened with Ann he decided to give Umezaki the peace by telling him what happened to his father.

~Hasta la vista..Baby

[–] ntsci 8 years ago

he was being nice... he said he created a fiction.

--------------------------
RIGOLETTO: I'm denied that common human right, to weep.

[–] evi-2 7 years ago

The film shows Holmes looking at a book with "Malay" in its title before writing that the father had served "From Malay...to..." I took this to indicate that he was making up the story about meeting the father.