I've been a big Sherlock Holmes fan as far back as I can remember. A family friend provided me, at a young age, with The Complete Sherlock Holmes with an introduction by Baker Street Irregulars founder Christopher Morley. I read it cover to cover. More recently, I acquired Leslie S. Klinger's superbly annotated version of the complete collection of stories. I'm still periodically making my way through it. I've also watched various film and TV adaptations, including those starring Basil Rathbone, Arthur Wontner, Ronald Howard, and Benedict Cumberbatch as Holmes, as well as Steven Spielberg's Young Sherlock Holmes.
But this expectation of a purely intellectual character is based, I think, not on readings of Conan Doyle's work, but on viewings of other interpretations. Self-proclaimed purists who glorify the adaptations with Rathbone or Jeremy Brett and decry the misinterpretation of Robert Downey Jr. may be surprised to learn of how often Conan Doyle (or Watson, if you prefer) presents Holmes as a boxer, in good physical shape, and physically energized by his passion for solving mysteries.
Inspired after watching the new film, I read The Adventure of the Solitary Cyclist earlier today. In the story, Sherlock gets into a brawl at a pub while investigating in pursuit of the truth. He emerges with a black eye, but as the victor. Later, when it seems that he is too late to save his client, he sprints, and Watson comments that Holmes keeps himself in good physical shape more so than Watson can in his "sedentary life." This shade of Holmes emerges in more than just this story. I leave it to Mr. Klinger to explain.
"Holmes's collegiate boxing is mentioned in The Gloria Scott. In The Yellow Face, The Five Orange Pips, and A Study in Scarlet, Watson comments on his prowess, and Holmes himself recounts using his skill in encounters with a street tough (The Final Problem), and Joseph Harrison (The Naval Treaty). In The Sign of the Four, McMurdo, a professional boxer, compliments Holmes on his boxing talents and Holmes reminds him that they fought against each other in a benefit match."
It turns out that Holmes is quite the pugilist and leads an active life. Disguises and skill in physical confrontation are as likely to come in handy when fighting crime as deductive reasoning. Downey Jr.'s Holmes, then, is as true, if not more so, to the original as Rathbone's (Conan Doyle's Holmes never fought Nazis). The slow-action scenes underscore Holmes's cerebral approach to fighting.
That said, I enjoy Rathbone's Holmes. Filming in the early 1940's, Rathbone et al. did what they could for the Allies' morale, and that specific series of films is well-acted and produced. Ritchie's best feature in the Holmes films, meanwhile, is not how he highlights Holmes's physical strength and fighting abilities, but how he brings to life the setting of late Victorian London (and England and Europe) more so than any other Holmes film or TV adaptation that I have seen.
Ritchie's first Holmes film ends with the eponymous detective remarking on the potential transformation that radio communication could have on society. In the second, Holmes similarly considers the imminent danger of a Europe susceptible to all-out war, something realized only 23 years after the narrative takes place.
In this way, Ritchie suggests that the most brilliant criminal and crime fighter of their time (Moriarty and Holmes) were not simply so insightful and deductive that they could understand the present and the past better than anyone else, but that they could also deduce about the future, thereby emphasizing their mental powers after all.
