Sherlock Holmes Sequel Threatened by "Homoerotic Subtext"

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Sherlock Holmes Sequel Threatened by "Homoerotic Subtext"

image

The estate of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle has threatened to kill any potential sequel to the hit film Sherlock Holmes if it suggests that the famous detective and his associate Dr. Watson were secretly gay lovers.

In a recent appearance on The Late Show With David Letterman, Sherlock Holmes star Robert Downey Jr. suggested there might be a "homoerotic subtext" in the relationship between Holmes and Watson, played in the movie by Jude Law. He also asked the audience whether or not Holmes was in fact "a very butch homosexual."

The comments may have been nothing more than the sort of light-hearted back-and-forth commonplace on late-night talk shows, but they still didn't go over well with Andrea Plunket, who controls the U.S. copyrights on Sir Arthur's famous detective tales. She took Downey's words seriously enough that she issued a warning to director Guy Ritchie: If he pursues that angle in the next film, she'll pull the rights to the property.

"I hope this is just an example of Mr. Downey's black sense of humor," she said. "It would be drastic, but I would withdraw permission for more films to be made if they feel that is a theme they wish to bring out in the future. I am not hostile to homosexuals, but I am to anyone who is not true to the spirit of the books."

Source: IMDB

Permalink

Seriously? I'm a huge fan of the books and won't see this movie because it looks to treat them pretty lightly. So it's okay that Downey can make Holmes a brawler when in canon he was a passifist, but inserting gay subtext (some of which might already be there if you talk to some literary scholars) crosses the line?

*facepalm*

And I agree. I don't want homosexual Holmes and Watsons

That seems a little extreme don't you think?

If they did suddenly make him homosexual, it would destroy Holmes...
The great detective (Not Great Mouse Detective, that was Basil) would be ridiculed...

However, I wouldn't argue if they decided to introduce Arsene Lupin into a film with Holmes :3

There goes my script.

Wait... doesn't Holmes have a girlfriend in that movie?

Yeah, that totally makes him gay

I am personally disapointed that I will be forced to continue to search the internet to find Holmes on Watson action, rather than being able to watch it on a cinema screen. *Sigh*

Still, doesn't look like they treated the books with a great deal of respect anyway, so I guess we now know where the line is drawn.

"I'm all for Downey to kick back and have a laugh and joke about it but as soon as it goes against MY interpretation of the character and MY view on how the characters would act if they were that little bit different then I'm afraid I'll have to pull the plug on the project because I have to have my own way."

Did anyone else read it as that or is it just me being in a bit of a bad mood?

TheNamlessGuy:
Wait... doesn't Holmes have a girlfriend in that movie?

Yeah, that totally makes him gay

I'm not too sure. Maybe he's bi.

So, some homophobe won't allow a sequel to a good movie be made? If the homosexuality is true I'll just cover my eyes and ears until it's over.

high_castle:
Seriously? I'm a huge fan of the books and won't see this movie because it looks to treat them pretty lightly.

It's actually not that bad. There's a lot more fighting than one would normally expect from Holmes, but beyond that it's a nice pulp-style interpretation of the character and setting. It was far more faithful than I had imagined it would be from the trailers.

TheNamlessGuy:
Wait... doesn't Holmes have a girlfriend in that movie?

Yeah, that totally makes him gay

remember kids having sex with girls make you gay

Watson is getting married and Holmes is too in love with himself for there to be another man in his life. I am not saying that there will not be homoerotic fanfic about the movie (because there always will be) but I get as much a gay vibe from the Sherlock Holmes movie as I do from the Lethal Weapon.

Jaranja:
I'm not too sure. Maybe he's bi.

Hmm... we have to look into this

*divulges from secret Holmes lair years later*
I HAVE EVIDENCE THAT HOLMES IS GAY

See here? It says says

"I like you Watson", he said with a smile on his face

Andrea Plunket:
black sense of humor

Really? I always thought of homosexuality as quite light hearted and, well, camp. Like Graham Norton or Barrowman.(shakes fist)

he was joking you freakin idiot

qbanknight:
he was joking you freakin idiot

Not him, the quote's from Andrea plunket.

qbanknight:
he was joking you freakin idiot

...are you talking to this 'Andrea Plunket' or Ol' Andy?

I agree with her. It's just not necessary. There is no need to tack on a gay relationship onto an adaptation of a very old, very established story.

It's not like gays are under-represented in society these days, and we have to turn very old characters into possible homosexuals just because we can.

However, I'm sure it's just silly speculation :)

TheNamlessGuy:

qbanknight:
he was joking you freakin idiot

...are you talking to this 'Andrea Plunket' or Ol' Andy?

Ol' Andy? Some joke that went over my head mayhaps?

*Edit* Well Now I Look Like a Right Idiot

"A movie? about two guys? GAY!!!!"

Why is it that Hollywood only listens to the stupid people on the internet?

Dumbfish1:
Ol' Andy? Some joke that went over my head mayhaps?

Andy Chalk, the guy who wrote the article

EDIT:

AkJay:
"A movie? about two guys? GAY!!!!"

Why is it that Hollywood only listens to the stupid people on the internet?

To be fair, the game industry does the same thing

*cough*Army of Two*cough*

TheNamlessGuy:

Jaranja:
I'm not too sure. Maybe he's bi.

Hmm... we have to look into this

*divulges from secret Holmes lair years later*
I HAVE EVIDENCE THAT HOLMES IS GAY

See here? It says says

"I like you Watson", he said with a smile on his face

Holy Crap, he must be immensely gay!

I like you nameless guy ;).

Jaranja:
Holy Crap, he must be immensely gay!

I like you nameless guy ;).

Well, umm... thank you
I'll go stand over here now

I jest, I jest...

Well besides the fact that he isn't gay as he has a female love interest in the movie why would it matter if he was gay. I wouldn't find him as a less appealing character if he was. His and Watson's relation in the movie is like J.D. and Turk's it isn't gay love it's guy love.

The way he has protrayed htough in the movie I wouldn't be surprised if they did him as bi but not gay.

I saw the movie and was very satisfied with it's treatment of the characters. Holmes and Watson were at their best and I will recommend any Sherlock Holmes fan to see it. The completely no-homo bromance between them was a great source of witty banter and did not suggest any sort of sexual tension to me. Any talk that indicates otherwise is a troll at best. At least they're not nearly as big a target for these jokes as say, Frodo and Sam.

[quote="Andy Chalk" post="7.165705.4372369
"I hope this is just an example of Mr. Downey's black sense of humor," she said. "It would be drastic, but I would withdraw permission for more films to be made if they feel that is a theme they wish to bring out in the future. I am not hostile to homosexuals, but I am to anyone who is not true to the spirit of the books."
[/quote]

How the fuck is suggesting somebody might be homosexual black humor? Black humor is, and this is a crude example, laughing at somebody being run over by a bus. A good example of black humor is Sweeny Todd. Downey's comments were more lighthearted than anything.

But, I guess I can't expect too much from somebody who seems like an obsessive fangirl who may just be a little more homophobic than she thinks she is.

Wow. Screw this lady. For her info Sir Arthur Conan Doyle got sick of writing Holmes and only did it for the money. He even killed him and brought him back to life in the next book so her point of "true to the spirit of the books" is moot. The spirit of the books was MONEY and not literary integrity. So she needs to just get over it.

Andy Chalk:

"I hope this is just an example of Mr. Downey's black sense of humor," she said.

No, that would be Tropic Thunder.

Wow, that bitch needs to chill. Actually, some of the best parts of the movie were the two of them quarreling like a married couple, but it doesn't have to be perceived as gay, it's just funny. I'd like to perceive it that way, just because I'm a yaoi fangirl, but I do hope they keep that banter between them.

high_castle:
Seriously? I'm a huge fan of the books and won't see this movie because it looks to treat them pretty lightly. So it's okay that Downey can make Holmes a brawler when in canon he was a passifist, but inserting gay subtext (some of which might already be there if you talk to some literary scholars) crosses the line?

*facepalm*

Idk, I think I understand where she's coming from. For example, I don't think the Tolkien organization would have let New Line make Lord of the Rings if they switched the races (the orcs were good and the humans bad). Even if their characters were the same, I think they'd pull it.

And I just want to say that quoting literary scholars is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. Scholars like to make up bull shit to sound smart. EVEN IF they're bull shit is true, it's still bull shit.

Random argument man:
That seems a little extreme don't you think?

Just a little...I mean I have read the books and that context is even seen in those >< All about perspective.

Glademaster:
Well besides the fact that he isn't gay as he has a female love interest in the movie why would it matter if he was gay. I wouldn't find him as a less appealing character if he was. His and Watson's relation in the movie is like J.D. and Turk's it isn't gay love it's guy love.

But yeah, This is stupid. It's not necessary to make them homosexual, and it's not necessary to be in an outrage over them being homosexual.

Sevre90210:
There goes my script.

Bwahaha! That made me laugh.

On Topic: I agree with her. It would be a complete change of the already fully established character(s).
It's not a slam against homosexuality, it's an attempt to keep things consistent.

This reminds me of an editorial I saw in the Toronto Star (I freaking hate that newspaper) when Lord of the Rings came out, saying how Frodo and Sam were gay, and so was Gandalf. A totally serious editorial. I was utterly outraged.
Not every two guys who are close friends have to be gay. Holmes and Watson certainly aren't gay, and to make them that way is just pandering needlessly to a minor demographic at the expense of any artistic dignity. It'd be reducing a modern-recreation of a classic character into a fan-service that crept from the dark corners of the internet.
No thanks.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here