Sherlock Holmes Sequel Threatened by "Homoerotic Subtext"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Most of the additions to the film were actually hinted at over the books.high_castle said:
Given Watson got married and Holmes had a "thing" for Irene Adler, it would be reasonably inconsistent with characteristics already put down.
And as BT says, two guys who work together really DON'T have to be homosexual. There's been a recent outbreak, via the slash fiction, of making everyone bi-curious. (Harry and Ron, Sam Tyler and Gene Hunt...without forgetting the classic Kirk/Spock/Bones setups)
Given the sheer size of the Doyle estate, keeping a lid on director interpretation can only be a good thing. Otherwise we'll have Michael Bay, Uwe Boll or George Lucas telling us that Holmes is an alien next.
Oh, and while we're at it, was Abraham Lincoln gay? [http://gayheroes.com/abe.htm]
/dons_flame_shield.
Ah, really? A pacifist? The same "pacifist" who fought Moriarty at Reichenback falls and used his knowledge of bartitsu to fling his arch-enemy to his death? ([link]http://www.historytoday.com/MainArticle.aspx?m=33348[/link])high_castle said:
I agree, this Holmes is far more pugnacious than most of Doyle's stories would suggest. But suggesting it's entirely without precedent simply isn't accurate.
I'm glad Ms. Plunket at least has enough perspective to realize Downey's comments are mostly joking. I'm also sure that there are those who will identify a "homosexual subtext" in the recent movie, whether one was intended or not. There are certainly moments that one could point to (note the statues on Watson's windowsill when we first visit his office), but I'd hardly suggest it's a major theme, even if it is intended; besides, both heroes clearly have heterosexual love interests. Hopefully Plunket doesn't have an "itchy trigger finger" with regard to the issue.
I'm a little surprised anyone gets a say in the matter nearly a hundred years after the last story was published, honestly.
I was surprised that Sherlock Holmes wasn't public domain. So, I looked it up...Andy Chalk said:
Apparently copyright has expired everywhere but in the US; and, in America, the only thing copyright still applies to is The Case Book of Sherlock Holmes, Arthur Conan Doyle's last Holmes collection (and one that's widely regarded as kinda shabby). Plunket is the widow of a television producer who bought the rights in the '80s.
How that one book allows her to wield control over all depictions of Holmes is beyond me, since I am not a lawyer.
But, there you go.
(Sources: Wikipedia and this Sherlock Holmes copyright page [http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/sherlock-holmes/the-sherlock-holmes-copyright.html].)
-- Alex
Oh you have a gay cousin, why did you not say that? This clearly makes you an expert on this and completely unable to be homophobic even without realising it. It much the same way as I can not be racist because some of my best friends are black.Hardcore_gamer said:
Hollywood is capable of making gay characters without making it the central aspect of the character and the film is already out so what ever homosexual subtext is there is already on film. Really if Holmes was was gay it would be a minor change, certainly less of a change than coming back to life. Other that possibly wanting to sleep with Watson it would change nothing about the character, the books are after all rather lacking in love interests.
While I can admire her wish to stick to the Cannon as much as she can while still keeping the audience interested...I think she got a little bit trigger happy on this one. Downey was just joking, as he often does. I mean, she could have addressed the director in a quite fashion that didn't involve a press release if she really wasn't certain that Downey was joking. She really didn't need to make as big of a deal of this as she did.
If only we could make a time traveling idea with Lupin III.Greyfox105 said:
OT: Um...I think that all of the meathead, moronic, small brained movie goers that populate the world these days would be severely angered over any gay subtext placed in their ACTION MOVIE WITH THE EXPLOSIONS THAT GO BOOM!
The point I'm trying to make is, it'd be like Marvel saying "If in Iron Man 3 Tony Stark becomes a nazi who wants to kill all Jews, we are taking the rights of this film away from you." I seriously don't think anyone has to "worry" about any homo-erotic subtext appearing in Holmes 2.
Given slates back catalog of puerile trash, I'd be more likely to trust Maddox than them. Last thing I heard about them were when they were slagging off D&D for being Gygax's lovechild, one week after the old guy passed on.Hope Chest said:
I'd instead point you to Scifiwire [http://scifiwire.com/2009/12/does-the-new-sherlock-hol.php] which explains some of the implicit quotes that the information was drawn from.
One of the problems with Holmes, like Robin Hood, is that there is so much canon that is nonsensical or wrong that people who've only skimmed the books still think he wears a deerstalker, carries a pipe and says "Elementary" a lot.
Because we wouldn't be talking about "fancies men" gay, we'd be talking HOLLYWOOD DAHLINK G.A.Y.Siris said:
Which very few gay people are, and would have got Holmes hung at the time.
This really isn't an issue in my opinion.
What the director DOESN'T do will be well taken care of by every slash and fanfic writer out there, drooling at a fresh opportunity to put the two of them in bed.
What the director DOESN'T do will be well taken care of by every slash and fanfic writer out there, drooling at a fresh opportunity to put the two of them in bed.
Speaking as a straight Englishman, gay Holmes would RULE.
Obviously, a movie about Holmes going cruising would be out of character. But given Holmes' misogyny and attraction (and Conan Doyle's attraction) to the unusual, some kind of dark, brooding, probably self-hating gay performance would be both excellent and appropriate. Who the hell is this random Yank to make these decisions?
Oh, and while we're here:
Obviously, a movie about Holmes going cruising would be out of character. But given Holmes' misogyny and attraction (and Conan Doyle's attraction) to the unusual, some kind of dark, brooding, probably self-hating gay performance would be both excellent and appropriate. Who the hell is this random Yank to make these decisions?
Oh, and while we're here:
Did we even see the same film? Karate Kids 2 and 3 sucked. Karate Kid was an top-notch story of an estranged teen finding himself while at the same time giving a troubled WW2 veteran a chance to grow into the father he should always have been. Like Rambo, it was a case of a genuinely good first movie followed by a lot of trash.