New Sherlock Holmes Movie

[Mr Peter Harrow, Esq]

I Certainly agree, it is definitely an old fashioned relationship, and one rarely if seen or understood in this day and age, one beyond mere friendship.

[Jonny B. Goode]

It comes, I think, from having a very close working relationship "in the trenches" (of course, a term that came out of WWI), and having to rely on each other for your very life. I think the last time we really saw it was the whole "band of brothers" mentality in WWII. I know my dad was still very close to a lot of his "buddies" from Pearl Harbor when he was in his 60s. Not hardly gay in any way, but he would gladly take up arms and fight alongside any of them at any time.

[Rockula]

Ah, gone are the days where two masculine men would meet, be initially suspicious of each other, fight with fists across the rolling Moors and then form a lifetime bond over a jug of ale.

I think I've just described a John Wayne movie.

[Lady Corsair]

Incidentally there was a small article in yesterday's Metro that there will be a sequel and that there may be a 'homo-erotic' slant to Holmes and Watson's relationship.

Why must every film have homosexuality forced into it? It may titillate some, but I find it annoying to be have it constantly pushed on me in Every. Single. Movie. I. See, whether it's warranted or not, whether it helps the story or even makes sense or not. (Wouldn't be a bit surprised if they stuck some subtext into the Wolfman film.)

Some movies, I expect it, it makes sense and it's appropriate. (LOTR, for example. The book read that way. And 300.) But every movie? It's getting a bit old and wearying.  "Oh hey we have two male leads, let's make them gay!"  I never saw any homoerotic themes in any of the Sherlock Holmes books I read; I don't see the need to stick it in.

I'm not homophobic, I'm homoenoughalreadyforcrissakes.

You can spin LOTR and 300 to be a bit homoerotic, but I seriously doubt they were filmed with that slant in mind (I suppose one would have to ask the director, and if an interviewer has done so and someone has that quote, I will revoke my statement). 

I think we have a completely different view of what's "gay" these days, even as compared with the 80s (He-Man cartoon, anyone?).  We've just become hyper sensitive to anything that could possibly be viewed as "gay." Our whole culture is homophobic.

[Flynn MacCallister]

Incidentally there was a small article in yesterday's Metro that there will be a sequel and that there may be a 'homo-erotic' slant to Holmes and Watson's relationship.

Why must every film have homosexuality forced into it? It may titillate some, but I find it annoying to be have it constantly pushed on me in Every. Single. Movie. I. See, whether it's warranted or not, whether it helps the story or even makes sense or not. (Wouldn't be a bit surprised if they stuck some subtext into the Wolfman film.)

Some movies, I expect it, it makes sense and it's appropriate. (LOTR, for example. The book read that way. And 300.) But every movie? It's getting a bit old and wearying.  "Oh hey we have two male leads, let's make them gay!"  I never saw any homoerotic themes in any of the Sherlock Holmes books I read; I don't see the need to stick it in.

I'm not homophobic, I'm homoenoughalreadyforcrissakes.

You can spin LOTR and 300 to be a bit homoerotic, but I seriously doubt they were filmed with that slant in mind (I suppose one would have to ask the director, and if an interviewer has done so and someone has that quote, I will revoke my statement). 

I think we have a completely different view of what's "gay" these days, even as compared with the 80s (He-Man cartoon, anyone?).  We've just become hyper sensitive to anything that could possibly be viewed as "gay." Our whole culture is homophobic.

He-Man? But he's just a stereotypical barbarian! O.o Stop ruining my childhood! >.<

[Vagabond GentleMan]

I think a lot of it isn't movies actually having any homoerotic material, it's some homophobe real quick 'crying wolf'.

Interview with the Vampire:  Homoerotic.

300:  Raging Testosterone, queen-humping ubermen running around shouting about Freedom.  Typical American film. 

If having fit men walking around scantily-clad is homoerotic, I'm homoerotic on the way to the shower every day.

[Rockula]

I think a lot of it isn't movies actually having any homoerotic material, it's some homophobe real quick 'crying wolf'.

Interview with the Vampire:  Homoerotic.

300:  Raging Testosterone, queen-humping ubermen running around shouting about Freedom.  Typical American film. 

If having fit men walking around scantily-clad is homoerotic, I'm homoerotic on the way to the shower every day.

I'm straight. But you look 'hot' to me.

[TribalWren]

I think a lot of it isn't movies actually having any homoerotic material, it's some homophobe real quick 'crying wolf'.

Interview with the Vampire:  Homoerotic.

300:  Raging Testosterone, queen-humping ubermen running around shouting about Freedom.  Typical American film. 

If having fit men walking around scantily-clad is homoerotic, I'm homoerotic on the way to the shower every day.

I'm straight. But you look 'hot' to me.

Woah man!! What just happened there.......?  *giggle*

[phuphuphnik]

I'm homoerotic on the way to the shower every day.

I have a new favourite quote.

[Aviatrix Abernathy]

I think a lot of it isn't movies actually having any homoerotic material, it's some homophobe real quick 'crying wolf'.

Interview with the Vampire:  Homoerotic.

300:  Raging Testosterone, queen-humping ubermen running around shouting about Freedom.  Typical American film. 

If having fit men walking around scantily-clad is homoerotic, I'm homoerotic on the way to the shower every day.

^^ Hilarious
      300 should be homoerotic. The spartans were in fact sleeping with one another. It just wasn't taboo at the time. The frank Miller Version was a typical American movie (not that I didn't enjoy watching ripped, bloody men run around in there manties) so they were more queen humping as you said.
    I didn't think that Sherlock was homoerotic. It was, as others have said, just a different kind of relationship than what a lot of men have now a days

[Jonny B. Goode]

I didn't think it was homoerotic either. But people were saying they were acting that way behind the scenes and had plans to add a homoerotic theme to the next movie.

[Mr Peter Harrow, Esq]

I believe a lot of confusion has arisen as regards a large number of takes where Guy Ritchie asked the leads  to be less gay, it is obvious they had a whale of a time during the filming, but the finished version does accurately represent their relationship.

[JosephR]

I didn't think it was homoerotic either. But people were saying they were acting that way behind the scenes and had plans to add a homoerotic theme to the next movie.

They've already portrayed the fastidious Holmes as an unshaven slob, so they might as well make him gay. 

A couple of years ago Daniel Craig mentioned he wanted a James Bond gay scene.  I believe Mr. Goode has a valid point.

[Captain Brandsson]

Wouldn’t exactly be the first time such a relationship has been suggested…  Not that is a reason to go there; it’s just “old news” on the Holmes apocrypha front.

[Flynn MacCallister]

I didn't think it was homoerotic either. But people were saying they were acting that way behind the scenes and had plans to add a homoerotic theme to the next movie.

They've already portrayed the fastidious Holmes as an unshaven slob, so they might as well make him gay. 

A couple of years ago Daniel Craig mentioned he wanted a James Bond gay scene.  I believe Mr. Goode has a valid point.

Erm, the unshaven bit was valid, but I don't know about the "fastidious" bit. Wasn't that brief rant by Watson in the film about personal hygiene, mess, shooting inside, and so on straight out of one of the stories?

[JosephR]

Erm, the unshaven bit was valid, but I don't know about the "fastidious" bit. Wasn't that brief rant by Watson in the film about personal hygiene, mess, shooting inside, and so on straight out of one of the stories?

The indoor shooting (a very patriotic "VR" in bullet-pocks) definitely.  Also, tidiness in 221B occasionally left much to be desired.  However, regarding his personal hygiene, Watson had this to say about Holmes after he (Holmes) had been camping on the moor for many days: "In his tweed suit and cloth cap he looked like any other tourist upon the moor, and he had contrived, with his cat-like love of personal cleanliness which was one of his characteristics, that his chin should be as smooth and his linen as perfect as if he were in Baker Street."  The Hound of the Baskervilles, p. 181.

[Flynn MacCallister]

I'm sure, though, that in another (earlier?) story they had a fight about that.

(Serial fiction. It doesn't need to be consistent.)

[Captain Brandsson]

Off a case, Holmes did unravel, somewhat.  That's when his addiction got bad.  But even then, he wasn't full-on slob.

On a case, he was as sharp as a razor about everything, himself included.

He did have a very unconventional system for taking care of some of his things (tobacco in a slipper comes to mind) that some readers have seen as "cluttered".  I, however, see it as eccentric order.

[Captain Brandsson]

Serial fiction. It doesn't need to be consistent.

Except that, in this case, it very often was...  Sir Arthur was a bit of a perferctionist, himself.

[Dr. Babinski, Ds.D]

Serial fiction. It doesn't need to be consistent.

Except that, in this case, it very often was...  Sir Arthur was a bit of a perferctionist, himself.

My god, how I love it when someone misspells perfectionist. I enjoy it most when it's on a resume, and being used to describe the applicant.

Just teasing.

Dr. B

[quantumcat]

I daresay Holmes had a penchant for staying "in character."

He might need to get a bit gamey or rumpled to fit a persona or pose as a bit of a fop with an unfortunately aggressive cologne,outre' mannerisms and a much too faddish fashion sense.

I think that plain cleanliness and order would appeal to Holmes out of comfort and efficiency.

(If it  met with general social approval,he would neither object or be gratified.)

A hunter often attempts to erase any trace of himself - including personal scent.

Such self-effacing avoids spooking the prey-as does "hiding in plain sight."

Human and non-human prey will "get the wind up" if they sense that someone ought to be there but there's no
evidence of who or where they are.

It would make sense for Holmes to take pains to avoid tipping his hand by allowing any spoor or effluvia to hint to a woodland creature,an escaped convict or a gigantic hound that he was observing them.

I think Holmes respected himself (and a few others) in addition to being very pragmatic.

He would be as neat as he needed or wanted to be with little concern for social conventions.

He would know exactly what colors,materials and styles went with every period and lifestyle but they would have no intrinsic significance for his own life.

[OhtheIrony]

    Oh my, Jude law in a suit and top-hat! *faints*

    ~A.Werther

[Captain Brandsson]

My god, how I love it when someone misspells perfectionist. I enjoy it most when it's on a resume, and being used to describe the applicant.

Just teasing.

Well, I never claimed that I was a perfectionist.

[Captain Brandsson]

I daresay Holmes had a penchant for staying "in character."

He might need to get a bit gamey or rumpled to fit a persona or pose as a bit of a fop with an unfortunately aggressive cologne,outre' mannerisms and a much too faddish fashion sense.

I think that plain cleanliness and order would appeal to Holmes out of comfort and efficiency.

(If it  met with general social approval,he would neither object or be gratified.)

A hunter often attempts to erase any trace of himself - including personal scent.

Such self-effacing avoids spooking the prey-as does "hiding in plain sight."

Human and non-human prey will "get the wind up" if they sense that someone ought to be there but there's no
evidence of who or where they are.

It would make sense for Holmes to take pains to avoid tipping his hand by allowing any spoor or effluvia to hint to a woodland creature,an escaped convict or a gigantic hound that he was observing them.

I think Holmes respected himself (and a few others) in addition to being very pragmatic.

He would be as neat as he needed or wanted to be with little concern for social conventions.

He would know exactly what colors,materials and styles went with every period and lifestyle but they would have no intrinsic significance for his own life.

All well and good, but that is not how Sir Arthur wrote him. 
The movie changed a few things.  Big deal.  Movies do that.  You are still allowed to like it, if you wish.
No need to rationalize it to line it up with canon…  Or if you want to do so for your own amusement you might explain how he lost height.

[JosephR]

Well, I never claimed that I was a perfectionist.

Or even a perferctionist...