From the New York Post (emphasis mine):
Guy Ritchie’s plan to put a gay spin on the relationship of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson in his new movie about the detective and his sidekick could backfire.
Robert Downey Jr, who plays Holmes, has revealed the crimebuster will sleep with and have sweaty grappling scenes with Watson, played by Jude Law, in “Sherlock Holmes,” due out Christmas Day.
“We’re two men who happen to be roommates, wrestle a lot and share a bed. It’s bad-ass,” Downey told Britain’s News of the World. Added much-in-the-news Law: “Guy wanted to make this about the relationship between Watson and Holmes. They’re both mean and complicated.”
But Michael Medved, a former Post movie critic, says Downey and Law must be joking. “There’s not a seething, bubbling hunger to see straight stars impersonating homosexuals,” Medved told us. “I think they’re just trying to generate controversy . . . They know that making Holmes and Watson homosexual will take away two-thirds of their box office. Who is going to want to see Downey Jr. and Law make out? I don’t think it would be appealing to women. Straight men don’t want to see it.
…
*raises hand*
This man has clearly never talked to a straight woman who wasn’t a fundamentalist or an uber-conservative. Are you shitting me? When I saw the trailer for Sherlock Holmes I flailed with girlish glee, which honestly doesn’t happen too often. But a Sherlock Holmes movie? With Robert Downey Jr.? And Jude Law? Dressed in period clothing? Bickering like an old married couple with homoerotic undertones? Fuck yeah, eye candy. I’ll happily shell out eight bucks for that.
If you could assure me Downey Jr. and Jude Law would make out, first I would cry tears of joy, then I would probably go back multiple times. As would a very large number of women (proof? go read the comments on this LJ thread). We’re the people who saw Brokeback Mountain for teh gay (actually didn’t like it, but that’s because I went for the gay, and I usually hate those kinds of movies). We’re the people who shat bricks of pure bliss when Harry Potter Book 6 essentially made Harry/Draco canon. We’re 95% of the people who read and write slash (homosexual) fanfiction – the straight gals, not the gay guys. We are more than enough to make up for the homophobes that would be scared away.
I highly doubt the movie will have anything more than homoerotic subtext, but that’s fine by me. Imagining what’s really happening it half the fun anyway. And if it wasn’t nearly 3 am, I’d have some insightful comment as to why straight women love homoeroticism, and how this mirrors men’s stereotypical love of lesbians. But it is 3 am, so I’ll just leave it at this:
Bow chicka wow wow
Oh wow, Robert Downey Jr just keeps getting typecast as the Drugged and Drunken, doesn't he?
OK, as a straight guy, I just have to say…
if Michael Medved claims not to find RDJ hot, he's just in denial.
Seconded.
Oh, yes. I saw the trailer about a month ago, and I sure know where I'll be on January 7. And 8, 9 and 10. And if the movie isn't crap, 11 and 12 as well. You know, just to pick up on the plot or whatever.
Squeeeeee
I'll definitely be seeing it, and knowing it will spite Medved will make it all the sweeter
Maybe someone ought to tell Michael Medved that he can fantasize about a threesome with Downey Jr. and Law, and still identify as straight afterwards. It's not even difficult, I just tried.
Hell, you don't have to be a straight woman to be interested in that. I have twice as much desire to see this, now.
*giggles*
And I'm with you. I kind of hated Brokeback Mountain. It was just so depressing. And bunches of other reasons.
Maxwell, thank you. I too as a straight man can acknowledge when another man is hot. I thought RDJ looked great in Ironman and I can't wait for the sequel. Jude Law is just attractive period. I have talked to guys that have said they just can't think of other guys as attractive.
I will go watch this. I like most of Guy Ritchie's work and RDJ and Jude Law are both phenomenal actors. What does the two characters being teh gay have to do with anything?
Bah.. I'll totally watch RDJ in anything… he's pure talent… and let me think here "The Wonder Boys"? This isn't the first time he's insinuated he is gay in a film.
Oh boy, I'm glad I'm not the only person who didn't like Brokeback Mountain. I didn't feel it was a very good story, who cares what sort of couple it's supposed to be about. The reviewer in this case likely doesn't have his finger on the pulse of society.
Or he's absolutely right. Well, I still intend to see the film. Teh ghey won't scare me away…I've read Sherlock Holmes. There just might be something to it……
I'm a gay guy and didn't really like Brokeback Mountain. I felt it was mostly a giant boring western film. Though, I must admit, the line "I wish I could quit you," and then the ending, made me b'awww.
But Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law? Fucking yes!
See, the problem with Brokeback Mountain being such a landmark film (and it was), is that when a straight guy like me says he didn't care for it, he immediately fears that he'll get hit upon for being a homophobe. Anyway. I don't think it applies here.
Medved is also a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute so I wouldn't listen to anything he says.
Do you know what they discover at the Discovery Institute?
Nothing.
BAHAHAHA, I crack myself up.
But, Veritas, don't you know? It's not about what they discover, it's about what *you* discover: Christ.
P.S. I move to rename it the Discovery Institution.
I second this motion. Can we move to a general vote by the assembly?
You may enjoy Wilde (1997), featuring Stephen Fry in the title role, lured to licentiousness by Jude Law.
As for my perhaps inappropriate Pastoral pot-stirring last night on pharyngula, I think you may have demonstrated the truth of this aphorism from Oscar: "Always forgive your enemies–nothing annoys them so much."
Mmmm, I loved Wilde!
Yeah, and try not to do the whole Pastoral pot-stirring thing quite as much ;P Ready for this to be over with
The more of the exchange I read, across all three blogs, the more disturbing I found it. You've comported yourself quite appropriately throughout; there's really nothing left to say beyond turning up the volume on the "ignore" dial. I've gotten a twitter account just to be able to follow the zerg, which I trust will be entertainingly non-eventful.
You're braver than I am. I haven't yet been motivated to get a Twitter account.
My mom, sister and I were *just* talking about this last night. The posters for the film are so freaking hot that we don't know what to do with ourselves, and now the promise of "grappling"? And I generally don't find Jude Law attractive (Chris still can't comprehend that I found Jason Schwartzman WAY hotter than Jude Law when we were watching "I Heart Huckabees" years ago). RDJ has always been unbelievably good looking, but I want to know what drugs he was taking all those years so that I can start. Anyhow, I already know what we'll be doing on Christmas Day this year…
Veritas: has that ever actually happened? I mean, I was bored shitless during The Piano, but nobody ever accused me of hating New Zealand.
Wilde was very, very hot. Oh, dear. On the one hand, you have Stephen Fry. On the other, well, let's talk about Stephen Fry some more.
Fraser: Yeah, it's happened, boss. At least twice. Of course, I used to hang out with some pretty interesting people.
Hell, I'm not attracted to either Jude Law or Robert Downey Jr., and I still want to see them tear each other's clothes off.
Two guys for straight women = what two girls is to straight men. What's better than one hot guy with a big, hard cock? Two!
Hmmm – Jude Law looks better as a Watson, than I'd expected.
H/D is canon now? I guess that's what I get for only reading book one. And to think my best ex-friend is a big shipper.
Wow…so many BBM haters. Too bad, I saw it twice in the theater and thought it was fr*%king amazing, esp. that "kiss" when they first see one another again…fan me, please!!! Anyway, I'm all for Watson and Holmes having a not-so-homo subtext, too. RDJ is superb in everything he does, it seems.
I loved Brokeback Mountain, but then again I'm a big fan of the director, Ang Lee, and his style of story telling.
Veritas: wow. So I have a theory, which is this: the US, like any nation, is tribal. The difference is that tribalism is taken incredibly seriously over there — levels which Europeans rarely see except in football team supporters. Members of a tribe can identify so strongly that they take immediate umbrage to any criticism, perceived or actual, of anything related to their tribe, which really stunts the discourse if you ask me.
Of course, there's nothing worse than some wanky foreigner telling you how your country works. So I'll shut up now, suffice to say that Ang Lee made a movie much earlier in his career called The Wedding Banquet which touched on some similar themes but was utterly charming.
Uh, rarely see anymore. Obviously, people in Europe have historically been quite passionate about certain tribes.
Well, first of all, Fraser, je suis Canadien. There are some huge political correctness crowds over here. I agree that we need to be careful with some things, but there are just so many people who are afraid of homophobia. I fight homophobia, I know people who have been the victims of homophobic violence..I just didn't like Brokeback. I know at least two people who treated me literally like a criminal 'cause of it. Anyway, not important, not to me.
I think Brokeback is a particularly American film, raising questions about what it means to be a man, masculinity, issues that many Americans, men and women alike, are especially close-minded about. America is a great country–I'm an American and feel fortunate to live here–but it's also populated by many arrogant, self-important, hypocritical (especially regarding the political correctness crap) citizens. I also think everyone is entitled to their opinions about a movie, or any subject, for that matter. If all of us agreed about everything, it'd be a pretty damn boring world. I enjoy reading and listening to thoughts and opinions other than my own; noone knows everything, and it's an opportunity to learn. My dad is from Italy, and he's far more open to new information than any of my friends' parents.
Yeah, I don't disagree with you there. I feel like it is a landmark film, but I just didn't appreciate it as much as I thought I would going in. Perhaps, a few years removed, it deserves a second glance, and maybe I will obtain myself a viewing of it eventually.
I think expectations about the movie were heightened to a ridiculous degree, and affected the perception of the film by some viewers. I always prefer to know little about a film going in, because no matter how hard a person tries, it's nearly impossible not to be affected somewhat by pre-viewing info. Men I have known for years, who I thought would go see the film, were afraid to go see it, which startled me–what were they so afraid of?! That's only one of the reasons I felt it was a landmark film, the effect just the IDEA of such a movie had on these guys. All the more reason for them to see it, I felt, but I never insisted they go, nor judged them for not going to see it. It just taught me something about American men.
Sure, that makes sense. I didn't see it in theatres, but that was because I was a poor university student at the time. I did see it once it was out on dvd. I can't say I was ever afraid of the movie, and I guess that is an interesting thought to hear. I suppose such men were concerned that being exposed to homosexuality in a movie (when not two hot chicks hooking up) would be equivalent to being gay themselves, and slotting into the definition of "other".
I just didn't find myself being absorbed by the characters too much. To be fair, I watched it with a room full of girls, which may be the same as trying to watch The Notebook with a room full of girls. Pointless because of all the crying and "Ohmygodsosad" and such. Oops.
A room full of sobbing females isn't the ideal way to watch any film. I suppose in the theatre folks are more subdued. Seeing a film with such incredible vistas on the big screen is a better experience all around. I saw it twice in theatres; the second time, I noticed things, not just scenic, but emotional. Maybe someday they'll re-release it and people who didn't get to see it in a theatre might give it another try. BTW, The Notebook didn't elicit a single tear from my eyes…
You're right about the men and their fears, which sort of validates the premise that you can't tell a book by its cover. Masculine men gay?! Cowboys?! Ranchhands?! How dare those filmmakers!!!" I found those fellas' reluctance both amusing and horrifying.
undeniable fact: dude + dude = hots. i am reluctant as a scientist to speak in absolutes, but i am adament as a girl with eyes to assert what is true. -allie