Monday night on “The Late Show With David Letterman,” Robert Downey Jr. Read the full post.
Dec 22
2009
08:01 PM ET
Robert Downey Jr.'s allegedly gay 'Sherlock Holmes.' Seriously?!
- Comments 267
- Add comment
Latest News
- Lifetime eyes Marc Cherry's 'Devious Maids'
- 'Idol': Phillip Phillips has a hit with 'Home'
- 'John Carter' deleted (light-hearted) scene
- 'Mod Fam,' 'Spin City' guys in 'Producers'
- TV finales: Best wedding dress of '12?
- Kristen Stewart, more red carpet style
- 'Glee Project': Look who's mentoring...
- TV Jukebox: Best of spring 2012
Most Commented
Top 5 Most Read
- ‘Game of Thrones’ scoop: Season 3 character list revealed — EXCLUSIVE
- Bodies of Work: 46 Unforgettable Nude Scenes
- ‘Les Miserables’ trailer: Anne Hathaway is the most miserable of them all
- ‘Hatfields and McCoys’ review, night 2: ‘I rue the day I saved your life!’
- TV Season Finale Awards: YOUR 2012 Winners Are...
Well…they are Brittish.
Jeremy Brett played Holmes as weird, disturbed by something, which was wonderful–the best yet, I thought. This seems a natural progression.
Jason – gay is a guy that gets fk’d in the ass by another guy. Pretty clear, eh?
Being gay just like being straight is more complex than who, how or whether you f*ck.
Human sexuality is more complex than a simpleton’s wit or reason.
Wow, the people who are so against it sure do think A LOT about the actual sex act itself. People who don’t have a problem with it not only don’t care, but they also realize that relationships and love are the same, gay or straight, and therefore much complicated than just sex…and have always been, and always will be.
Yeah, and the funny thing is, they’ve done some research, and discovered that the people LEAST likely to be engaging in anal sex are . . . GAY MEN.
Gosh Santiago- You sure are limiting your brain power to run off an AA battery- gay isn’t just sex it’s a social way of life. Some gay men live with each other for life and never have sex.
Except that you’re wrong, Santiago. Clearer now?
The word “gay” should not be used as an insult in any capacity, but that’s now why people are angered by Robert’s statement.
People who are fans of Sherlock Holmes don’t want the dynamic between the two main characters to be completely changed for the film.
If they do that, then it’s not Sherlock Holmes.
Divining fact from fiction is more of an art than a science. Don’t you think?
Based on the advertising, this movie seems to be trying to re-invent Holmes as a kind of Victorian-era action hero.
And if you try to play an action hero in the 21st century as anything OTHER than “wink-winky gay,” you’re going to look like a complete jackass.
gay or not i can’t wait to see this movie!! and hey…there’s subtext in tons of classics.
from imdb
“According to Gore Vidal, as recounted in The Celluloid Closet (1995) one of the script elements he was brought in to re-write was the relationship between Messalah and Ben-Hur. Director William Wyler was concerned that two men who had been close friends as youths would not simply hate one another as a result of disagreeing over politics. Thus, Vidal devised a thinly veiled subtext suggesting the Messalah and Ben-Hur had been lovers as teenagers, and their fighting was a result of Ben-Hur spurning Messalah. Wyler was initially hesitant to implement the subtext, but agreed on the conditions that no direct reference ever be made to the characters’ sexuality in the script, that Vidal personally discuss the idea with Stephen Boyd, and not mention the subtext to Charlton Heston who, Wyler feared, would panic at the idea. After Vidal admitted to adding the homosexual subtext in public, Heston denied the claim, going so far as to suggest Vidal had little input into the final script, and his lack of screen credit was a result of his being fired for trying to add gay innuendo. Vidal rebutted by citing passages from Heston’s 1978 autobiography, where the actor admitted that Vidal had authored much of the final shooting script.”
..Isn’t RDJ famous for dropping these kinds of things? I wouldn’t really take what he says too seriously.
Nonetheless, I already have plans to see the movie Christmas day.
And on a side note: The hype with Avatar needs to be done with. It was a gorgeous film, but it was also amazingly boring.
Did any of these people who are writing these articles watch the interview? Letterman brought it up and made it REALLY awkward. Downey Jr. was simply trying to finish up the horrible interview Letterman was doing.
I am a huge fan of Sherlock Holmes. I’ve read all the stories and actually played Holmes in the past. I’ve always seen Holmes and Watson as a romantic couple and would love it if WB would have the guts to explore that road for the pair. Holmes respected Adler greatly to be sure, but to fall in love with her? I don’t believe it.
My father and I have always enjoyed Doyle’s creation and have enjoyed how the they are portrayed on film. He is refusing to see the film because of this, but I probably will. Depending on how it is, I may be able to change his mind, but yeah WB should worry over this.
A work of fiction endures because it has the magic of imagination. It can change.
Actually, when seeing the trailer before Avatar, my cousin told me, “I’m not going to see this movie now because I heard Sherlock and Watson are gay in it.” Now, granted, that says more about my cousin than anything, but I know he’s not the only close-minded cinephile in the country. I wonder if this (clearly wrong) perception actually will have any kind of effect.
I find it beyond ridiculous that people are actually upset about a film character being gay. WB should be worried? I think the world should worry if we appease this kind of close minded absurdity.
Sounds like a gay agenda leftist movie im not wasting my time with it.
Here’s some facts, people who support gay rights can be left or right wing. I know some leftist who don’t approve of homosexuality and then I know some religious right wing people who support gay rights. Anyone would think there was some rule that said if your right wing you cant support gay rights. Some people simply don’t think before they comment.
I’ve seen the movie. Downey does NOT play Holmes as gay. In fact, he is played as infatuated with, and having (or having had) a sexual relationship with Irene Adler (which is, of course, nonsense).
Frankly, it’s just purely and simply a bad movie, not true to the characters, privileging violence over ratiocination, relying on a ridiculous plot that’s full of holes.
I have to respectfully disagree that RDJ’s Holmes was anything other than fascinated by Irene Adler. He certainly was intrigued by her, but any scene that had to do with her in a sexual sense (Adler dropping her towel in front of him) seemed to make him more nervous than anything. He only ever shows a sort of boyish affection for her, though she is definitely holding a torch for him.
I also believe that the movie, while it did amp up the action (IMO necessary when making a movie from Doyle’s work, which was rather dry), it still held to the original story and the characterizations of Holmes and Watson.
It’s certainly nothing like the earlier films, however.
I’ve read many of the original stories and written a few papers analyzing the characters, so I feel fairly able to have an educated opinion on the books and movies.
Personally, I always thought there was a certain amount of chemistry between Holmes and Watson, whether that was as brothers or lovers I could not say. Though historically Doyle could not have written such a thing into the story blatantly, as deviancy of that kind was considered illegal at the time.
Holmes wasn’t gay in fiction by Doyle.
If jr. wants to be gay or play gay he can watch his own damn movies – I’ll skip this one.