I’d be really keen on this (as a non-canonical lark) if not for the consistent rumors that Holmes and Watson are presented as a gay couple. Is that just hype?
I’m pretty sure I saw a quote from Downey where he said they were presenting the two as gay. But I was never sure if he was just trying to raise a stink, to get attention for the movie.
It would make all the difference if he was just talking about subtext. Jeremy Brett’s Holmes is portrayed as ambiguously gay, and I think the actor has stated that he played him as a closeted homosexual, but that doesn’t detract from the portrayal.
I just watched the trailer. They made Holmes out to be very hetero and Jude Law played Watson less gay than Doyle. At least in the trailer. It looks like this is “Sherlock Holmes” in name only. He smokes a pipe, and at some point he probably dons a deerstalker cap, and I assume he still lives on Baker Street, but aside from that there seems to be absolutely nothing in common with Doyle’s characters.
Oh, I forgot to mention… I hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate CGI. I have no desire to pay $10 to watch a video game.
I also forgot to mention that I’ll probably see this because Mrs. Firefly is a big Robert Downey fan. At least this should be better than the George Clooney cr*p she drags me to.
*please note the editing of key vowels in certain Firefly words is to avoid contributing to the delinquincy of Tracy’s sons, who sometimes look over mom’s shoulder when she’s at the monitor.
I hate CGI too. A couple of weeks ago I watched the 1956 version of “The Ten Commandments” on DVD and marveled at the Exodus scene. Those were real people Cecil B. DeMille was directing, tens of thousands of people with all sorts of animals including grumpy camels. I know some of the other effects look cheesy but I can overlook that because DeMille was like a great general directing his troops.
For me, CGI is a mixed bag. Sometimes its good (LORD OF THE RINGS, NARNIA) and can do things that are difficult to do live action but it can become tedious when put in the hands of lazy directors (Lucas, Zemeckis, Cameron, all three of whom USED to be good).
I think DeMille could have used CGI very well with some of the scenes.
It is not good or bad, but, instead, it can be used poorly or very well.
Better a gay Watson than the ineffective bungler he’s usually portrayed as being. I’m a big fan of sidekicks in general, often finding them more interesting than the hero. I therefore hate to see them maligned, especially Watson, who in the stories was invaluable to Holmes.
Ok, maybe I’m a prude but what the heck, here goes: last night I was enjoying my umpteenth viewing of “Rudolph The Red Nosed Reindeer” and saw an ad for the aforementioned Sherlock Holmes movie. I know there had to be some parents watching Rudolph with their kids and in the middle comes this ad for a PG-13 movie. The ad showed a nekkid woman’s back in a very suggestive way and had a lot of violence.
Granted, looks like an interesting movie but is it necessary to show an ad like this during the airing of Rudolph? Couldn’t they have waited for the next program, the Emmy Nominations concert or whatever the heck the crap was? Which, by the way had the Black Eyed Peas in it. You guys are right, they are everywhere. I’m afraid of Fergie.
That drives me nuts! I can see doing ads like that, but why, oh why do they do that during kids’ shows. Also, does it kind-of scare you what kids’ shows are on at 11:00pm, midnight, 2:00 in the morning?! I’ll have insomnia and flip through the channels and Full House is on at 3:00am.?! Whose kids are up watching that?
This is pretty much the only movie I’m looking forward to seeing this month. Well, I might also see The Lovely Bones if the reviews are good enough, but that’s about it.
And no, I don’t think Holmes and Watson will be gay, but there will probably be some amusing jokes in that direction.
The Holmes Ultimatum? It looks like it’ll have a steampunk aesthetic. I hope it’s good — otherwise I’m stuck with a time traveling Malcolm McDowell in 1970s San Francisco as the coolest steam punk movie.
My main objection to this is that Downey said (Probably joking) that Holmes and Watson are a gay couple this time out, and that Holmes is portrayed as a man of action in this, which is totally at odds with his traditional personality.
Floyd: Steampunk doesn’t mean “Set in the 19th Century” per se…it refers to an alternate timeline in which 19th century technology continued to advance, whereas more modern stuff didn’t develop – Babbage-related computers rather than digital ones, coal-powered aircraft rather than gasoline ones, zeppelens rather than airliners, etc.
I know that, but I bet this will have gadgets advanced more than they were based on 19th century — so far as it’s not ridiculous like Wild Wild West. The aesthetic of steam punk while not being actual steam punk.
“The ‘Wild, Wild, West’ movie had such promise, and it was completely squandered. A pox on all involved.”
(Following response from Jon Peters edited by Kit Johnson)
But didn’t you see the GIANT F–KIN’ SPIDER?!?!
THAT WAS F–KIN’ AWESOME! NOW IMAGINE IF I COULD HAVE PUT THAT GIANT F–KIN’ SPIDER IN SUPERMAN RETURNS! THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN F–KIN’ AWESOME!
-Jon Peters, producer of WILD, WILD WEST and SUPERMAN RETURNS http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgYhLIThTvk
How are “babbage-related computers” not digital? Babbage used the logic of George Boole, which was binary, in his mechanical designs. “Digital” does not mean “electronic,” nor “transistor.” It refers to a system of logic. The logic gates can be controlled by electricity, steam, hand cranks, water… The power source has nothing to do with whether it is digital, or not. A digital apparatus has discrete, finite components, an analog apparatus has an infinite amount of states. A sundial is an analog time device. A record album with its one, continuous groove is an analog sound reproduction device. An analytical engine designed by Charles Babbage to do mathematics by incrementing teeth on gears is a digital calculating device.
Rufus: So you’re saying than an old-fashioned hand-crank adding machine, or a wind-up alarm clock are digital? I’m saying Babbage-derived computers are *not* digital because they are analog, and I’m using the accepted definitions of both those terms. Man, you’re in a pissy mood today, aren’t you?
Speaking of the movie that shall not be named, Bob Conrad actually had a pretty substantial role in the movie, playing a sheriff that helps out the ersatz Jim and Artie. When he found out that Loveless wasn’t played by a midget, however, he flew in to a rage and stormed off the set claiming it was an insult to the memory of Michael Dunn, who, I guess, he was best buddies with. He’s also very active in midget rights, or he was, anyway. Anyhow, he left them in the lurch with no real warning, and they were already filming. There wasn’t any point in recasting, since the whole part revolved around Bob’s history and personality, so they ended up just basically ditching nearly the entire sequence, including (I’m told) some fairly extensive western town sets they’d built.
It’s a new day and nobody’s pissed in my cornflakes yet, so I’m downright convivial, but what definitions are you taking about? I don’t know what a “Babbage-derived computer” is, but I know about the analytical engines designed and built by Charles Babbage. What about them is analog? And yes, I am saying hand-cranked adding machines are digital. They tally one gear-tooth at a time. It seems like you are defining digital as electronic and analog as mechanical. That’s not right. I’m not looking them up, but in layperson’s terms analog means continuous and digital means discrete increments. A slide rule is analog, the slide can stop anywhere along the ruler. A geared adding machine is digital, the teeth only mesh at specific intervals. A quartz watch is digital, quartz vibrates at a certain, exact interval. Most spring-wound watches are analog, their movements are continuous.
I’d be really keen on this (as a non-canonical lark) if not for the consistent rumors that Holmes and Watson are presented as a gay couple. Is that just hype?
What?! Please tell me you’re joking! Why did I even get out of bed this morning?
I’m pretty sure I saw a quote from Downey where he said they were presenting the two as gay. But I was never sure if he was just trying to raise a stink, to get attention for the movie.
It would make all the difference if he was just talking about subtext. Jeremy Brett’s Holmes is portrayed as ambiguously gay, and I think the actor has stated that he played him as a closeted homosexual, but that doesn’t detract from the portrayal.
I just watched the trailer. They made Holmes out to be very hetero and Jude Law played Watson less gay than Doyle. At least in the trailer. It looks like this is “Sherlock Holmes” in name only. He smokes a pipe, and at some point he probably dons a deerstalker cap, and I assume he still lives on Baker Street, but aside from that there seems to be absolutely nothing in common with Doyle’s characters.
Oh, I forgot to mention… I hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate CGI. I have no desire to pay $10 to watch a video game.
I also forgot to mention that I’ll probably see this because Mrs. Firefly is a big Robert Downey fan. At least this should be better than the George Clooney cr*p she drags me to.
*please note the editing of key vowels in certain Firefly words is to avoid contributing to the delinquincy of Tracy’s sons, who sometimes look over mom’s shoulder when she’s at the monitor.
I hate CGI too. A couple of weeks ago I watched the 1956 version of “The Ten Commandments” on DVD and marveled at the Exodus scene. Those were real people Cecil B. DeMille was directing, tens of thousands of people with all sorts of animals including grumpy camels. I know some of the other effects look cheesy but I can overlook that because DeMille was like a great general directing his troops.
College Widow,
For me, CGI is a mixed bag. Sometimes its good (LORD OF THE RINGS, NARNIA) and can do things that are difficult to do live action but it can become tedious when put in the hands of lazy directors (Lucas, Zemeckis, Cameron, all three of whom USED to be good).
I think DeMille could have used CGI very well with some of the scenes.
It is not good or bad, but, instead, it can be used poorly or very well.
Better a gay Watson than the ineffective bungler he’s usually portrayed as being. I’m a big fan of sidekicks in general, often finding them more interesting than the hero. I therefore hate to see them maligned, especially Watson, who in the stories was invaluable to Holmes.
The Nigel Bruce syndrome, yes, very bad. But I’d rather watch Nigel bumble than watch Holmes & Watson kiss. Call me a homophobe, but… ick.
The stories are great! A great, great series. One of the best.
Lars, yes, I too would prefer watching Nigel Bruce bumble rather than french-kiss Basil Rathbone.
Ok, maybe I’m a prude but what the heck, here goes: last night I was enjoying my umpteenth viewing of “Rudolph The Red Nosed Reindeer” and saw an ad for the aforementioned Sherlock Holmes movie. I know there had to be some parents watching Rudolph with their kids and in the middle comes this ad for a PG-13 movie. The ad showed a nekkid woman’s back in a very suggestive way and had a lot of violence.
Granted, looks like an interesting movie but is it necessary to show an ad like this during the airing of Rudolph? Couldn’t they have waited for the next program, the Emmy Nominations concert or whatever the heck the crap was? Which, by the way had the Black Eyed Peas in it. You guys are right, they are everywhere. I’m afraid of Fergie.
The College Widow,
That drives me nuts! I can see doing ads like that, but why, oh why do they do that during kids’ shows. Also, does it kind-of scare you what kids’ shows are on at 11:00pm, midnight, 2:00 in the morning?! I’ll have insomnia and flip through the channels and Full House is on at 3:00am.?! Whose kids are up watching that?
Rufus – Full House is about 3 single men living with 3 young girls. It’s on at 3am for the pedophile demographic. Aren’t you sorry you asked now?
Ewwwwww! Very, very sorry.
This is pretty much the only movie I’m looking forward to seeing this month. Well, I might also see The Lovely Bones if the reviews are good enough, but that’s about it.
And no, I don’t think Holmes and Watson will be gay, but there will probably be some amusing jokes in that direction.
Seeing this next Wednesday and will spill beans as permitted…
Spill! Dish! We love spoilers here!
So it’s a violent action-adventure movie with slapstick/sexual humor? Could be a great movie, but is it Sherlock Holmes?
Probably not. If I see it (still up in the air on it) I’ll approach it as a Victorian actioner with no relation to the Conan Doyle stories.
The Holmes Ultimatum? It looks like it’ll have a steampunk aesthetic. I hope it’s good — otherwise I’m stuck with a time traveling Malcolm McDowell in 1970s San Francisco as the coolest steam punk movie.
My main objection to this is that Downey said (Probably joking) that Holmes and Watson are a gay couple this time out, and that Holmes is portrayed as a man of action in this, which is totally at odds with his traditional personality.
Floyd: Steampunk doesn’t mean “Set in the 19th Century” per se…it refers to an alternate timeline in which 19th century technology continued to advance, whereas more modern stuff didn’t develop – Babbage-related computers rather than digital ones, coal-powered aircraft rather than gasoline ones, zeppelens rather than airliners, etc.
I know that, but I bet this will have gadgets advanced more than they were based on 19th century — so far as it’s not ridiculous like Wild Wild West. The aesthetic of steam punk while not being actual steam punk.
The “Wild, Wild, West” movie had such promise, and it was completely squandered. A pox on all involved.
Rufus,
“The ‘Wild, Wild, West’ movie had such promise, and it was completely squandered. A pox on all involved.”
(Following response from Jon Peters edited by Kit Johnson)
But didn’t you see the GIANT F–KIN’ SPIDER?!?!
THAT WAS F–KIN’ AWESOME! NOW IMAGINE IF I COULD HAVE PUT THAT GIANT F–KIN’ SPIDER IN SUPERMAN RETURNS! THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN F–KIN’ AWESOME!
-Jon Peters, producer of WILD, WILD WEST and SUPERMAN RETURNS http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgYhLIThTvk
After listening to Kevin Smith’s story, you realized how truly good of a job Bryan Singer did.
How are “babbage-related computers” not digital? Babbage used the logic of George Boole, which was binary, in his mechanical designs. “Digital” does not mean “electronic,” nor “transistor.” It refers to a system of logic. The logic gates can be controlled by electricity, steam, hand cranks, water… The power source has nothing to do with whether it is digital, or not. A digital apparatus has discrete, finite components, an analog apparatus has an infinite amount of states. A sundial is an analog time device. A record album with its one, continuous groove is an analog sound reproduction device. An analytical engine designed by Charles Babbage to do mathematics by incrementing teeth on gears is a digital calculating device.
Floyd, speak not of the Movie-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named with the initials WWW that took my favorite show as a kid and thoroughly raped it.
Sorry JS… I thoroughly sympathize and agree.
Rufus: So you’re saying than an old-fashioned hand-crank adding machine, or a wind-up alarm clock are digital? I’m saying Babbage-derived computers are *not* digital because they are analog, and I’m using the accepted definitions of both those terms. Man, you’re in a pissy mood today, aren’t you?
Speaking of the movie that shall not be named, Bob Conrad actually had a pretty substantial role in the movie, playing a sheriff that helps out the ersatz Jim and Artie. When he found out that Loveless wasn’t played by a midget, however, he flew in to a rage and stormed off the set claiming it was an insult to the memory of Michael Dunn, who, I guess, he was best buddies with. He’s also very active in midget rights, or he was, anyway. Anyhow, he left them in the lurch with no real warning, and they were already filming. There wasn’t any point in recasting, since the whole part revolved around Bob’s history and personality, so they ended up just basically ditching nearly the entire sequence, including (I’m told) some fairly extensive western town sets they’d built.
To which I say: Good for Bob!
Republibot 3.0,
It’s a new day and nobody’s pissed in my cornflakes yet, so I’m downright convivial, but what definitions are you taking about? I don’t know what a “Babbage-derived computer” is, but I know about the analytical engines designed and built by Charles Babbage. What about them is analog? And yes, I am saying hand-cranked adding machines are digital. They tally one gear-tooth at a time. It seems like you are defining digital as electronic and analog as mechanical. That’s not right. I’m not looking them up, but in layperson’s terms analog means continuous and digital means discrete increments. A slide rule is analog, the slide can stop anywhere along the ruler. A geared adding machine is digital, the teeth only mesh at specific intervals. A quartz watch is digital, quartz vibrates at a certain, exact interval. Most spring-wound watches are analog, their movements are continuous.
PS – there was supposed to be a after the “Pissy Mood” comment. Sorry.
…:)?