Joe, isn't it =queer= that any portrayal, these days, of manly affection is automatically gay?

You are tho right, Thweetie! I can't IMAGINE where this all comes from!

Kissies!

NYj ;^)

"Asexual" is a possibility, I grant you. Many Victorian confirmed bachelors had an antipathy to women, despite their Monarch on the throne. Some may have carried this to extremes (Jack the Ripper).

Roger Moore's portrayal of Holmes (with Charlotte Rampling as Ireme Adler) was quite interesting since they had a son together.

I firmly believe that the English "public school" system (which is not public at all, really) seems to encourage some measure of "gaiety" in the British upper class. Witness the notorious Cambridge Four spies, at least two of whom were gay and one bi-sexual. BBC did an interesting series on them, I have it on DVD. Somehow, in this version, these traitors are portrayed sympathetically as anti-fascist! I guess if you let enough years go by, and memories fade as contemporaries die off, you can get away with spinning historical facts any way you like. I wonder what they will say about Obama in 60 years?

NYj

"Comrade Obama played a key role in bringing down the American Fascist Imperium. Indeed, without Obama, the rogue Zionist state might still exist as an affront to the New Islamic World Order. But let us pause and remember the martyrs who died in the desperate Jew atomic attack..."

You are tho right, Thweetie! I can't IMAGINE where this all comes from!

Kissies!

NYj ;^)

Aw, you big brute, you!

my thoughts.

1) they decided Holmes was still addicted to something. But not drugs. So they made him a womanizer.

2) Watson is a little more snarky, but still acknowledges that Holmes does have skills.

3) They've put a little more emphasis on the fact that there are a few images from "The Strand" showing Holmes in a boxing pose with his shirt off. Ready to begin the round. So that's staying to canon, even though the actual stories only hinted that he was an amateur boxer.

4) it was mentioned on occasion that he was trained in "Stick Fighting" in Doyle's stories. Though nothing much came of that. Escrima sticks are a step up, but I can handle it.

it has it's plus's and minuses. now if I can just see if it's worth collecting, by seeing the actual movie instead of commenting on the trailer. sadly I have to wait till december

I cast my vote also for Jeremy Brett as the ultimate Holmes on film.

If any of you would like to catch up on them and have a Costco membership, I saw they have all of the Brett episodes and films, with extras, in a massive DVD set for $99.

It looks like Downey as Holmes is competing in some barefisted prize-fighting in the film. This is actually not that far off from the canon, as Holms was not only an expert boxer but a grappler as well, using a "Bartitsu" (which was an English fighter's adaptation of Jiu-Jitsu) hold on Moriarty at the Falls. So by combining a solid striking system with a grappling system, Holmes was an early exponent of the Ultimate Fighting Championship. (Director Guy Ritchie also trains in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, the base system of mixed martial arts).

Quick trivia question: what actor has played Sherlock Holmes, Mycroft Holmes, and Sir Henry Baskerville?

I did notice that Holmes and House are quite similar. So why not Hugh Laurie? He already has the basics down pat. Downey knows about drug abuse and being an arrogant ass. Not saying he couldn't pull it off. He's a great actor. Just saying that is would be nice if the actors signed to portray these characters actually looked like them as much as possible.

Ever notice the address on House's apartment? 221B.

When he was shot by an assailant (Elias Kotteas) at the end of a season, they never identified him by name in the episode but he was listed as "Moriarty" in the credits.

The House/Wilson relationship is also quite close to Holmes/Watson.

it also showed a short Holmes look-a-like when they went to try and find hyde

Ok, Time for me to jump in.



Alan Moore has a series of graphic novels called League of Extraordinary Gentleman. Which uses old 19th century literature characters as if they are part of a shared universe. Not to be mistaken by the travesty of a film that was made using the same name and concept and ironically starring Sean Connery (James Bond). Moore puts forth that Mycroft being smarter avoided the spotlight went undercover in the government to organize secret agents to work for the Empire. Not wanting to use his own name he was just known by his initial "M".

I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this already, so forgive me if it I am repeating anyone, but the House/Holmes connection is actually very strong. Supposedly Doyle based Holmes off of a doctor he knew, I think the doc's name was Dr. Bell, first name began with a "J", can't remember exactly. Anyway, the doctor was so observant and impressed Doyle, that he later partially based Holmes on him. So House is actually one of the closer homages to Holmes.

My issue with this movie is it seems to be action oriented, which may provide for a fun time, but I always thought the best part of Holmes was the cerebral payoff. I mean sure, he could have strongarmed some of the culprits in the stories, but instead he outsmarted them all the way. It sucks that they have to make it sexier/action oriented in order to make a big movie out of him. But I guess it is harder to show someone being super smart in a movie, for instance take Spiderman, in the comics he is a technical genius and invented his web-shooters, in the movie they are part of the mutation.

But I guess it is harder to show someone being super smart in a movie, for instance take Spiderman, in the comics he is a technical genius and invented his web-shooters, in the movie they are part of the mutation.

Actually, I thought it made a lot more sense for Spidey to have the web-shooters as part of the mutation...after all, how many teenage geniuses have an appropriate invention just lying around after being bitten by a radioactive spider?

I'll withhold judgment on the Sherlock Holmes movie until I see it. I know I'd like to see some of the Irene Adler series of books by Carole Nelson Douglas made into movies.

I did notice that Holmes and House are quite similar. So why not Hugh Laurie? He already has the basics down pat.

Hugh Laurie also played Bertram Wooster. That would be funny. Being both Bertie and Sherlock, one of the dimmest bulbs in the closet (but funny) and one of the brightest.

I don't see it.

I see Jeremy Brett as Doyle's Holmes. Robert Downey Jr. can be a once-in-a-great-while Holmes, magical, mystical, with great spectacle. Not really Holmes. He just has the name.