Robert Downey Jr’s Gay Comments May Axe Sherlock 2

Whoa there Downey! Seems your off the cuff style of saying the right thing has got you in a tiny bit of hot water.

His comments in an interview that suggested Sherlock Holmes and Watson “could” be gay has raised an eyebrow of the wrong person. The one person that could stop him from getting to play the character again.

Andrea Plunket, who holds the copyright to the super sleuth in the US, says that if Guy Ritchie and company plan to pursue a homosexual storyline for Holmes and Watson, they can forget about releasing a sequel. “It would be drastic, but I would withdraw permission for more films to be made if they feel that is a theme they wish to bring out in the future,” Plunket was reported as saying in Total Film.

“I am not hostile to homosexuals, but I am to anyone who is not true to the spirit of the books.”

Now Plunket might want to watch that film again. Hell, check out the trailer. I haven’t seen the movie and even in the trailer it seems they have a deep bromance going on, which is teased as them being gay by one of the (hottest) title characters “they have been flirting like this all day”

Plunket is criticizing that she would not allow the film to have a sequel if they persue this gay storyline. Because it is “not true to the spirit of the books”

The biggest criticism of the film leading in was that this was NOT a traditional Sherlock Holmes. He is messy, eccentric borderline crazy and inappropriate. The Sherlock in the books and in every other film rendition of him he has been calm, introspective, wise, and a pure gentleman.

So that he “flirts” with his bestie is just one more thing on a train that is already off the rails.

After confronted on her statement Plunket seems to backpedal saying “I hope this is just an example of Mr. Downey’s black sense of humor”.

I don’t know if this will see a sequel, but if it does it will likely be based on its current success. It would make sense to keep elements that made the first one succeed.

Comment with Facebook

43 thoughts on “Robert Downey Jr’s Gay Comments May Axe Sherlock 2

  1. Holmes & Watson certainly weren’t gay in the books, and personally I got no such impressions from this movie.

    If they do decide to pursue a homosexual storyline I won’t complain–I’ll just choose not to see it. But I’d feel the same way if they tried to give him a new female love interest. It just wouldn’t “feel” like Holmes & Watson to me, and this movie, while enjoyable, was enough of a stretch from what I always imagined them to be. For instance, it always seemed to me that Holmes was more asexual than anything. What does he need romance or sex with *anyone* for? He sees it as completely useless. In *that* way a relationship of any kind would be against the spirit of the books. Calling this woman, while she did totally jump to conclusions, a homophobe or whatever else is just being bitter.

    No, don’t force homosexuality on an existing, *straight* iconic character. Just create an even more awesome gay one.

    All that said, that comment was definitely just Downey’s sense of humor and I don’t think anything will come of it.

  2. Its pretty good, a lot of boring parts tho. I like it when they slow him down to show just exact how he fights, but still it can get boring i fell asleep like three times in the movie. It is reccomended for the older audiences because some of the material can not be understood by the lower age group. I give it a three out of five

  3. Yawn.

    First of all, let’s get one thing out of the way:
    There are no homosexual overtones in the film. None. Zippo. What started this stuff in the first place is Downey’s kidding around last August. Remember that? Some folks took him seriously. All it did was still up buzz for the film. Anyway, Holmes and Watson are as gay or bi as Bruce Wayne and Dick Grayson. Or Bert and Ernie, for that matter. Nothing here, move along.

    Second, the film has made its money. Chances are a sequel will happen at some point.

    Third…how many times has Sherlock Holmes been adapted and changed for films and television? This is just another version of the character, another interpretation.

    Fourth- what’s the worst that can happen here? Find a public domain Sherlock Holmes book and adapt it? My, my, the scandal.

  4. I think Guy Ritchie’s interpretation of the character and the update he makes is great. And I find the relationship between Sherlock and Watson very interesting…I wouldn’t mind at all if they twist it to the gay side…I fact I’ll love it. For people like the woman who’s affraid of it or all the people saying its not right is exactly why we need to turn a famous well-known character gay…so people can see it as it is: NORMAL.

  5. I’ll admit that McAdams’ performance was the weakest, but it seemed to me that she and Holmes had been in some kind of relationship previously, and it was not to his liking, but he still cares for her (hence the picture in his room). And yes, the Holmes/Watson homosexuality is a possibility, but they’re best friends! Seriously! They’ve lived and worked together for so many years, of course Holmes would be sad to see his pal go. And being the intelligent man that he is, he would try to prevent it. He’s a shut-in with very little of anything but cleverness, and he needs someone nearby to bring him out of his shell and put him under control. And he seems to be the kind of person who doesn’t take the triviality of love and sexuality to mind at all. He knows that emotions cloud the mind, and that he’s trying to hold them back, which was another reason he was uncomfortable when McAdams’ character appeared.

    1. I laughed SO HARD when Macadams was falling off and Sherlock just turned around and started chatting with Blackwood.

      Ive had an individual that i was best friends with that i loved, friendship doesnt stop that. Im sure that if she was my detective cop partner like Watson our feelings would not have changed one bit. (does my example address the point you made, or did i completely misunderstand what you said?)

  6. The problem as I see it is two fold.

    First, our society has this belief that male affection, whether it be toward a man or woman, is seen as “gay” or a “sissy” thing to do. Men of yore could express affection towards other men but still retain their masculinity and heterosexuality. Not so today. This is why displays of affection between men, whether it be found in the Bible, Greek literature, or medieval history, are often misunderstood to imply homosexuality.

    Second, Hollywood is almost obsessed with getting a token “gay” character or theme into almost everything nowadays. That is why some people were complaining about Avatar’s lack of “gay” characters. When films or TV try to force homosexuality into the material, it just turns me off and I don’t watch. If they try to force homosexuality, whether explicit or implicit, into future Holmes’ films, I’ll stop going to the theater. There is no need to have it in the films.

    With that being said, I didn’t find anything in this current Holmes film to be pushing homosexuality. It was clear that both men (at least to me) were straight. They had a strong bond, yes, but more like best friends than gay lovers.

    1. You are right that a large part of society thinks so narrowly, but don’t assume everyone does.

      Secondly, Hollywood is not obsessed with getting a token gay character into every genre. The reality remains that as society wakes up to how ignorant it is to assume “gay is wrong” a broader representation of people on screen.

      Its the same thing as when Blacks were considered “wrong” and all sorts of injustices were portrayed against them. They were not allowed to be in films in a role other than a slave or servant. When society started to wipe out those ignorant spineless viewpoints based on skin colour, more and more black people were introduced in any role. So was it an agenda to “get blacks into films” or was it just a reality that people woke up and said “why cant they” and there was no issue?

      1. First off, I don’t assume everyone thinks that narrowly about male affection. But, I do think it is an uphill battle.

        Second, Homosexuals and blacks are not analogous. Studies consistently show that homosexuals make up 3-5% of the population, whereas blacks (in the U.S.) make up 14% of the population, which is at least three times as much. Yet, I bet you’ll find that gays show up in more than half of film and TV properties.

        I’d argue that there is an agenda. People may argue about whether it is right or wrong, but it is an agenda. The inclusion of gay characters in films or TV, often times, are not necessary. Hence the term “token.”

      2. In response to Tim, I think that to say that there’s an “agenda” to include gay characters in TV and movies is correct but only because they have been completely invisible before except for as complete figures of fun/pity/wierdness. Finally some characters that are typical men and women that just happen to be gay are appearing and about time too. I can think of so many shows without any gay characters too. Not every show on TV is Will and Grace. How many gay characters were there in Friends, or how many in the latest blockbuster movies?

        Back to the main article, I do think that Holmes and Watson are just close buddies that have known each other for years and have a platonic love, however I resent the fact that it would be “wierd” or fake if they were to have some kind of gay feeling toward each other. If it were to dominate the whole story of the film then sure that might be too much, but as a side-thing “oh look they’re solving crimes and getting into scrapes oh and they just happen to be gay” then why not? Just in the same way that if the film was totally dominated by a straight love relationships that would be too much too, it’s just not a romantic relationship (either straight or gay) type of movie

      3. Tim, back when there was still an ignorant view on skin colour there was 0% blacks on TV. In 1966 when Star Trek introduced a BLACK WOMAN as a senior officer on a military vessel (even though it was science fiction) it was absolutely scandalous.

        Things change, and the ignorance is the same. People choose an irrelevant detail about a person and choose to hate them based on it. Blacks outgrew negative connotations, (some havent) and are now commonplace and its irrelevant to make an issue based on skin. Gays are no different in that aspect.

        How many blacks or gays there are is irrelevant. They are still oppressed or treated unfairly because of an irrelevant detail.

        You can argue that there is an “agenda” but its just reality. Times change and the films of the time change with it. I haven’t seen any representations of gay characters that were considered “token” in the last decade. Its either about a gay person, or its irrelevant that they are gay. Which is reality on or off the screen.

  7. I just scanned over the entries so far so this might have been mentioned. I remember reading a long time ago that Doyle got quite bored with his creation and his popularity. so, Conan first gave him an cocaine addiction then suggested that he was homosexual. What pissed Sir Arthur even more was it made the character more popular with the masses… I could be wrong I could be right…

  8. This is a sentence from my review:

    “The acting of Rachel Mcadams along with her character was unbearable and unnecessary to the movie’s plot, and her relationship with Sherlock was SO FAKE. The bro-mance between Holmes and Watson was WAY more believable (it was actually what saved the movie from the fact that Macadam’s character was in it)”

    In fact Sherlock seemed to be in SHOCK and worried when Watson seemed hurt, but when Macadams is hanging off the edge of a bridge to her death, he LOOKS AWAY and starts chatting with Blackwood. I swear.

    Just because he likes women doesnt mean he doesnt like having sex with men. I know a lot of bisexual friends. People need to grow up about the whole “gay” phobia they have. Its going to look really prejudice in about 20 years.

    I can TOTALLY see Sherlock being gay for Watson. (and i mean this with absolutely no comedy pun or funny undertone… seriously, he seemed very arradched to him)

    I doubt they really ARE gay for each other, but the reaction this comment is having is gross. People need to grow out of the gay people hatred

    HAVING SAID ALL OF THE ABOVE

    Robert Downey Jr is OBVIOUSLY joking. The guy has a horrible sence of humor. Last year he said the stupidest thing about The Dark Knight… do you guys remember what he said about Batman? It was the dumbest fucking thing ever.
    That this lady is taking him seriously makes her the stupidest person in the face or the planet.

    1. Sherlock dressed up as a doctor and took care of Watson in disguise just to look out for him. It was so sweet (and gay) at he same time.

      But every time Macadams flirted with her he got a look on his face that made him look as if he just tasted shit.

      Not to mention the bridge scene with her… THAT was funny

    2. I don’t “hate” gay people. I saw and loved Brokeback Mountain as a movie.

      But making Ironman, Batman etc. gay is not cool.
      Sherlock Holmes is just another famous character.

      But it’s a Downey joke I think, nothing to be serious. I like the guy but he’s a douche.

      And dude you sound gay.

      1. ??
        I never directed this at you. In fact i didnt even read any of the comments when i wrote that.

        The comic books never tell you that any of those characters arent bisexual. I dont see anything wrong with Ironman being bisexual (he cant be gay, he obviously fucksa more women then Jay-Z)

        Did you just call me gay?
        Okay so youre using the word gay as an insult, yet youre telling me you dont hate gays?
        Enlighten.

      2. Ifaz, you sound homophobic when you use “gay” as a derrogatory term. “You sound gay” would only be accurate if he was saying, “I am a boy, and I like to have sex with men”

        That he can recognize that a man can have strong feelings for another man and still not be gay just makes him a man, instead of a coward.

      3. I never said you directed at me. I was just trying to make a point because I also made fun of the fact and you seemed to mention about it in your comment.

        The last part was a joke man. More of a sarcasm.

      4. IFAZ

        If youre using “gay” in a funny way, as in “your purse is gay, dude” then i dont care. If in your comment you were just “making fun” then i wasnt talking to you. I dont care if people use the word gay like that… if people use the word gay as a joke i dont mind it as much.

        I was talking to people who GENUINELY hate gay people and that REALLY think gay people should die

        EVERY christian friend i have (i mean, EVERY CHRISTIAN FRIEND) believes that gay people go to hell.
        As a straight person, also an atheist.. i find that to be COMPLETELY evil. (in the very definition of the word evil)

    3. Since he plays a Marvel character it makes sense if he rags on TDK. I know im in da minority of people that likes his sense of humor. I found it funny when he said u needed an ivy-league degree to understand TDK’s complicated plot.

      1. Ok. I LOVE his sense of humor, but sometimes it makes him look bad.

        I say worse shit with my homeboys but if i was on fucking camera, i would never say anything too stupid that would forever mark me as “The Idiot”

        Yeah hes funny, but when he says “TDK was too complicated for me” on TV… it makes him look pretty retarded

        I will admit it was funny, but what im saying is: people arent laughing with him, theyre laughing at him (sometimes, i like him though hes cool)

    4. James, I completely agree.

      Anti-gay is so last century. People need to grow up. not trying to attack people’s personal opinion here, but if someone is gay and is in that lifestyle, what’s so wrong about it?

  9. I discoverred that the reasons I didn’t have the urge to watch it was that the trailer didn’t look at all like a Guy Ritchie movie and it reminded me of “Shanghai Knights” (and, naturally, I’d never wanna watch a film that looks to mimic that one) but I went with some friends and I am happy to report that it is nothing like “Shanghai Knights” (still, doesn’t quite feel like Guy Ritchie though). Overall, I didn’t like it as much as my friends did, but it IS surprisingly good, as far as action comedies go lately. I was happy that they go into the detection aspect much more than the trailer hints, plus the Irish jigg-like music by Zimmer is awesome!

  10. Quick. Everyone mask their personal opinions and lets all do the politically correct thing. Direct hate towards the woman for daring to have an opinion and let’s all pretend that it isn’t a big deal to make classic heroes gay. Gay Iron Man. Gay John Connor. Gay Batman. Gay Jack Sparrow. Gay Mickey Mouse…

    1. Who says he wasn’t gay already. Watson is never more than an armslength away and he rarely has romantic inklings toward the women in the novels.

      Its possible without having to go to such extremes as you suggest. If there ever was a literary classic character that could be gay, Holmes is likely the easiest mental step to accept.

      His core storyline is that he is a uniquely genius detective, and his only social outlet seems to be his male lifemate Watson.

  11. Rodney, I suggest that you check it out for yourself. The intricacies of Holmes make this film far more entertaining than it otherwise should be. It seems like you’re not interested because they are approaching the material slightly differently, not sure why, you can always rewatch one of the prior films if you want more of the same. The changes are very welcome in my opinion and they seem overall believable. Check it out, it won’t ruin your day, I assure you.

    On another note, judging by the way they handled their relationship in this film, the recent statement is probably RDJ’s sense of humor. Holmes is dependant on Watson for many things, but I hardly think sexual favors is one of them.

    1. You suggest that I don’t want to see it? In the podcast I list this high among “movies I didn’t get to see yet and still want to”

      I am eager to see how this “different” Holmes works.

      The running gay joke seemed to be present even in the trailer, but for this woman to get upset over that and worry that this will turn into Brokeback Holmes needs to watch some buddy cop movies and bromance comedies.

      A man can have strong feelings about another man and not be sexually involved with him. She is just showing her insecurities.

      1. “A man can have strong feelings about another man and not be sexually involved with him. She is just showing her insecurities.”

        I agree.
        If i could take that quote and multiply it times 10,000 and tattoo it into every single homophobic person in the world, i would
        It shouldnt even be called a phobia, the fact that its called a phobia sickens me

      2. I think you misunderstood her, Rodney.

        All she as saying, was that if the studio wants to establish an explicit or implicit homosexual relationship between the characters, she won’t support such a storyline. She is not objecting to the way the Holmes/Watson dynamic is presented in the current film. I’d be upset if they tried to push a homosexual angle in any future films.

        Personally, I did not find anything about the Holmes/Watson dynamic in this film to be overtly gay. Holmes and Watson had the kind of chemistry fitting of two best friends, but not gay lovers. It was clear that both men had feelings for women, with Watson trying throughout the movie to propose to his girlfriend, and Holmes constantly fighting back feelings for his old flame (which is a woman by the way!).

      3. I agree with Tim. Well said.

        The thing that bugs me is how guys can’t be friends without people taking it wrong. Sucks. I wish people would just get over being gay or being straight and not find it funny anymore to exploit homosexuality. I’m just sick of it being the center of everything. People are gay and people are straight, so what.

      4. No.

        I have very close friendships, and i know the difference between bromance and gay.

        Just because you fuck women doesnt mean youre not gay. Bisexual people arent in fairy tales.

  12. Fuck no. No homosexual storyline. Just leave their relation as it is. BTW, I heard Brad Pitt might play Professor Moriarty which would be awesome if true. But I hope there is a sequel.

Leave a Reply