THIS.
After having been mortified by the two trailers of the Guy Ritchie sequel to 'Sherlock Holmes' floating about the internets like detritus polluting otherwise clear, blue waters, it was a bit of a relief to see I'm not the only one who resents having the characters I adore dragged through the mud so shamelessly. Came across the following on Tumblr, and wanted to post it here because she so accurately conveys my own qualms... and because I was in a disputatious mood. *nods*
RE-BLOGGED FROM ELINA-ELSU'S TUMBLR:
The original post references this in regards to the slash, however I'm of the opinion it applies to the Holmes/Watson relationship in general. The Holmes Canon gives us a beautifully rendered portrayal of two men who genuinely loved and respected each other, regardless of whether or not they were more than friends. That's a concept Ritchie will never understand, and what caused me such a strong aversion to his upcoming movie. Holmes' face smeared in makeup, dressed as a prostitute, falling on top of Watson in some lame attempt to fabricate subtext - no, my good sir, that is crass humour, not proof incarnate that the detective and doctor were sleeping together >:|
Moffat and Gatiss get it. It's not about inserting blatantly sexual subtextual scenes in, but about portraying the rare love between these two men the way Doyle did. In their words and deeds and the way in which they treated the other. There was much exasperation to be had on the doctor's part, but despite it all, Holmes was his friend. They liked spending time together since they actually enjoyed each others company, and I am NOT seeing this from those movies. All I'm seeing is slo-mo action sequences, character bashing and the selling of sex.
Thanks, but not my cuppa.
From Elina-Elsu's Blog:
"About slash, subtext and innuendo
One of the (many :’D) things that bothers me about the RDJ films is how they seem to have all these ‘in your face’ gay jokes going on.
That’s not what really appeals to me as a Holmes/Watson slasher, especially in victorian versions. I always remember how my heart leaped when I first saw them walking arm in arm in the Granada series, or when I read how they showed caring in all the tiny ways in the canon stories. In the Ritchie film on the other hand, they clearly know about the slash appeal, and have made it into a source of farce-like jokes.
In the BBC it can be seen they know about it too…but in my opinion they did it better and more clever way by turning it all upside down. When previously in victorian times people would have whispered and wondered quietly about their relationship, now everyone just assumes they already are in one.
-
Heh, sorry. This was one of the things I needed to get out of my head. I have now decided not to go see the new Ritchie film as I really do not want to, despite all the Stephen Frys and slash slaspstick it might have. I promise not to say anything of it when the time comes, as I don’t think I should, having not seen it.(I might actually just avoid the internet alltogether.)
Meanwhile, I will await for the BBC Sherlock season 2 eagerly and might even try to force out some Holmes/Watson (or Sherlock/John) drawings ;D"
RE-BLOGGED FROM ELINA-ELSU'S TUMBLR:
The original post references this in regards to the slash, however I'm of the opinion it applies to the Holmes/Watson relationship in general. The Holmes Canon gives us a beautifully rendered portrayal of two men who genuinely loved and respected each other, regardless of whether or not they were more than friends. That's a concept Ritchie will never understand, and what caused me such a strong aversion to his upcoming movie. Holmes' face smeared in makeup, dressed as a prostitute, falling on top of Watson in some lame attempt to fabricate subtext - no, my good sir, that is crass humour, not proof incarnate that the detective and doctor were sleeping together >:|
Moffat and Gatiss get it. It's not about inserting blatantly sexual subtextual scenes in, but about portraying the rare love between these two men the way Doyle did. In their words and deeds and the way in which they treated the other. There was much exasperation to be had on the doctor's part, but despite it all, Holmes was his friend. They liked spending time together since they actually enjoyed each others company, and I am NOT seeing this from those movies. All I'm seeing is slo-mo action sequences, character bashing and the selling of sex.
Thanks, but not my cuppa.
From Elina-Elsu's Blog:
"About slash, subtext and innuendo
One of the (many :’D) things that bothers me about the RDJ films is how they seem to have all these ‘in your face’ gay jokes going on.
That’s not what really appeals to me as a Holmes/Watson slasher, especially in victorian versions. I always remember how my heart leaped when I first saw them walking arm in arm in the Granada series, or when I read how they showed caring in all the tiny ways in the canon stories. In the Ritchie film on the other hand, they clearly know about the slash appeal, and have made it into a source of farce-like jokes.
In the BBC it can be seen they know about it too…but in my opinion they did it better and more clever way by turning it all upside down. When previously in victorian times people would have whispered and wondered quietly about their relationship, now everyone just assumes they already are in one.
-
Heh, sorry. This was one of the things I needed to get out of my head. I have now decided not to go see the new Ritchie film as I really do not want to, despite all the Stephen Frys and slash slaspstick it might have. I promise not to say anything of it when the time comes, as I don’t think I should, having not seen it.(I might actually just avoid the internet alltogether.)
Meanwhile, I will await for the BBC Sherlock season 2 eagerly and might even try to force out some Holmes/Watson (or Sherlock/John) drawings ;D"