"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."
No shit, Sherlock.
And this is the only time I'll ever get to use that snotty phrase in a meaningful way since the above is actually a quote from Sherlock Holmes in A Scandal in Bohemia. It's a fine encapsulation of the Holmes spirit—polished intellect, cool reason and a disciplined mind; in other words, a charming antiquity with no more place in the modern world than a dodo's nest.
Jumping to conclusions with springs on our feet is, as Holmes states, silly, but it's fun. So is the rumor that Guy Ritchie's upcoming film about Holmes and his devoted sidekick Dr. Watson, played by Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law respectively, was going to have great big handfuls—or even dribs and drabs—of homoeroticism in it. In Britain's News of the World, Downey had described the deductive duo as "two men who happen to be roommates, wrestle a lot and share a bed. It's badass." He didn't stop there—when someone at Comic-Con asked Rachel McAdams, who co-stars in the film as Irene Adler, about the focus on the Holmes/Watson relationship, Downey jumped in and said, "Well she doesn't give me any! It's called circumstantial homosexuality."
To me this kind of thing sounds promising—I envisioned a tale of raw, sweaty, hairy, manly sexual desire bulging and bucking under a tightly-laced social harness…so Victorian…. so forbidden…and consequently dripping with fragrant and irresistible juices. The notion was one of the Insider.com's Top 5 Gossip Grabs for Tuesday, Perez Hilton headlined it "Sherlock Homo?" and Michael Medved condemned the idea of putting a little "top-and-bottom" spin on our dear old literary friends thus:
There's not a seething, bubbling hunger to see straight stars impersonating homosexuals. I think they're just trying to generate controversy . . . They know that making Holmes and Watson homosexual will take away two-thirds of their box office.
Who is going to want to see Downey Jr. and Law make out? I don't think it would be appealing to women. Straight men don't want to see it.
The speculation is certainly amusing, especially the bit about how wrong Michael Medved is about whom I want to see kissing whom (more on that later). If you use the Holmes method of considering all the evidence, though, you have to look at director Guy Ritchie's interview with MTV which says he won't avoid those gay overtones but his action thriller is intended to "get away from the slightly stuffier, quintessential Victorian concepts of men and make them warmer and more accessibly friendly and make them more into the kinds of guys I'd liked to be friends with," which doesn't sound especially flaming to me. He calls it a "family movie" and while he does say, "These guys are sort of in love with each other," he goes on to call their pairing a "real mateship."
The trendy pop term for this sort of thing is a "bromance," an attachment between men that's strong and emotional, but not sexual. Women call this "having friends."
Print
