Hey, Medved: You’re completely, totally wrong.

Says Michael Medved, some guy I have no idea who he is but is quoted in the NY Post:

 "There’s not a seething, bubbling hunger to see straight stars impersonating homosexuals," Medved told us. "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."

Um, actually, there is a seething, bubbling hunger, at least in the circles in which I travel. We like the idea of just the overtones and innuendo, and personally, I’d love the tease of it ending there.  But you know, if you want to make them snuggle, that’s okay, too.


I think it’s good for straight men to see homosexual overtones, too, and though most are unfortunately too stifled to admit they enjoyed it, more will like it than you think.  Also, the "impersonating homosexuals" thing is . . . well, telling.  ACTING, honey.  They call it ACTING.  They aren’t "impersonating" anything, any more than they are when they play doctors and lawyers and teachers and rapists and priests and murderers and shop workers and convenience store employees or put on makeup to falsely advance their age.  

I hope this movie cleans up.  I hope it has homosexual overtones so thick you could paint with them, and I hope it is the hit of the season.  And I hope Medved goes home feeling confused and uncomfortably hard.

8 Comments on “Hey, Medved: You’re completely, totally wrong.

  1. *seethes and bubbles*
    I saw the preview at Harry Potter… thank God I was in a dark theater… I would have had to leave the room otherwise.

  2. It really, really heartens me that THIS is the post that brings commenters out of the fucking woodwork. I swear to god, I’ve got the best friends list.

  3. Michael Medved is the right-wing media critic who called Captain America an anti-American terrorist sympathizer. He’s said a lot of other stupid things, but for me at least nothing will ever top that.
    I’m interested in the new Holmes picture because it is TOTALLY stealing an idea me and a friend had a few years back: strip off all the non-canonical Holmes signifiers and go for a semiotic reboot. I mean, when you just see a picture of a deerstalker hat and a calabash pipe, you INSTANTLY think Holmes, even if it’s just the hat and pipe. But there’s nothing in the original text to indicate either of them. (Yes, Holmes smokes a pipe, but a calabash is never specified and is unlikely.) So after a hundred years of Holmes as deerstalker, hunting cape, calabash pipe, and chubby, incompetent Dr. Watson, we’re finally getting a movie with NONE of those things. Conceptually fascinating. Of course, from the trailer it seems to be doing something utterly different from the original stories, but still. Fascinating.
    Sorry. I’m a nerd; I go off on things.

  4. I saw the trailer on YouTube a while back and ended up snorting coffee up my nose – it was fantastic! (The trailer, not the coffee/nose thing.)
    Personally, I’ve always felt that there was something going on between Holmes and Watson, and the banter in the trailer does nothing to dispel that notion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: