“The series, set in 21st century London”
I find these ‘Maybe he’s gay, maybe he’s not..’ type stories quite tedious.
The TV show takes its inspiration from the works of Conan Doyle. He did not write the characters as gay, so meddling with their characters to make them appear more up to date is a bit daft.
Yes, the Pink News brigade are absolutely daft.
That’s an understatement.
Oh, for fecks sake…!
The Beeb trying to cash in on a recent film that they think may have revived interest in the stories. It’s called jumping on the bandwagon.
And I know, let’s make it modern and give it a gay angle. Right on!
Whatever it is, it is nothing to do with Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson.
There was no romance between the pair. Read the friggin’ books!
They’ll be claiming Biggles and Algy were gay, next.
Just more ammo for the Mail and Express.
Steven Moffat isn’t a fan of the gays.
Where did you get THAT idea? Never watched Doctor Who. He was the one who created Captain Jack Harkness for goodness sake!!!
I was looking forward to this and now I hear they are making it gay, I’m definitely watching now. This said, it don’t sound gay, gay, it sounds like they will be doing what they did in House (a show that was based on Sherlock) once and just have people think they are gay but the main character has no romantic interests and is dedicated to his work though it will still add a bit of amusement in it.
I think it’s absolutely fine – except that the characters that they’ve created aren’t Conan Doyle’s, so they shouldn’t have nicked his names for them.
*Yawn*. How visionary of the Beeb, add a p!ss poor ‘will they won’t they?/’/'are they aren’t they?’ angle to an otherwise overdone story. Why bother? Any chance the powers that be might pour some licence payers money into a story or production that hasn’t been done a hundred times before. As we speak they’re probably planing on filling the autumn schedules with the umpteenth remake of a Jane Austen book.
Re: “Sherlock” ‘hinting’ that Holmes and Watson; having seen the programme, it does nothing of the kind.
There are a couple of comedic moments when other characters assume they are gay, but they are certainly heterosexual; so there’s really no need for people to get worked up and outraged by the idea.
I’m rather disappointed in PinkNews for regurgitating a piece of tabloid tat from the hateful Daily Mail (written to enrage its homophobic readership) without first checking that there is any truth in the story.
he doesn’t look like a retired army surgeon either …
Army surgeoun invalided home after being wounded in Afghanistan. Do your research.
It is possible for two men to love each other, never vocalize it, and have no sexual attraction for each other, gay or straight.
Wow… so much muddle-headedness in this report and in these comments it’s untrue!
1) The initial report is rubbish. There *is* no gay angle and far from the BBC providing ammo for the homophobic right-wing press, it’s actually the likes of the Mail who have completely invented this story to pander to their own prejudiced readership. Just watch the programme on Sunday if you don’t believe me…
2) Steven Moffat “isn’t a fan of the gays”! What’s that supposed to mean? Presumably he’s not bothered by the fact the co-creator of the series and his fellow writer is one!
3) What does Martin Freeman have to do with “the gays”? He is married with a wife and two kids!
Seriously? What do they think Holmes and Watson got up to when they had no cases? They have always had a thing for each other!
But on another note, I heard people asking the writers of Merlin if it was a gay romance story during the first season :)
Well even before that there was the Guy Ritchie version where Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law were acting like a bickering bisexual couple with the seven year itch. Then before that you had Viz with “Sherlock Homo” camping it up like Larry Grayson. And there were rumours long before that.
It’s not that revolutionary, though I think they’re flogging a dead horse with pointless time-travel plots on Saturday evenings ATM, between that and “Ashes to Ashes/ Life on Mars”.
I really don’t need to see Holmes brought up to date due to some contrived plot device… does someone in the BBC imagine we don’t know what a Victorian is?
Leave the time traveling to Dr Who please.
I don’t care if he’s not an army doctor. Martin Freeman can examine me anythime
I personally don’t have any problem with them hinting at an attraction/chemistry between the two. Whilst it wasn’t Conan Doyle’s intention, so many people (and I mean a LOT of people) have seen a subtext between them that surely there isn’t any harm in playing on that? The BBC seems to unintentionally create homoerotic tension all the time, I cite Merlin as an example as I personally ship (that means support) the Merlin/Arthur couple, because it just seems so obvious!
Anyone know if this is going to be broadcast on the BBCAmerica?
It’s intriguing that the Beeb should release this just as I’m finally making my way through the books. To the modern eye, there DOES appear to be some homoerotic undertones to the Holmes/Watson relationship, however one must consider the language difference – essentially, phrases and words have different meanings now than when Doyle wrote his stories. I have no doubt that he wrote no homoerotic content, that it’s merely language drift (the first time I read about a man ejaculating wildly, I did a double take, then read up and realised it meant essentially shouting and being vocal) that makes us see homosexual content in the stories.
WHAT A COCK-UP!!
spanner – mind your manners and learn your facts
I wasn’t commenting on that post you stupid little cnut of a boy.
Great bit of TV but are they gay – who cares?
I thought it was just the trendy sexual ambiguity you get in ‘inclusive’ scripts nowadays.
The two were dealing with the obvious issue when two flat mates get to know each other.
Dr Watson’s (hetero) sexual interests were clearly outlined when he tried to chat up Mycroft’s texting PA. Whereas Holmes’s asexuality was demonstrated earlier in the science lab with the lipstick scene. Which was very funny.
In the cafe they then have the stumbling, almost blokey conversation about who has a girlfriend – and Holmes perhaps hints at a gay sexuality whilst making it clear he is more married to his work and has no bedtime interest in John Watson. Watson makes it clear he really doesn’t mind whether Holmes is gay or not.
And nor do we?
Err no they’re not. As Steven Moffat said on newsnight, they’re laughing at and off said suggestions.
It’s things like insuating Holmes and Watson are gay, having Holmes use Nicotine patches instead of smoking a pipe, that will prevent television from ever recovering it’s former glory. People used to tune into television shows in North America in numbers that often topped forty million, now a quarter of that is considered good and even numbers as small as 1 or two million are touted as a success by many channels. The reason people tuned in was because they felt television spoke to them. They could understand and relate to the stories and characters. According to current Television and movies, we live in a world where King Arthur was Bi-sexual, HG Wells was really a woman, everyone uses Nicotine patches rather then smoking, all fathers are idiots and people drive cars the size of a matchbox racers and they look just about as stupid, who can identify with that? The minority perhaps, but not the majority and as a result, the Televsion viewing audience in both Europe and North America will continue to decline, and it will do so right along side the movie going audience until the entire entertainment industry is nearly dead. It’s happened before, do some research and look at the numbers. The question is, will the industry get back on track and recover this time…or is it really doomed?
Watch the program. Listen to the dialogue IN CONTEXT as you watch the scene in question. It is made quite CLEAR neither of them are gay.
People see and read into things what they want to see and hear, often to justify their own actions.
To be fair, my hetero homie and I get this all the time…
Promoting the show by teasing a niche market while preserving deniability for Outraged of Tunbridge Wells?
Well I never.
Never mind the hints let’s see the action.
Let him be gay please let hm be gay
In the original stories,Watson was Married and Holms was A-sexual! (A-sexual people DO exist!)
He seems more asexual than anything else… I doubt he’d notice a hottie of any gender unless they had badly-cut fingernails.
I always thought Beeb-Sherlock was written as out asexual. No other interpretation ever really crossed my mind. (Whether or not he experiences romantic attraction of any kind seems to be the ‘up in the air’ part, not his sexuality per se.)
Watson is quite clearly not gay, possibly bisexual I suppose, though most likely straight.
And yet… They find themselves in an arrangement/relationship that seems charmingly co-dependent nonetheless. I think it’s just lovely and modern :)
What a load of complete rubbish. Both the original stories by Conan Doyle and the modern TV version make it quite clear that Holmes is heterosexual. In fact he was shown very explicitly having a relationship with a woman.
The Pink News people are potty! You are ignorant, illiterate and deluded.
Alright guys, what I don’t understand is why everybody’s feeling put off by the fact that this story unfolds in the 21st century. Who needs ANOTHER movie of the (absolutely brilliant) Doyle books? I think it was a nice idea to toy a bit with the characters, to create a new Sherlock who would be a brillant detective in our time, with our countless ways to prove this or that via high technology. Who cares if there’s some romantic tension between Sherlock and John? Sherlock is clearly asexual, John is clearly heterosexual, but we do live in times where such lines can be crossed, and where you can have some kind of romantic relationship without there having to be any kind of sex. It’s a very modern series, it is MEANT to be as modern as possible. It’s nice play ground, and I love the acting and the brilliance and the tension.
Sherlock Homes is not gay! If the BBC turn him into such a character it will take away the man that Sherlock is.
I am so disappointed. Sherlock is just deeply involved in what he does. Sometimes people who are so involved in what they do, other areas of life are left aside.
I’m so immersed in what I do that I have neglected my relationship! I regret it of courses but if someone is good at what they do and are intelligent then they are naturally drawn to intelligent people who stimulate their mind.
Having a strong in many areas of science and focused in the area of Human Behaviour I understand that intelligent individuals require intellectual conversations and only a few friends and family can provide this! Sherlock and the Doctor have a unique relationship, which is of a higher intelligence. Request to the BBC: not to destroy it!