RECENT  POSTS:  » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something. » NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win. » By the time you read this headline, we'll be ten more seconds beyond stagnant anti-gay 'culture wars' » Video: America cannot wait—to purchase American Family Association radio equipment? Huh?! » Huckabee 2016: 'cause church and state aint gonna marry themselves » EEOC does wonky, under-radar thing that could lay groundwork for definitive nondiscrimination protections » Maggie Gallagher, now that you've lost on marriage, might you lose these deceptive ways as well? » Crowdfunding discriminatory business owners: Perfect statement on anti-gay movement's current affairs » The religious anti-gay crowd: They never understood the marriage fight; now they don't understand their loss  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

08/05/2009

Their attacks? Elementary would be an upgrade, Watson!

by Jeremy Hooper

Picture 6-211Director Guy Ritchie has not said that the Sherlock Holmes and Watson of his forthcoming big screen adaptation will be a gay couple. At all. What he's said is stuff like this:

"As a heterosexual couple that at moments could seem gay, they play it off very well," Ritchie said of Holmes and Watson. "These guys are sort of in love with each other. It's real mateship. It's trying to keep that balance. You have to endear yourself to them, and at times you skate on thin ice, because it's such a relationship about two men."
Guy Ritchie Explains The Tender Bromance In 'Sherlock Holmes' [MTV]

But the director's comments about his own film hasn't stopped the homo-hostile, clearly gender-roled social conservatives from attacking the unreleased movie on the sole basis that it might be too gay. This from conservative radio host Steve Malzberg:

(click to play audio clip)
The Steve Malzberg Show-August 4,2009-Hour 3 [WOR]

Pure and utter detestation. Malzberg doesn't even take the time to do a simple Google search to find out the truth of the movie's central relationship. A little heterosexist birdie named Michael Medved put a "fear the gay film" meme in his daily talking points, and so Steve lets his team's already agreed-upon shunning of male-male intimacy guide him to a place of homophobic repudiation. And of course the very idea that gay love could even appear on screen leads to a decrial of this "Obama-nation."

But don't you dare accuse these folks of showing unrestrained bigotry towards gay people. It's just "the sanctity of popcorn" that they want to protect. Right?

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Yay! New crazy radio highlights to replace Liberty Live!

Can't wait for more! Thank you!

Posted by: DN | Aug 5, 2009 10:31:19 AM

So they're like a crime-solving Turk and J.D? And if they seem gay to us its probably just because writers werent as scared of looking gay as they are now. Hell the book version of Return of the King practically has Sam and Frodo making out.http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/sanctity

Posted by: penguinsaur | Aug 5, 2009 11:26:19 AM

Okay, so now two guys can't even be close friends without being gay? Is this seriously the anti-gay mindset? Way to fear emotional bonds, folks.

Posted by: fuzzypony | Aug 5, 2009 2:21:29 PM

But Sherlock Holmes wasn't gay... or straight. It's the general consensus that he was asexual. I'm surprised I haven't heard AVEN's rebuttal to the movie portrayal of one of the world's most famous asexuals.

Posted by: Ashton | Aug 5, 2009 2:23:10 PM

Does this Malzberg hack have the capability of stringing together a single original thought. Every idiom that he used in that piece was plagiarized directly from the playbook of right wing hysteria. At least the Liberty's Obituary Live (lol) boys could coin a phrase or two, once in a while. Or, at least string them together is some in a less insipid fashion.

Of course, that begs the question, "Do they really have the need to be interesting?" This guy certainly doesn't seem to "feel" the need to be interesting... Maybe I'm giving him too much credit. Maybe he really doesn't have the talent to be interesting.

Posted by: Dick Mills | Aug 5, 2009 4:29:50 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails