I dislike Guy Ritchie films immensely, but this looks pretty awesome....

* Any chance someone has got the script?

It does look like something I'd want to watch!

Thanks for that Gary.  

Looks pretty good. I didn't realise that was Jude Law at first. He's moved away from his 'pretty' films.

Nice work, Murphy.

It looks a lot different to what I was anticipating - that can only be a good thing!

The Houses of Parliament shot was fantastic.

Andrew

I like Guy Ritchie movies, although RocknRolla was not all that exciting, and I was excited to hear he was making a Sherlock Holmes movie. . .until I heard he was going to explore the 'homosexual' side of Holmes and Watson's relationship.  That killed it for me.  Although, with Jude law in the flick, it's no surprise.  

I have been a fan of Sherlock Holmes and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle for years, having read everything he has written about Sherlock, and this is a side of these characters that DOES NOT exist, and DOES NOT need to be made up.  Ever.  I'll be skipping this one.

Just like Dumbledore.  Why do so many 'creators', feel that male characters have to made homosexual to 'have depth', or be interesting?

"Beneath this pillow lies the key to my release" LOL! It sure does!

Quoted from steven8 I like Guy Ritchie movies, although RocknRolla was not all that exciting, and I was excited to hear he was making a Sherlock Holmes movie. . .until I heard he was going to explore the 'homosexual' side of Holmes and Watson's relationship.  That killed it for me.  Although, with Jude law in the flick, it's no surprise.   I have been a fan of Sherlock Holmes and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle for years, having read everything he has written about Sherlock, and this is a side of these characters that DOES NOT exist, and DOES NOT need to be made up.  Ever.  I'll be skipping this one. Just like Dumbledore.  Why do so many 'creators', feel that male characters have to made homosexual to 'have depth', or be interesting?

The trailer was funny but that would definately turn me off too. People love to push political agendas, aparently homosexuality is the new height that all nobel characters must aspire to...

Quoted from steven8 I like Guy Ritchie movies, although RocknRolla was not all that exciting, and I was excited to hear he was making a Sherlock Holmes movie. . .until I heard he was going to explore the 'homosexual' side of Holmes and Watson's relationship.  That killed it for me.  Although, with Jude law in the flick, it's no surprise.   I have been a fan of Sherlock Holmes and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle for years, having read everything he has written about Sherlock, and this is a side of these characters that DOES NOT exist, and DOES NOT need to be made up.  Ever.  I'll be skipping this one. Just like Dumbledore.  Why do so many 'creators', feel that male characters have to made homosexual to 'have depth', or be interesting?

Homosexuality is only a big deal if you make it out to be a big deal.  Who cares if Dumbledore is gay?

Quoted from dresseme Homosexuality is only a big deal if you make it out to be a big deal.  Who cares if Dumbledore is gay?

Exactly!  7 books, not a mention, then all of a sudden, it's plastered everywhere!  Why?  Why did it have to become an issue?  Who cares.  The novels stood up just fine without it ever being mentioned.  Sherlock Holmes doesn't need it either.

Quoted from steven8 Exactly!  7 books, not a mention, then all of a sudden, it's plastered everywhere!  Why?  Why did it have to become an issue?  Who cares.  The novels stood up just fine without it ever being mentioned.  Sherlock Holmes doesn't need it either.

But you're looking at two different things: In Harry Potter, it was never explicitly stated that Dumbledore is gay.  JK comes out and then says that she thought of him as a gay character while writing him.  

In Sherlock Holmes, it sounds like they're explicitly talking about Sherlock and Watson as gay characters.  

To both I say, who cares, but that's just my personal opinion.  I don't see why a character's sexual orientation should be such a hot topic and cause for alarm.

The only people causing an uproar over this are people uncomfortable with homosexuality.

Now, I can understand not wanting to see Sherlock Holmes in such a light to preserve the original character, but hey, I don't want to see him rebooted period, so whatever.  It's not like they're doing a classic reinterpretation anyway.

Quoted from dresseme I don't see why a character's sexual orientation should be such a hot topic and cause for alarm. The only people causing an uproar over this are people uncomfortable with homosexuality.

Nobody had mentioned alarm, or being uncomfortable, just annoyed.

Thanks for the link, it looks good. I will probably see this, although I don't know how the comedy will mix with the other themes.... I don't remember Sherlock Holmes having too much comedy involved.

Okay, I watched the preview.  MAN, that looks cool.  

I do like Guy Ritchie's style.

Quoted from Tommyp Thanks for the link, it looks good. I will probably see this, although I don't know how the comedy will mix with the other themes.... I don't remember Sherlock Holmes having too much comedy involved.

Sherlock Holmes had no 'blatant' comedy except the awesome interplay between Holmes and Watson.

Quoted from dresseme But you're looking at two different things: In Harry Potter, it was never explicitly stated that Dumbledore is gay.  JK comes out and then says that she thought of him as a gay character while writing him.   In Sherlock Holmes, it sounds like they're explicitly talking about Sherlock and Watson as gay characters.   To both I say, who cares, but that's just my personal opinion.  I don't see why a character's sexual orientation should be such a hot topic and cause for alarm. The only people causing an uproar over this are people uncomfortable with homosexuality. Now, I can understand not wanting to see Sherlock Holmes in such a light to preserve the original character, but hey, I don't want to see him rebooted period, so whatever.  It's not like they're doing a classic reinterpretation anyway.

If it's a non-issue why include it? I thought steve8's point was that this homosexual trait is being used by writers/creaters to give 'depth' to characters when in fact characters can be interesting without it. All of recent television and films are saturated with it.