I think the gay gags are due to the modern setting. Two young, attractive, modern men can't really live together without some eyebrows being raised.
And good review, by the way.
I always find that a bit sad, it feels like we've lost a level of relationship complexity, being in love with someone is a different emotion from trusting a friend implicitly in everything, but if you can't have to guys doing the latter now because the focus is always on gay jokes.
I mean why are they even funny any more? Shouldn't it just be a thing? Yes, yes some people are gay (surprise!), these two don't happen to be. I don't think in fiction you get the same thing going on so much in guy/girl friendships
To Tomwithnonumbers, it's the same with any "mistaken-for-a-romantic-relationship" joke. It's not necessarily the accusation itself that's funny, but rather the denial. Why it's funny is up to the viewer, but it still is nonetheless.
And I think it happens a lot with guy/girl friendships, maybe even more than male/male ones. (mostly because of the "girls and guys can't be friends" thing, but sometimes because they may have actual chemistry) However I know that it happens least with girl/girl friendships.
Leave a Comment:
Don't knock it until you try it
Having quite recently binged on the entirety of the Holmes canon and been quickly directed towards this series, I have to admit that I was skeptical enough not to touch it for the better part of a year. From everything that I had heard about it, it sounded like a terrible idea. A modern-day Holmes is... basically House. And from the fandom, all I could get was that the characters are snarky and bromance is funny. However, I am going to have to admit that I was quickly brought around when I finally watched the first one. Holmes' (or, sorry, Sherlock's) character, as well as Watson's, is spot-on. The additions made to the cast compliment them. The writing is fairly tight (though, admittedly does falter somewhat when the writers are playing the "I'm not gay" gag. I know that a lot of people like it, and Holmes/Watson is one of literature's biggest and brightest bromances, but the way it was written seemed a little shoe-horned, thrown in there for the fangirls.) I was a little afraid that they'd build the substance off of nothing but snide quips and snarking, but there's actually more to (some) conversations. And, like in that recent movie with Law and Downey Jr, I always feel happy when the writers show their research with canon shout-outs or quotes. (The level to which they payed attention shows in the end of "A Study in Pink" where John reveals that he had actually been shot in the shoulder, while leading the audience to believe it was the leg. Conan Doyle never really could decide in the canon where he had been shot, could he?) As to the downsides, most are rather superficial. For instance, I don't agree with a lot of the camera shots, but that's just nit-picking. Overall, I was pleasantly surprised at the result— a genuinely fresh version of the Holmes stories without completely ignoring canon or derailing the characters. Actually, I think that this caught the essence of Holmes' and Watson's characters incredibly well.