Log in

No account? Create an account
tower of light

April 2017

Powered by LiveJournal.com
gazing, 3

Irene, O Irene

In response to my last post in which I complained about the movie's treatment of Irene and Holmes' relationship, spookyfbi reasons:

There was no on screen romance (Not between Irene & Holmes, anyway). At no point in the movie does Holmes indicate that he has any romantic feelings for Irene. He doesn't want her to suffer because he's not a bastard, and he probably enjoys her as a foil, and she possibly thinks he's cute and enjoys playing with him, but that's about it. I actually really enjoyed their dynamic. It was sexual for the audience without being sexual for the characters, which I thought was very clever!

And my response:
(TL;DR version: If usual male/female lead interaction in typical Hollywood movie is a 10 a la Indiana Jones and Marion Ravenwood, then Holmes & Irene here would be a 5...which is light by usual standards but really, I was expecting a 0, hence the original complaint.)

That's the thing though, in the book canon (and good Lord I never thought I'd be one of THOSE people who talk about book canon while discussing a movie adaptation), there is utterly NOTHING sexual about Irene Adler whereas Holmes is concerned. Zero. Nada. Zill. It was vehemently emphasized that Holmes felt nothing for her except for respect, and the same is true vice versa.

One of the things I loved best about Irene Adler as a character was how Conan Doyle wrote her without commenting on her gender—she was just such a purely kickass character who did not end up romantically linked with the male lead in any way, shape, or form. She existed quite independently of Holmes, who had an abiding respect for her.

And that's another thing which didn't sit right with me about Irene/Holmes interaction in the movie—how Holmes sticked around with her and her little games. It was a part of the...humanization of Holmes, I suppose; but still, the Holmes I am familiar with would never put up with such flighty diversions (waking up naked and handcuffed to a bed? really? REALLY?), not to mention that Irene would never deign him an interest in that way, period.

Yet, I do admit that movie!Holmes is so much easier to slash precisely because of the same humanization, because he no longer wears the aura of invincibility and infallibility. He actually needs people (namely Watson) now—and I have to say, I never quite got that feeling from the books. A part of that is because movie!Watson is so much more awesome than book!Watson, but man...

P.S.: I do agree though, the line about "our dog" is pure gold and entirely "WTF you people are so married".

Entirely unrelated: Awesome Kill Bill spoof on Youtube.

Kill Bill Parts 1 & 2, in One Minute, in One Take

Entirely unrelated #2: I am looking forward to Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. I mean, Jake Gyllenhaal!! Squee!


See, what I got out of it was the concept of Watson as an unreliable narrator. Which gets me thinking, and realizing that there really is no way that Watson could have always been telling the truth, and not even for any really nefarious reasons. You don't tell the world about things like bitching over borrowed clothes, or your own gambling addiction. It's the grounds that all good H/W fanfiction has been based on - that we see how Watson perceives Holmes, which is to say, cold and perfect because [insert reason here, though the most common is because that's how he wants Watson to see him.]

re: irene - a scandal in bohemia was ridiculously full of plot holes. i didn't even really realize this until i started analyzing it more closely as the date for the film approached - and before the movie came out, i wrote this, which is basically a lot of theorizing on how mastercriminal!irene actually makes a scandal in bohemia make sense.

the bottom line, though? the movie was a visual fanfiction. it's guy ritchie's fanfiction. it is A Version of how things are behind the scenes. i personally really loathe it when people are like it's ~the definitive version~, because no, it's not. IMHO, it's an amazing version, and I loved it. But that isn't to say that this holds any more weight than any other fan's interpretation, just because Guy made a movie out of it. XD

Edited at 2010-02-04 02:51 pm (UTC)
Really great point about the potential problem regarding Watson's POV. That's very thought-provoking and certainly opens up possibilities to see the canon in a new light.

As for the movie, well, I think it's valid to use it as canon if one is solely interested in the movieverse...bookverse is a different story, but then again I never did get the urge to slash them from reading the books....
I have to make a confession here, that is, I am truly one of your secret admirers.

So I finally decide to watch this movie after reading comments from you.





Re: 哈哈哈哈哈哈哈

是的,回来一个星期了,时差还是没倒回来……所以作息时间和以前差不多…… = =