It's a very thoughtful, interesting piece--I think it always works well when an interviewer starts Benedict off and then really listens, as this one seems to have done.

(I'm not on Tumblr, so thank you for bringing it to my attention.)

nakahara wrote:

ancientsgate wrote:

All he has to do when the subject of johnlock comes up is to keep it light. Smile and say, "Not my cuppa, I don't get it, but hey, that's what makes a horse race--  everyone likes something different," or words to that effect. No reason to make generalizations and exaggerated statements about something he knows absolutely nothing about, after all. I am not personally offended by what he said about johnlock, because I can see that he's ignorant about the truth about who writes it and why, and who reads it and why (whole college courses have been offered about this subject, after all, lol), but I wish for his sake that he could make his peace about it and stop repeating the same silly things about it over and over. I've seen him saying the line about S and J being chained together on a bed floating through space, in both print and TV interviews with him, at least 5 times, over the last several years.
 

But it would be pretty sad if the attitude of us Johnlockers forces him into this kind of self-censorship, wouldn´t it? I´d rather know his own opinions than fake PR speeches he would prepare in an effort to not insult the fans.

Also, we should remember that Johnlock fanfictions are written for similarly minded people and placed on special sites so that the fans can easily find them and the people who hate the stuff can avoid them. It is not OK for those nosy reporters to take Johnlock fanfictions outside from this area and to forcibly show them down the throats of actors who are indirectly the subject of it, or to constantly bring this stuff out in an interview despite it being completely irrelevant in scope of actors work. I still remember how the reporter Caitlin Moran took one of such fanfictions on the public event where the staff of Sherlock just promoted S3 and forced Benedict and Martin to read the work outloud, during the live broadcast of the event, humiliating them both and the author of the piece in one swipe. It´s probably the unpleasantness of such occurences what negatively coloured Benedict´s opinion on fanfiction as a whole.

That aside, I would really like to know where did he read this stuff about Sherlock and John floating through the space on their bed. Sounds interesting.
 

Just thought I'd comment over here rather than on the picture thread - I hope that's OK! 

I agree, Nakahara, but I get the impression that in this particular case, the interviewer didn't force the issue but Benedict brought it up himself.   He's lumping in the slash fiction with the comments from the fans which present a different view of the character from his ... I suppose he is extremely talented and is creating a work of art in a sense, and it can seem as if people who present the characters as "cute", etc., are essentially saying that they think his portrayal is wrong.  As if they're taking a piece of work he's proud of and saying "you should have done it like this", or at least telling him that he's failed in getting his message across!   He's not giving an opinion on fanfiction in general, but just on certain types of fiction written about a character who he partially created.  I think he did generalise about people's motivations, but that was prompted by the interviewer and I think it was nice that he tried to imagine people's motivations (and I actually thought his was an interesting hypothesis which might apply to some writers).  

I've noticed a lot or repetition in his interviews too, but I think that's inevitable.  He's often talking about the same things.  For instance the school homophobia story is one he's told before, but not everybody is going to have read it and it's probably interesting and relevant when talking about The Imitation Game. 

The one thing that I sometimes wish he'd say more explicitly (although I think he sometimes implies it) is that singling out one man (because of how great he was and how much he contributed), for a pardon, is a snub at the many, many people who were convicted of something that shouldn't have been a crime. 

Yes, I wish he'd say more - it's really interesting to read about his take on the character!   Like you, I think there's a lot more to Sherlock than that - he has more heart than is at first apparent.  I think he's ruthless, but rarely "brutal" ... at least, that's what I've got from it, so I'm possibly also guilty of misinterpreting what he's portraying.   However, I wondered if he was talking more specifically about Sherlock's reaction to a fawning fan coming on to him, and particularly about the scene with Kitty where we see that (although he also sees through the fawning fan act). 

I too am puzzled why he said that. Maybe he just wanted to convey his belief that Sherlock is not exactly a cuddly romance material. But concerning his portrayal of Sherlock - he portrays him as an exact opposite of the "machine". If he wanted to leave the impression that Sherlock is some kind of a robot, he should portray him closer to Khan and leave out the tears and heartfelt speeches on John´s wedding and the general attitude of self-sacrifice that encapsules his Sherlock. 

I also find it dubious that an actor who has more than 40 various roles under his belt would await that an audience would view his characters in only one right way. Art isn´t like mathematics - it leaves all kind of impressions in different people. 

As to the rest of the interview - the questions and answers in it aren´t posed as simple questions and answers cited verbatim (as they would be in my country). The interview is kinda narrated by the reporter and it is obvious that he moderated their dialogue into the direction he wanted to discuss with BC

Concerning the topic of Johnlock - of both protagonists of Sherlock, Martin Freeman was the shipper. Benedict never made it secret that he is uneasy about the subject and that he doesn´t particularily understands this part of fandom. I don´t know why this fact is suddenly a problem - he is fully entitled to have his personal tastes. 

Still, he conveyed some high ideals in the interview - his abhorence of anti-gay bigotry and his concern over the barbarity and medieval cruelty that currently raised its ugly head in Middle East. Those nice ideas shouldn´t be eclipsed by harmless things like his fanfiction preferences and we shoul value them since it´s not that usual that an actor dares to speak about those issues so openly. 

nakahara wrote:

I too am puzzled why he said that. Maybe he just wanted to convey his belief that Sherlock is not exactly a cuddly romance material. But concerning his portrayal of Sherlock - he portrays him as an exact opposite of the "machine". If he wanted to leave the impression that Sherlock is some kind of a robot, he should portray him closer to Khan and leave out the tears and heartfelt speeches on John´s wedding and the general attitude of self-sacrifice that encapsules his Sherlock. 

I also find it dubious that an actor who has more than 40 various roles under his belt would await that an audience would view his characters in only one right way. Art isn´t like mathematics - it leaves all kind of impressions in different people. 

As to the rest of the interview - the questions and answers in it aren´t posed as simple questions and answers cited verbatim (as they would be in my country). The interview is kinda narrated by the reporter and it is obvious that he moderated their dialogue into the direction he wanted to discuss with BC

Concerning the topic of Johnlock - of both protagonists of Sherlock, Martin Freeman was the shipper. Benedict never made it secret that he is uneasy about the subject and that he doesn´t particularily understands this part of fandom. I don´t know why this fact is suddenly a problem - he is fully entitled to have his personal tastes. 

Still, he conveyed some high ideals in the interview - his abhorence of anti-gay bigotry and his concern over the barbarity and medieval cruelty that currently raised its ugly head in Middle East. Those nice ideas shouldn´t be eclipsed by harmless things like his fanfiction preferences and we shoul value them since it´s not that usual that an actor dares to speak about those issues so openly. 

 
Amen.

I haven't really been 'up to' following all the drama concerning the interview before now...

I'm a bit 'worried' about what he said on Sherlock though... but then again as a fan of this TV show I suppose you see what you want to see and I personally see so much more in Sherlock. I see someone who wants to hide the fact that he is cabable of feeling but choses not to.

It's never good for a character to be one sided... and what I read in that interview sounds onesided to me.

But oh well... 

KeepersPrice wrote:

I was surprised not to see this posted here today.  Apparently it had Tumblr all in an uproar...

http://www.out.com/entertainment/movies/2014/10/14/sherlock-star-benedict-cumberbatch-poised-make-alan-turing-his-own-imitation-game

Did I miss it?

 
Hm. Am I the only one who has trouble to open the link?? My screen is blank, also when I try to get through to this interview via google and search. I would be really interested to read the interview.

I think everyone should stop worrying about it. At the end of the day, it's an interview, and quite often, the actual words that you say in interviews can get twisted around and changed slightly to suit the style of the article. Or, alternatively, the person interviewed may have given longer answers, but those get cut down to just the bare bones or what the editor views as "the essentials" so that they can get into the word count of their article.

I was a professional actor for ten years from the age of 8 till 18 when I went to Uni and decided to pursue writing as a career instead. However, in that time I did quite a lot of interviews and I was forever reading them back with a bit of a baffled expression thinking "well, that wasn't exactly what I said but nevermind, close enough" or "actually no, that wasn't what I meant"...but by that time there's not much you can do seeing as its in print, and unless it's the direct polar opposite of what you've said then there's not much point objecting either. It's normally just a twist on your words or a rewording...My dad, as a professional writer, has noticed the same thing happen to him in interivews, my mother too as a producer and writer....and both my uncles are professional footballers who have also had masses of experience in interviews, and yep, the same thing happens.

Therefore, all I'm saying is, don't take it to heart...the only way any of us can truly know Benedict's opinions is if we were to get him drunk and chat to him in a relaxed environment.

As for the Sherlock chacter thing, we all know there's more to Sherlock than the cold hearted side, and even Benedict has talked about that a little bit in other interviews, we know there's been a character development. He's not all fluffy clouds and rainbows, but he's at least a little bit better than he was at the beginning of ASIP.
 

I don't get all the fuss about this interview. But possibly that's because I come from a different place anyway. I think Benedict is a bloody brilliant actor and I would watch him in anything without thinking twice. Otherwise I'm not really into the hype that much. But I have to say this interview has made me respect him quite a lot. If this is really how he said it, I would call it clever, sensible and insightful.
I also share his view on some the fan fiction that is out there (not even to speak about some of the graphic images). As for the fans writing it, of course they can be as free and creative as they like to be, but they can't force anybody, and that also includes the actors, to like or even endorse everything they produce. That's possibly asking an awful lot.
 

Liberty wrote:

I suspect the "florals" comment wasn't meant to be part of the interview, but was just him chatting with the interviewer, and I imagine it was jokey - it's difficult to get the tone when it's in print, sometimes fun and irony is missing.  I've often seen that happening with interviews.  (In fact, it happened just recently in an interview with Benedict and Keira Knightley - they were chatting with the interviewer before the interview officially started, but it was filmed, and something the interviewer said backfired on them).  I don't think that comment should have been printed.  But I don't think it was offensive (and I can see why it was printed, because it fitted in with the "story" being presented).  I think he has a right to have a public persona, and to say things in private that he wouldn't necessarily wanted printed.
 

That´s very likely.
Also, the reported narrated the interview as a kind of a story and used this "florals" incident as a framing device into which he then embedded his discussion with Benedict. What was a quite insignificant and probably a short incident handled politely in real life was thus embellished into huge proportions.