More "whitewashing" BS, this time from the Guardian.
www.theguardian.com/film/2017/sep/15/romany-gypsy-traveller-portrayal-in-film-benedict-cumberbatchAs far as I am concerned this is getting pretty ridiculous. I hope the author of this piece is not some "privileged" person because if she is then what right does she have even having an opinion about the underclasses not having enough representation! The paper should only have people of Roma ethnicity write about such matter because anything else is just using a white privileged person as a sham to express a POV.
If these people had their way BC would ONLY have acting opportunities if he portrays posh, upper class, straight, English gents who have recently married and have now two children! And then they would probably accuse him of never stretching himself dramatically and just going for cliched archetypes!
When did every actor HAVE to be someone who IS their role instead of ACTING their role?!?
And when did being an intelligent person who wants to be a part of the world by being involved in matters that include more than just our own "tribe" become a horrible thing. I would imagine the issue of the homophobic attitudes towards the young MW was the "story point" that motivated BC to taking on this project. Why should that decision be considered something unacceptable? Why shouldn't he, as a thinking, caring, concerned person want to add his contribution to the conversation in the way that he can with his acting talent?
It isn't like BC is slapping on blackface and mocking a culture is it? I am sure he will do the role justice and treat it will dignity and honesty. Not every ethnic group has a spotless record of tolerance and inclusiveness and it isn't right that anyone who wants to examine (through his acting) the warts of this particular culture be subjected to these catcalls of "whitewashing" and racist comments.
And I absolutely HATE when a writer throws in the line that "Cumberbatch is undoubtedly a hugely talented actor and we can expect a nuanced performance from him.". That's just called covering their ass! Because the next bit gives them away - "the implication that any actor can throw on a different ethnic identity at a whim is troubling." If they really believed that a talent such as BC would give a truly "nuanced performance" then they would would be in agreement with just letting him ACT and see where the performance lead before slagging his casting in the role. Maybe he would lend a real credence to the issue highlighted in the work and draw more attention to the social issues at play here? But what they really think is that BC is just another "any" old actor who was just thrown the role at a "whim"!
Let's see if we applied the "rules" of total political correctness to the roles BC has done so far what would we have...
He wouldn't ever done the role of Frankenstein because the performance was a slur against autism!
He wouldn't ever done the role of Hamlet because more roles in theatre should go to wider ethnic diversity so someone else should be cast in the role! And he isn't Danish either so why should he be cast as Danish royalty!?
He wouldn't ever done the role of Khan because this fictitious person was portrayed by Ricardo M. originally!
He wouldn't ever done the role of Alan Turning because BC isn't gay and only gay actors can portray gay people.
He wouldn't ever done the role of Sherlock because he doesn't repress himself sexually (and that could be interpreted as slurring asexuals). Oh and M&G are queerbaiting, misogynistic writers who he should not be supportive of either!
He wouldn't ever done the role of All because he isn't transgendered.
He wouldn't ever done the role of Dr. Strange because TS was cast in the movie and that was insensitive to Asian actors, so him being in that movie would have shown him to be supportive of "whitewashing"!
He wouldn't ever done the role of Edison in TCW because he isn't American.
He wouldn't ever done the role of Stephen Hawking because he doesn't have ALS and simply CAN'T accurately portray a person with this affliction without it being demeaning in some way!
He wouldn't ever done the role of Van Gogh because he isn't Dutch!
He wouldn't ever done the role of Stephen Ezard because BC personally wasn't good in maths at school.
Actually I don't think there would be ANY roles he would be suitable for! Because he isn't a dragon, a long dead Prime Minister, an Australian computer hacker, a fussy quiz team leader, a son of Hugh Laurie, a maniacal murdering king, a Boston politician, a son in love with his half-sister, a gay spy, or... well the list goes on and on!
:-))