Reset Password
Reset Link Sent
| Blogs > HetFlexK > True Hetero-Flexible Tales |
|
"Into Darkness" of Benedict's mouth I've always been a mild fan of the Star Trek movies, but was thrilled by the J.J. Abrams reboot (or whatever you want to call it) when I first saw it. Then the sequels started to come out, and as usual my expectations were set too high, so I wound up disappointed. I know myself well enough to know that sometimes, after that initial reaction, I can go back and see something again and it will leave a much different impression. The same has happened with music, many times. A band I love will put out an<b> album </font></b>that is incredible, and then the next one doesn't seem to match up. If I can stop comparing the two and just listen to it on its own merits, it becomes it's own incredible. Given enough time, and with that tendency to compare squashed, I can usually go back and watch something I didn’t like the first time and find a different appreciation for it. Not always, but sometimes. I remember disliking “Star Trek; Into Darkness” very much, and the main reason that stuck out in my head, all these years later, was what I’ll call the over acting of Benedict Cumberbatch. His character turns out to be an iconic one from the original series of movies; Khan. That role was played by Ricardo Montalban if I remember correctly, but I don’t recall his character being as intense as he was portrayed by Cumberbatch. I swear every single scene that the man is in, his acting is over the top. He does something with his face that, to me, says he's trying to show emotion instead of actually expressing it.  I call him Khanberbatch You can tell the difference between a person who is feeling the emotion, and someone who is trying to fake it, and the intensity he tried to portray or exude was so false and fake that it made me dislike seeing his face and listening to him talk. It made every line out of his mouth sound terribly cliche and overstated. So when I went to watch it again recently, the only thing at the front of my mind was the notion the film would probably be bad because of the over acting of Cumberbatch. The truth, is that it's a pretty decent movie, and I really enjoyed it more this second time around than I did the first. I’ll be keeping my copy, and will see it again at some point down the road (maybe a couple years) but one thing still stood true during this viewing, and that was my annoyance with Cumberbatch and his very poor (at least to me) acting. It didn’t spoil the entire flick for me this time, like it did before, but I still couldn’t help but be annoyed by it. Despite that, seeing the movie again (and enjoying it more this time around) has given me renewed hope that I might also view “Star Trek; Beyond” in the same light. I don’t remember liking that movie very much either, but the one thing that does stick out is a flashy action scene that seemed to go on forever, involving a motorcycle. Oh, and some woman wearing all white makeup with cool hair. That’s it though. The storyline wasn't memorable, the movie overall wasn't memorable, and it left me feeling disappointed so I'm hoping I can go back and watch it with a different mindset, and wind up liking it like I did “Into Darkness”. At least one thing is certain; I won’t have to deal with an over acting Cumberbatch. |
 |
 |
 |
| Become a member to comment on this blog | ||
 |
×
×