By Jila Hamrang

Benedict Cumberbatch has been cast to play Johnny Depp’s brother in the upcoming Whitey Bulger biopic Black Mass. However, it seems odd to think of Cumberbatch as Depp’s onscreen brother, because quite frankly, they look nothing alike. As this post from RadioTimes points out, by including this as one of their most comparable looks:

“Leaping off a building? But of course…” RadioTimes describes, as one of the times when the actors looked most alike.

Again, this goes back to the concept of typecasting, which I discussed in my previous post. In today’s age, there are multiple ways of changing an actor’s appearance, so if the casting directors chose Cumberbatch because of his caliber of acting, does it really matter if he looks nothing like Depp whatsoever? Also, do our developed skills with media and make-up make the idea of typecasting based on looks somewhat irrelevant? Granted, there are things one simply cannot change (or it would be too expensive to edit), like height, and some aspects of body type (i.e. having broad shoulders), but with our developments, can actors now be chosen based on you know, their ability to act?

Not to mention, before the Internet decides to comment on Depp and Cumberbatch’s lack of similar apperance, it might want to check out how Depp is going to look for the movie:

Depp onset as Whitey Bulgey (HuffingtonPost)

Depp does not even look like Depp when he is in character as Bulger, so who knows what they will do to Cumberbatch’s famous face (which was recently revealed by Moffat to be almost not sexy enough to play Sherlock..”.how dare he!” say Cumberbitches). Rest assured Internet: if they can make Johnny Depp into the creepy guy you do not make eye contact with at the bar, the least they can do is make Cumberbatch look like his brother.

However, in the likely event your brain is still searching for candidates more similar in appearance to Cumberbatch than Depp, let me put it at ease:

1. Ian Harding, who currently plays a scandalous English teacher on Pretty Little Liars.

Ian Harding as Ezra Fitz in popular teen drama Pretty Little Liars.

2. Colin Morgan, former Merlin-star who is currently playing Ariel from The Tempest at Shakespeare’s Globe. He also, like Cumberbatch, suffers from high cheekbones syndrome.

You’re welcome, Cumberbitches.

By Jila Hamrang

Sean Fagan, a BuzzFeed Contributor, has compiled a list called “7 Literary Characters Benedict Cumberbatch was Born to Play” (BuzzFeed). His list brings up the idea of typecasting. Is it fair to typecast Cumberbatch, or any actor for that matter? Is it not part of their jobs as actors to be able to act like something they are not?

Well, it is not that easy. The media industry is, news to all, I know, obsessed with looks. Cumberbatch’s face is not one associated with “conventional beauty,” but he has transcended this barrier by creating his own brand of beauty. He is the poster face for intelligence, the Englishman, and thanks to his role as Khan in Star Trek, the ultimate villain.

So it is easy to see where Fagan is coming from when he suggests that Cumberbatch play Charles Ryder because of his “certain stuffy sexiness,” or Querry because of his “special brand of smoldering anger.”

I mean, are they really going to cast Cumberbatch in a role made for say, Ryan Reynolds? No, because their types are different.

This is not necessarily a bad thing. As Fagan’s exercise shows, an actor can come to mind with certain characters, and this is how actors get casted. It only becomes a truly negative thing when an actor is dissatisfied with his roles and wishes to break away from his typecast. However, that is not always successful.

Rex Harrison playing Professor Henry Higgins in My Fair Lady (1964).

Really, the most shocking thing about Fagan’s list is that he did not include Henry Higgins from Bernard Shaw’s Pygmalion.

Cumberbtch would be the PERFECT Henry Higgins! I have been saying it for years. Am I right? Do I sense a My Fair Lady remake?

Benedict Cumberbatch rockin’ that Henry Higgins bookcase-style.

Let me also put out there that I am willing to write the script. #futuregraduate2014.

By Jila Hamrang

Spotted: Dakota Johnson of the anticipated adaptation of 50 Shades of Grey and Benedict Cumberbatch were seen having lunch together. Apparently, when a star goes to lunch with an unexpected friend, like the 24-year old Johnson, it is breaking news and creates the suspicion that they are dating.

Naturally, most of the articles rope fans in by using images of the two of them, and barely mentioning, if at all, that there was a third person with them. Of course, since she is not famous, she is irrelevant, and only a nuisance to the reporters’ angle of the lunch outing being a date rather than just a lunch.

To spice up their lunch, Cumberbatch put napkins on his face which caused his lunch buddies to laugh. For example, this article from Daily Mail stated: “He provided ample lunchtime entertainment for 24-year-old Dakota and another female friend as he smothered his face with the white napkin” (Link). It is as if the paparazzi and the celebrity news articles are oblivious to the possibility that Cumberbatch’s joke was a way to cover his face from the imposing photographers, with the added bonus that it entertained his friends. This is especially suggested by when a napkin has fallen off and he looks to the side, towards the paparazzi. 

His look indicates that he knows they are watching.

The paparazzi taking a photograph of a star while he is enjoying brunch with his friends is not the most heinous thing they have ever done, but Cumberbatch’s reaction, although small and humorous, says a lot. It says:”You want a picture? Here, here is my face covered with napkins. Is this not hilarious? Is this what you wanted? Is this better than what you wanted?” He gives them something nonsensical because that is what they are: nonsensical.

Just leave the stars alone and let them eat their lunches, with napkins or without. Also, it would be great if the paparazzi stopped being that hyper girl from 3rd grade who thought every time a boy and a girl spoke it meant they were in love with each other.

By Jila Hamrang

A Google Search of Cumberbatch at the moment will lead to links about his place in TIME’s 100 Most Influential People and a surprising article concerning Martin Freeman. In a recent interview, Martin Freeman, Cumberbatch’s co-star in Sherlock, told Yahoo that he does not hang out with Benedict Cumberbatch. Freeman, who plays Sherlock’s best friend Watson on the show, said: “We are very friendly and we’re good work colleagues but we’re also quite busy and I don’t really hang out with many of, or any of, my co-stars.”

In other words, the friendship the characters have on-screen is not reflected by the actors off-screen. Apparently, Yahoo forgot the definition of “acting.” It does not appear that Freeman’s comment is made out of maliciousness, but the article tries to milk it for all its drama by entitling the piece with the sassy: “Martin Freeman: I don’t hang out with Benedict Cumberbatch (exclusive).” The title is more abrasive than the actor’s actual statement. It suggests that Martin Freeman specifically singled out Cumberbatch as someone he chooses not to spend his time with, when in reality, Freeman’s statement suggests that he does not really spend time with any of his co-stars. This is understandable, since Freeman has his own personal life, which includes his two kids and his long-term girlfriend Amanda Abbington (Mrs. Watson in Sherlock). The question recalls middle-school-cafeteria-chatter, and has nothing to do with his promotion of Fargo, but apparently Fargo was not as important as his hangouts with Cumberbatch. If anything, this piece is a lame attempt by Yahoo to garner more views with the use of Cumberbatch’s name, and with a misleading title that suggests less than amicable feelings between the two co-stars, they will get the attention they desire.

Although viewers may wish their favorite actors were their favorite characters, they have to realize that it is okay if Freeman and Cumberbatch are not Watson and Holmes.

Perhaps, it is a compliment to the actors if viewers wish they were as close as their characters. That is, it is so believable that they are good friends, it is astonishing that in real life, they are not. However, fans’ obsession with their friendship more-so exhibits their connection with Holmes and Watson. So, do fans care whether or not Freeman and Cumberbatch hang out? Does it matter, as long as they keep making Sherlock episodes?

By Jila Hamrang

The only title more jarring than “Cumberbatch vs. Cyrus” is “Cumberbatch dating Cyrus,” but no fear Cumberbitches, the star has not been in any altercation or romance with the pop-star. Cumberbatch has risen in the ranks for TIME magazine’s annual top 100 list, and Mirror could not help but mention that the star’s sixth spot in the polls is “way ahead of pop superstars Miley Cyrus, Katy Perry, and Bruno Mars.”

If Cumberbatch is “way ahead” of the pop superstars, then why list them? Does Mirror want more views by name-dropping? Is it inconceivable that Cumberbatch would beat Cyrus? Is Mirror suggesting his spot is a real accomplishment because he is ahead of them?

Interestingly, Cumberbatch is the only actor in the top-ten, and the article lists who is ahead of Cumberbatch, including Beyoncé and Lady Gaga, but not until after it alerts readers that Cumberbatch is ahead of Cyrus, as if it is the best thing that could happen to him. In a world where no publicity is bad publicity, is it shocking that Cumberbatch is ahead of Cyrus? Judging by Mirror‘s article, yes, yes it is.

Link.