Benedict Cumberbatch responds to Sam Elliott: “There’s a kind of denial”

Benedict Cumberbatch power of the dog
netflix

The Power of the Dog actor justifies his character and the meaning of Jane Campion’s film: “It’s not a history lesson…”

For Sam Elliottone of the old cowboys of 1883, Power of the DogJane Campion’s Oscar-favorite film, is a “big shit”. An opinion for the less decided which did not much like Benedict Cumberbatch :

“I’m trying very hard not to say anything about this very weird reaction that happened the other day in a podcast,” comments the English actor who plays an unassuming gay rancher in 1825 Montana, taking out his frustration on his sister-in-law (via BAFTA Film Sessions). “I didn’t hear what he said exactly so it wouldn’t be fair to comment in detail… But I do understand he was offended by the way the western was portrayed…”

Benedict Cumberbatch pursues and counter-attacks by targeting in particular the allusions of Sam Elliott on the homosexuality of the character: “ABeyond this reaction, there is a kind of denial that anyone could have towards anything other than a heteronormative existence because of what they do in life or where they are born. … It is once again a form of massive intolerance throughout the world towards homosexuality, towards the acceptance of the other and of all kinds of difference. We are in a prism of compliance with what is expected of a man in the archetypal mold of the western. Deconstructing that through Phil (his character) is not a history lesson…”

Oscars 2022: The Power of the Dog, by Jane Campion, is favorite with 12 nominations

In the process, the British actor of Power of the Dog goes to the end of his analysis by explaining that “people like Phil still exist in our world. Whether it’s on our doorstep or whether it’s down the street or in a bar or on a sports field. There is aggression, anger and frustration. Like an inability to control who you are. It does damage to those people and, as we know and shows in the film, damage to those around them… There’s no harm in exploring a character to find out the root causes. This is a very specific case of repression, but also of an intolerance of this true identity, that of Phil, which he cannot fully assume. The more we look under the hood of toxic masculinity, the better we can uncover its root causes, and then we’ll be more likely to deal with it…

Leave a Reply