Smoked Salmon wrote:
It was never fair to expect an actor like Cumberbatch to try and have to reflect such an iconic character portrayed by such a different type of actor.
You mean like Sherlock Holmes?
If a role is iconic, then it's very likely to end up being played by multiple different actors, often of very different types. Heck, different actors have been playing the same role since the dawn of theater. How many thousands of Antigones or Hamlets or Cyranos have there been? And how is it unfair to an actor to expect them to act?
Sherlock Holmes was a literary character open to interpretation and adaption. Khan was as much a visual and performance based characterisation as he was written one.
TWOK has not been surpassed by STIF in terms of acclaim and the fact is that Cumberbatch was very much having to step into a role where he would automatically be compared to an iconic performance. That is different to an interpretation of Holmes. He was always destined to have a hard time breaking away from that and the attempts to do so have reduced him Khan to something of a largely unfamiliar bad guy who just happens to share the name. I wouldn't be the first person to suggest that had he remained John Harrison it would've made little difference to STID. Therefore I think having him carry the burden of the Khan name was a disservice to Benedict. He should've been able to create his own bad guy from scratch (in terms of performance).