Did Brooks' eccentric acting put people off?

I didn't know whether to feel annoyed or sorry. I remember thinking that he shouldn't or couldn't go near Trek again. I thought he (Sisko) was an amazing strategist as a Starfleet officer. I'd like to see the character return.

 

At times, the way Sisko spoke, it sounded unnatural. His delivery had a weird cadence, especially when the Sisko was angry. At those moments it did seem like Brooks was overacting, in an attempt to put emphasis on a point that he wanted to convey to the audience or other characters.

That didn't bother me, though. After a short while, you get used to it. It is what it is. Sisko's manner of speaking is kind of quirky, but quirky isn't a bad thing. It can be amusing.

Often times, when I see Picard on the tv screen, it seems to me that Sir Patrick is putting on a Shakespearean acting clinic. Like I said, it is what it is. Just enjoy it for what it's worth.

 

The best lead series captains all have eccentricities. It's why they're memorable and engaging and not walking popsicle sticks.

And there's more to Sisko than making every word in a sentence feel like a string of independent word-long sentences (Kirk) or, worse, making every sentence loaded with more pregnant pauses than the relative mass of four cats' litters combined (Picard), since 48 kittens is a lot of meow to fill that litterbox with... Once you pick up on Picard's quirky use of language, it's iconic of the character. It's no different for any engaging lead, there's something a little intangible and different that has endearing and unique value. Sisko has offbeat cadences and that's just as wonderfully iconic, don't let me previously catty swipe at Picard fool you.

 

He did have a unique way of expressing himself at times (an almost lyrical aspect to his speech when he got emotional) but I liked it. It was a combination of the quirkyness of TOS Kirk/Shatner with the gravitas of TNG Picard/Stewart. I'd understand though if it's not to everyone's personal tastes but he's my favorite lead/captain on my favorite trek series.

 

It didn't bother me in the slightest. Sisko had some unusual mannerisms and a slightly odd way of speaking, but I just accepted it as being a part of the character's DNA.

Brooks was not on the same level as Patrick Stewart when it came to acting chops. But then again, neither was Shatner. It didn't impact all that much on my feelings towards his character.

 

I agree it sounded a bit weird when Sisko got angry, but he has a beautiful voice and that makes even the most eccentric speech patterns very acceptable. I could listen to Avery for hours and never get bored.

Plus his acting is fine, I actually like every series lead up until now, and I definitely include Avery Brooks in that, and yes that also includes Kate Mulgrew, Scott Bakula and Sonequa Martin-Green.

 

I wonder if there are any instances of the other actors on DS9 or other Trek actors who have commented on Brooks' style in some other interviews (behind his back or to his face). It seems him being "out there" IRL may have garnered more attention to his acting style or behaviours on set. Just curious.

 

For me, In some rare scenes, yes. Particularly in some scenes where he was supposed to act dramatic but ended up being hammy. (Then again, in some other 'dramatic' scenes he seemed to perfectly catch the mood, so I'm not sure why it was so 'off' in those other scenes).

Generally, I just decided to ignore it when it happened, and to just enjoy the rest of the episode for what it was.

 

I doubt many actors would do that publicly, they may have to work more often with the actor they talked about. In private, they might have done that, I doubt we'd hear about it though.

 

I think Star Trek calls for heightened performances, hence the casting of Shakespearean ‘thespians’ such as Stewart and Shatner. The show tends to asks actors to portray reactions to crazy situations. It’s not and never has been a work of realism.

I’m a fan of... gosh, about 35-40 years depending on when I first saw Trek movies as a kid. “You Klingon bastard, you killed my son” etc. I wouldn’t say Shatner or Stewart overact, more that they give performances which fit the material they are given.

Avery Brooks, much the same. I think his work throughout DS9 is superlative. It’s only in the last few weeks that I’ve started posting on this board and thus engaging with fandom that I’ve been introduced to the notion that he’s bad. His so-called overacting or choices in delivery/cadence are no more egregious than anyone who came before or after. No one calls out Odo for chewing the scenery, but he does because that’s the show he’s in.

In other words, Brooks is fine. No, not fine. Brooks is great.

 

There are some who think Brooks was bad, but I don't think it's anything near a majority opinion here.

 

Got to agree in part. Found Mulgrew to be stiff and robotic. Loved Brooks' dramatic flourishes. Bakula was ok for me. To each their own.

 

Buzzkill was being an idiot when he posted this (yes, I am allowed to say that).* I don't think Brooks has ever been bad in anything.

*He is no longer an active poster under that screenname.**
**Also, he's me.

 

I had the feeling that Mulgrew could have been better with better scripts to work with. I really liked her voice acting playing Katharine Hepburn in Tea at Five.

 

Tbh, I never got used to Brooks' acting really. Not saying he's bad but it's just not my cup of tea. He did portray Sisko great imo so I have no problem there. It's just the style really.

 

Honestly, I don't find Brook's acting eccentric or bad in any way.
I've always supposed that the character Sisko should be and behave the way he did.

As for Sisko, at first I thought he was rather boring as for being the one in charge compared to Kirk, Picard and Janeway but as the series progressed, he became a real bada**!

 

I'm kind of biased towards Sisko because when I was a teen working my very first job, I had a boss that reminded me very much of him. He was cool most of the time, but he could also bring the thunder during crunch time. I'm inclined to think that there's a lot of Avery Brooks in Sisko, especially as the series progressed.

 

I think Brooks acting in the series as a whole is great. If I'm correct he has some experience in stage acting. I think he felt that approach would probably fit Trek the best with actors such as Stewart coming off as a successful run in ST:TNG and his portrayal of Picard made him a rival to Kirk himself as fave captain. This may be popular but Stewarts acting in certain scenes could also be seen as over the top. I know what you mean about Brooks being seeming odd though in his performance. But only in parts. He himself said he had a hard time conveying certain emotions that a story needed. But as a whole I don't think this has detracted from the series at all. I think he is one of the most memorable ST characters and in a good way.

 

"This may be popular but Stewarts acting in certain scenes could also be seen as over the top."

That was meant to be this may not be popular.

I can't seem to find the edit button. Maybe that's because I'm a newer poster.

 

Yeah. The edit button doesn't show up right away.