2. What's My Motivation?
Benedict Cumberbatch's villain is an astonishingly provocative creation - not only in his performance, but also in the creative decision that moulded the character. I don't quite agree with the marketing campaign behind the character, in light of the events of the film, because it does little more than make a pantomime out of a perfectly legitimate threat for a while, but his impact is such that that doesn't quite get in the way of his performance as a whole. It doesn't matter who he is, or who he isn't, because he is a brilliant villain. However, even Cumberbatch's well-dressed villain has his problems - he is driven by a singular motivation, and by a massive betrayal initially, and that is hammered home in the way he is framed for much of the film. He is a superior being, ignorant of the ants scurrying around him thanks to his hell-bent agenda of vengeance (that offers nothing more than the trailer reveals, by the way.) But, once he has achieved his goal, Harrison changes entirely, and becomes a different breed of villain, and though there is some exploration of why he might have changed his focus in a throw-away comment, there is a huge inconsistency in how he is presented at first and what he becomes. Story-tellers are of course able to employ misdirection, but there should be sign-posts and hints early that reveal themselves in retrospect, and for Into Darkness it feels like a creative decision designed to artificially add scale to the finale (which ironically, wasn't needed in the end.)