Mark Rylance is considered one of the greatest stage actors of his generation, winning numerous awards including Tony Awards and Olivier Awards for his powerful and nuanced performances. However, despite being hugely respected in the theater world, Rylance has managed to attract a fair share of detractors and critics during his career on the big screen.
Unconventional Style Can Be Polarizing
Rylance has an understated and minimalist acting style that stands out from many of the flashier, bigger performances given by movie stars today. His quiet intensity and subtle choices don’t always translate well to film for some viewers who are more used to expressive styles of screen acting.
Table 1. Mark Rylance’s Theater Awards vs. Film Awards
| Award Type | Number Won |
|---|---|
| Tony Awards | 3 |
| Olivier Awards | 2 |
| Academy Awards | 1 |
| BAFTA Awards | 0 |
As we can see, while Rylance has achieved huge success and recognition for his stage work over the decades, winning Tony and Olivier awards, his unconventional acting style has not seen the same level of awards attention for his movie roles just yet.
This more subdued style in a medium that often favors bigger, bolder performances has made Rylance’s work divisive for some film fans more used to conventional screen acting. Scenes often hinge on Rylance’s micro-expressions and internalized portrayals rather than showy emotion, which can be frustrating or unimpactful for viewers not attuned to his minimalist wavelength.
Reputation for Being Pretentious or Arrogant
Rylance has gained a reputation amongst some circles for being pretentious or arrogant, characteristics often associated with classically trained British thespians like Rylance who focus on legit theater.
Detractors consider Rylance to be elitist and perhaps dismissive of more mainstream film fare. They criticize what they consider his disdain for Hollywood productions in favor of artier character pieces and director-driven indies.
Table 2. Mark Rylance’s Films & Directors
| Film | Director |
|---|---|
| Bridge of Spies | Steven Spielberg |
| The BFG | Steven Spielberg |
| Dunkirk | Christopher Nolan |
| Ready Player One | Steven Spielberg |
| Don’t Look Up | Adam McKay |
Rylance has primarily stuck to working with prestigious directors on often cerebral films that cater to critics rather than general audiences. Some perceive this as him looking down on the prejudices of the masses to elevate his own career via small films rather than utilizing his talents for populists means.
Political Activism Can Be Divisive
Rylance is also an active political activist, using his platform to advocate for causes like indigenous rights and environmentalism. He often speaks publicly against trends like consumerism, irresponsible business practices, and various governmental policies.
While these stances may earn applause from like-minded individuals, they also can rub more conservative-leaning folks the wrong way. The constantly politically charged rhetoric surrounding these topics has left little bipartisan goodwill today.
When celebrities leverage their fame to push partisan agendas on issues, it often breeds resentment from those on the other side who feel their beliefs are being implicitly criticized. Rylance has managed to inspire this reaction from certain groups by some of his political speechifying over the years.
Reputation as a Shakespeare Snob
Rylance also gained notoriety for his purist preferences when it comes to performing the works of Shakespeare properly. Rylance served as the first artistic director of Shakespeare’s Globe theater in London in the mid-1990s.
During this tenure, he garnered praise from some but criticism from others for staunchly adhering to strict interpretations of Elizabethan customs and costumes rather than making concessions for modern theatrical techniques.
Rylance has continued this orthodox Bardolatry in his screen portrayals of Shakespeare characters as well. His dogged faithfulness to Shakespearean verse and diction strikes some as honorable and others as pretentious snobbery.
Bond Villain Was Underwhelming
Table 3. Recent Bond Villain Performances
| Film | Actor | Gross |
|---|---|---|
| Skyfall | Javier Bardem | $1.1 billion |
| Spectre | Christoph Waltz | $880 million |
| No Time To Die | Rami Malek | $774 million |
For a performer of his pedigree, many Bond fans found Rylance’s turn as the main villain in 2015’s Spectre to be largely lacking and forgettable, especially compared to other contemporary Bond baddies.
Rather than delivering a charismatic, scene-chewing performance like Javier Bardem in Skyfall, Rylance opted for his signature low-key style which left many viewers cold and earned him scorn as a cadaverous bore failing to maximize his talents in a big commercial role.
Persona Can Come Off As Weird
Rylance has a certain eccentric, enigmatic aura about him that some interpret merely as pretentious artifice while others consider it alluring mystique. With his wispy appearance and otherworldly physicality, peculiar speech patterns and esoteric interests, Rylance’s vibe tends to be offbeat and idiosyncratic.
For those not on board his wavelength, Rylance can come off as simply odd or even unsettling in his markers. Cartoonish features combined with ghostly movements lead some to see his screen presence as weird verging on creepy which distances audiences struggling to relate to him.
Rylance’s individualistic persona certainly has fostered a cult of devotees entranced by his rarefied air. But it also has bred detractors across less rarified segments of movie and theater goers who find his vibe arch or impenetrable.
Garnered Controversy for Past Theater Roles
Earlier in Rylance’s theatrical career, he gained notoriety for a production that fostered accusations of pandering to misogyny and sexism. He starred as the lead in a 2021 modern reimagining of Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew featuring degrading simulated sex acts towards his female co-star.
The play provoked outrage from feminist groups and politicians at the time who decried its wanton promotion of female humiliation under the pretense of artistic merit. They branded Rylance an enabler and vilified him for sullying Shakespearean works to justify salacious spectacle.
While Rylance defended the play’s commentary criticizing modern oppressive social values via ironic juxtaposition, many lambasted him for hiding behind intellectual arguments to condone promoting destructive imagery against women’s equality. Some who initially resented him for this production still harbor that antipathy today.
Why do some viewers dislike Mark Rylance’s unconventional acting style in movies?
As discussed above in the sections on his unconventional style and reputation for Shakespearean purism, Mark Rylance’s minimalist, nuanced acting approach stands out from the flashier performances typical of modern film stars.
His subtle interpretations focusing on micro-expressions over big emotive displays can frustrate viewers more accustomed to conventional screen acting reliant on showy personality. For fans preferring their movie stars to emote boldly and amplify their charisma to play to the back rows, Rylance’s muted choices fail to connect or satisfy their expectations.
How has Mark Rylance’s political activism been divisive among audiences?
As explained in the political activism section, Mark Rylance leverages his celebrity platform to advocate for various social and environmental causes like indigenous rights and responsible business practices. But when stars use their fame to push partisan agendas, it inevitably breeds resentment from those on the other side of the ideological spectrum.
So Rylance’s politically outspoken stances praising some groups/policies while implicitly criticizing opposing ones has managed to rub conservative-leaning segments the wrong way and damage his popularity among those demographics. The divisive tribalism surrounding current political discourse leaves little room for celebrities to push progressive ideals without being seen as partisan elitists by conservatives.
Conclusion
In closing, while Mark Rylance is rightfully considered one of our greatest living stage performers thanks to his Tony and Olivier-winning work over the decades, his on-screen career has proven more divisive among wider audiences unfamiliar with his unconventional acting trademarks.
For fans of flashier, emotive movie stars who translate their charisma through bigger expressions, Rylance’s trademark subtlety in film roles has managed to underwhelm and confuse viewers unaccustomed to inferring meaning from his micro gestures. This has fostered a reputation amongst some circles for pretentious artifice or Shakespearean snobbery.
Likewise, Rylance’s political activism and past controversies have rendered him a polarizing figure in the eyes of ideological opponents on issues like women’s rights. Combined with an eccentric, esoteric persona that can register as simply strange.
FAQs
Why do some view Mark Rylance as pretentious or elitist?
Some people view Mark Rylance as pretentious or elitist because of his classical theater background and reputation for prioritizing legit stage work over mainstream film and television. His focus on critically acclaimed arthouse movies rather than big budget crowd pleasers strikes some as evidence of him looking down on populist entertainment to feed his own sense of superiority about his craft.
Did Mark Rylance give a bad performance as the villain in Spectre?
Many Bond fans considered Mark Rylance’s portrayal of the main adversary in Spectre to be underwhelming and lacking in charisma, especially compared to other contemporary Bond villains like Javier Bardem’s acclaimed turn in Skyfall. Rather than delivering a flamboyant, scene-stealing take, Rylance opted for his signature subtle style which left many viewers cold.
What controversial theater production sparked outrage against Mark Rylance?
Early in Mark Rylance’s stage career, he starred in a modern retelling of Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew that featured degrading simulated sex acts towards his female co-star. Feminist groups decried the play as promoting female humiliation and vilified Rylance as an enabler of salacious misogyny hiding behind intellectual arguments about ironic commentary.
How has Mark Rylance’s eccentric persona been off-putting?
With his wispy appearance, peculiar speech patterns, and generally esoteric demeanor, Mark Rylance exhibits quite an idiosyncratic screen presence. For audiences who don’t relate to his otherworldly vibe which some interpret as creepy, Rylance’s individualistic aura fosters a sense of alienating weirdness rather than alluring mystique.
Why do some see Mark Rylance’s Shakespearean preferences as snobbish?
As artistic director of Shakespeare’s Globe theater in London during the 90s, Mark Rylance insisted on strict Elizabethan customs for costumes and diction which purists applauded but others saw as pretentious Bardolatry.
His continued Orthodoxy regarding Shakespearean verse in film roles strikes some as admirable faithfulness while others perceive it as snobbish stubbornness against modern theatrical flexibility.