Some people don't photograph well. This is, for the most part, an established fact. No matter who you ask, they will probably admit that some people are not done a justice with a simple picture. There have been theories that these people lose some of their visual appeal because unlike a normal human being with two eyes, cameras only have one "eye" or focal point, and therefore lose perspective and depth. This, therefore, is the missing "something" that renders a relatively attractive person plain or unattractive in a photograph.
I don't exactly agree with that theory. If that were the case, a video filmed by a camera with only one lens would also fail to capture their attraction.
I'm more inclined to say that part of what makes a person attractive is more than their mere looks. Movement and action combine with looks to make a person beautiful. Yes, there are some absolutely stunning and beautiful people who look amazing in a still photograph, there's no argument to that. Some people, though, are absolutely brilliant to see when they move and a still picture will never be able to capture that quality.
I've had this theory for years, but never took time to think about it until recently. I have three examples. The men I will write about in this entry are all very interesting to watch, but I don't think that photographs do them justice.
Example one is a young man by the name of Matt Smith.
He's interesting to watch because he gives so much energy to his performance. He's perfect to play the part of an alien because he is so odd himself, yet he's also likable. He's charming, and photos don't really show that.
Next is Benedict Cumberbatch.
He plays Sherlock Holmes in the BBC television show Sherlock. The first time I saw him I wondered why they would hire such a strange looking man to play Sherlock. I was amazed by reports of people who had seen the show when it aired in the UK (before I could see it here in the US) and raved about how attractive he was. I simply couldn't see what all the fuss was about.
Then, I saw the show for myself. He's stunning. The combination of his voice, his movement and his eyes just leaves me staring, amazed, at the screen whenever he's on it. He plays the role of the unique and calculating Sherlock Holmes to a T. I believe everything I see the character do, and in a way that you could easily picture the "real" Holmes in the book doing things.
Now, the last person I'm giving as an example is a little strange for me. If you had asked me six days ago if I thought this man was an attractive man I first would have looked at you as though you were completely out of your mind and then I'd have politely answered in the negative before swiftly changing the subject. It wasn't that I'd never seen him "in motion" because I had, and I didn't think he was that great to look at. That changed when I watched his film The General.
Yeah, it's Buster Keaton.
Something about how that man moved, and emoted without ever cracking a smile, is hypnotizing for me. He was funny, and graceful, and frankly, brilliant. I'm not sure I can even start to explain it. The character he played wasn't supposed to be strong, graceful or anything that he obviously was but it shows anyway.
One thing I've learned from the internet is that no matter who you are, or what you look like, someone is attracted to you. I'm not alone in finding something nice to see in these men (in fact, most of the fans of these men are so much more affected than I am that it is almost disturbing) but I still feel a little befuddled at my attraction to them. It's one of those reasons I rarely talk about who I find attractive in real life. While I'll occasionally write out a blog entry to say something like this, getting me to verbalize it in reality would be like pulling teeth. I guess I'm not so very much into conventional good looks. Give me an "interesting" face over a pretty one any day.
No comments:
Post a Comment