There's this thing that really irks me when actors express disdain for original source material (books, novels, old english poems) because it doesn't give them enough raw grist to show off their considerable acting chops.
I give you Ray Winstone, the motion-captured face of the new Beowulf movie (which, by the way, shouldn't actually be called Beowulf but actually Neil Gaiman's Olde Timey Englishe Monsterre Rompe): "I had the beauty of not reading the book, which I understand portrays Beowulf as a very one-dimensional kind of character - a hero and a warrior and that was it. I didn't have any of that baggage to bring with me."
Excuse me, fuck you. I don't want to hear how you were liberated from the restrictions of the source material so you could bring 'depth' to the character. Especially when the source material is one of the most venerated and studied pieces of writing in the English language. Read the book, and put it on screen. Is that so much to ask? Apparently it is.
I remember David Wenham (the guy who played Faramir in Lord of the Rings) saying something very similar... 'Faramir's such a flat character, too good and honest and whatnot, totally boring to play on-screen!' to paraphrase loosely. Piss off, dude. You don't have to turn every freaking thing you do into Fucking Streetcar Named Goddamn Desire. Stop dicking with the source material so you can show off your range.
If the character's flat, play the flat character and STFU.
