Christopher Eccleston: Thor, Star Trek, Let Him Have It, sci-fi

Interview Simon Brew 28 Oct 2013 - 06:32

We chat to Christopher Eccleston about sci-fi, Thor, 28 Days Later, Let Him Have It, Star Trek, Blade Runner and more...

"I'm Chris", says Christopher Eccleston as I walk into the room, standing up to shake my hand. It's a warm welcome, and the prelude to an interesting chat where we took in his breakthrough role in Let Him Have It, and went through Blade Runner, Thor: The Dark World, Alan Taylor, cut scenes, Anthony Hopkins and what he's up to next.

Here's how we got on...

Can we start with Let Him Have It? I was in my later teens when I stumbled into a cinema to see the film, which of course was the story of Derek Bentley, who was hung on what's since been desribed as 'highly suspect evidence' for murder. What struck me about the film was that was quite an un-British film at the time. And it was rare to see a young actor getting something so weighty on the big screen. How did that come to you, because it was an Alex Cox project originally wasn't it?

Yeah. I auditioned for Alex Cox, and he cast me, and then Alex left the project. And probably to answer your question about it being an un-English film, it was then directed by a Hungarian. Peter Medak [The Krays]. I reauditioned and got the role, and they wanted an unknown. Because they didn't want an actor on screen playing Derek Bentley who carried any baggage for the audience. They wanted them to believe that this was Derek Bentley. I think too the fact that I'd hardly ever been in front of a camera reinformed the performance. I was as raw as possible, really, I really didn't know one end of the camera from the other.

It's an incredibly powerful film, even now...

Yeah. Because it's a true story.

How familiar were you with Derek's story at the point you took it on?

I'd seen one little community theatre piece, who had done a piece about it because it's a miscarriage of justice. And the Elvis Costello song. That was it. It wasn't a huge part of my life. But then once you're cast in that you realise that there's a huge amount of literature about it.

The film did have an impact, when Michael Howard posthumously part-pardoned Derek.

Part-pardoned, yes. He wasn't fully pardoned.

How did you feel about that? Because the film had had an effect there, but perhaps not enough of an effect?

I've had the experience twice, with Let Him Have It and with Hillsborough. If you're going to involve yourself with something like those projects, you're going to have to be convinced that there was a miscarriage of justice. Otherwise you shouldn't be involved.

As high-handed as it sounds, I had to convince myself that it was an injustice to be involved in both projects. So it's very satisfying if it makes a small contribution, and both Hillsborough and Let Him Have It made a tiny contribution. Derek's pardon was as a result of his sister's and his sister's daughter's efforts.

Coming to Thor: The Dark World, then. You've said in the past that you don't really do heroes, and that a heroic role isn't necessary one that appeals.

I question the notion the heroes. I like the Dennis Potter phrase that we're all half ape, half angel. I think that's great. If you're playing a hero, look for the ape in him. If you're playing a villain, look for the angel in him. Then you're giving the audience some grey area. Because I think we are all like that.

With Malekith in particular, it's not an easy job here to put so much across under the heavy make-up and hair. But in terms of trying to put across some pathos to him, was the preparation key here?

Is there pathos in him? I don't know. Did you feel there was any?

I thought there was an effort made to justify why he did what he did in the film. I thought he was nasty and unpleasant, but he makes the decision for his people at the start, even though it's a horrific decision.

Yeah. That's certainly what myself and Alan [Taylor] were after. We worked closely, and we said we didn't just want a cackling fiend. And it's really for the audience to decide whether we achieved that. I certainly hope so. It's important to understand that the script that the audience ends up seeing is not necessarily the script that you shoot. There is more footage, and for whatever reason scenes were lost, and the emphasis was changed.

One of the things of doing a job like this, a huge project like this, is that you will have to understand that there's a big process after the shooting process. These films are created as much in post-production as they are during the shoot.

I read in particular that you had one scene with Anthony Hopkins that didn't make it to the final cut?

I did, yeah. It'll be on the extras. That's what I hope.

Was that your meet your hero moment?

Yes. It very much was. I was a 19-year old usher at the National Theatre in 1984, and at that time - pre-Silence Of The Lambs - he was playing a character called Lambert Le Roux. He was based on Rupert Murdoch and Robert Maxwell. Giving this incredible stage performance, which had a huge influence on me.

You've talked extensively before about your love of theatre. Whenever I've talked to someone who's worked in the midst of a particularly CG-heavy film, theatre seems pivotal to them. You watch a Star Wars prequel, and you don't get a conviction that people believe they're in the middle of something. Here, you're surrounded by all sorts of computer graphics at times here, but there's still a substantive core. Is that theatre preparation, a theatre ethic?

I think it's changed at drama schools now, but my training, all those years ago in 1983, we didn't deal with cameras at all. It was theatre training. And what you learn as an actor, or in those days what you learned, was the first time you think about acting for a camera is when you get a television job. So yeah, at the core of me, I'm trained as a theatre actor, and at the time I was cast in this role, I was playing a lead at the Olivier, which is where I ushered and saw my hero, Anthony Hopkins.

And [director] Alan Taylor referred to it in the meeting. He said I know you're on stage at the moment, and perhaps they thought we need somebody who can hold a stage.

And these films are theatrical. They're big scale.

Particularly the Thor ones. There was a real Shakespearian undercurrent to the first film.

Yeah. And that's why I admire so much what Chris [Hemsworth] has to do. He gives us this fantastic physical presence. And then he gives us this humour. He undercuts himself.

You realise when you make a film like this that sometimes people will come to you for just a visual detail. They're not all coming at you to talk dialogue. It's a visual, theatrical big thing. And that's a challenge. The challenge is to also be truthful, and to be believable.

So is it a particularly fun thing to do? To make a film like this?

It's fun when you get on the set and work with a director like Alan, and actors like Chris. It's a relief to get out of the make-up chair. It's a long time in the chair, but once you get on the set and you're doing the scenes... for instance, when I was in my sleeping pod, the whole awakening of Malekith. Alan would play atmospheric music. That was great fun, it was like being a kid again. I've always said that I like green screen, because it's what I did as a child in the back garden at home. I created all kinds of things around me as a child, with my imagination. So I enjoy that. I enjoy the ludicrousness of that. But then, it's no more ludicrous than sitting there, and pretending you're talking to somebody.

In your spare time, are you a blockbuster movie fan? Is that how you switch off? Because you've got such a serious body of work. So when it's announced that you're cast in Thor, notwithstanding the Hollywood films that you've done before, that's a surprise. What led you to that, what led them to that?

Well, I became a villain in Hollywood terms because of the film Elizabeth. They kind of make that decision. I would say that my own taste tends to be human interest stories, but when genre works on me, it really, really works on me. I'll never, ever forget the first time I saw Blade Runner. And for all the beauty of the skyscapes and the creation, it was the central message, as I understood it, of a robot longing to be human. How wonderful it is to be a human being.

There are all sorts of interpretations of Blade Runner, too. What I love about science fiction in particular is that you can address some very human questions. Last summer's Elysium's was the extension of where class division is going: the rich people have one world, the poor just get to look at it from afar.

Science fiction at its very best - and you see it in some of the best Doctor Who episodes - is when it's putting a prism in front of an issue in the world and taking it to logical place. That's where I think genre cinema particularly excels.

Yeah. I think there is a whole area of genre cinema where they think doing the genre is enough. But yes, when it takes a human situation, looks at it, and magnifies it through the prism of sci-fi... I loved Star Trek, I loved the original Star Trek as a child. And that is all about character. The triangular relationship between Spock, Bones and Kirk.

Appreciating that I'm not trying to be a celebrity magazine here - and I'm really not - has fatherhood changed any of the acting jobs that you've taken on?

Not yet. But I think it will. I think inevitably you start to consider things slightly differently, when you're around young children. That's as much as I would say. But it's new to me, and I think it's going to have a huge impact.

We did a big piece on our website about 28 Days Later, about what the real horror of that film is [the article is here]. And we centred in on your character. For everything else that film does and that film says, Major West epitomises so much horror and unpleasantness, under a weird guise of reason. He's certainly one of the most terrifying characters of recent times.

But where did that role come from for you? How did he develop, and how aware were you on the impact of Major West when you took the job on?

Not really. I'd worked with Danny Boyle a couple of times before, and again I went into that very much trying to suggest some humanity within his inhumanity. There was a pragmatism he felt in offering those women up for rape, which is one of the central things. His pragmatic, military mind was saying if I do this, I will keep control of these men and we can ultimately vanquish the zombies. But he forgets that if he gives up one iota of your humanity, you're lost. Thematically, that is why he is then taken by the zombies.

A fascinating film.

Yeah, yeah.

Are you at a point where you're looking to develop material yourself?

No. I'd love to sit here and say that is the case. But it isn't. I seem to continue being what is described as a jobbing, a working actor. Evermore enthusiastic to try different things. Thor was a huge challenge for me. The other big American films I've done have not been so special effects laden, so I've not had as much to contend with and compete with. And I think if this happened to me again I'd be a lot wiser, and a lot more clued in.

The guys who had done Thor, and gone through the first film, knew what they were handling. I was a little bit fresh, I really was green to it. A huge learning curve.

That's the advantage though, isn't it? That it's a pre-established world, and you walk in as the character who's almost a wrecking ball?

Yeah. It would be nice to do one more film like this on this scale, with that knowledge. Which is I'm sure what Chris and Tom and Natalie would say to you. They probably came into this second one saying 'now I get it'.

So have you avoided being signed up to a gazillion more Marvel films?

Who knows, who knows!

But doing something like this again does hold some appeal, just with eyes a bit more open to the process?

Yeah. It would be nice to have a go at something like this again.

So what do you have lined up next?

I'm doing the National Theatre's 50th birthday celebrations, and then next year I'm in a series for HBO and Warner Bros called Leftovers. Which is written by Damon Lindelof.

It's interesting: HBO has been credited with the spark for the television boom, but a lot of the qualities that HBO has tapped into were in Cracker.

A lot of it was yeah, that's absolutely right. That's why I think we should talk about British television. We should keep our own identity. We're very good at what we do, we shouldn't ape the Americans. For instance, anti-heroes like Walter White and Tony Soprano have always been a staple of European literature and television. America's come slightly later to it. Although in the 70s, they had a lot of that. 70s American film, the anti-hero was an obsession, then it got lost, and then it came back.

And with that, our time is up. Christopher Eccleston, thank you very much.

Thor: The Dark World arrives in UK cinemas on October 30th.

Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

He came across really well there, great interview guys, first I've ever found Mr Ecclestone so engaging. Excellent questions.

PS Simon I think Heat Mag is needing a new writer :-)

Thanks.Interesting interview which i enjoyed very much.Certainly conveyed that Eccleston is a principled actor who tends to need some kind of personal investment in the character he's playing to work his performance.Seems to have enjoyed his experience working on the movie and i hope Marvel find another role worthy of a quality actor like him on another film.Going to see the film soon as and looking forward to seeing him throwing down with Chris Hemsworth.

So does Svartalfheim have a north?

So you didn't say:

"Ok. Spill the beans talk us through why you left Dr Who and why you wouldn't come back for the 50th anniversary?"

Deliberately so. I had 15 minutes with him, and a) he's asked the question all the time, b) what else can he really say about it, and c) would he tell me if there was anything else?

What he's least asked about, but is hugely interesting, is Let Him Have It, a film I really, really have a lot of time for. So chose to ask him about that instead!

"a) he's asked the question all the time, b) what else can he really say about it, and c) would he tell me if there was anything else?"

You really need to go back and watch Frost/Nixon again! :-)

True dat, I watched it when it came out and again quite recently and it's lost none of it's impact.

He met with the producers. He said he'd do it. Moffat wrote the script. They went to book him, but he said no because he had such a difficult time on it before it would be too painful.

Wish Ecclestone had been in Heroes more, but then I wish Heroes hadn't been screwed up in so many ways...

...No that is just fan speculation that far too many people take as fact, per the BBC and Steven Moffat we know that he had a couple of meetings where they discussed the possibility of him appearing before he decided against doing it.
It is quite possible that he was too busy to do the episode when they were planning to shoot it, and the meetings were to see if they could arrange some time to do so, it is possible that after hearing the direction Moffat wanted to go with the story he decided that he would not want to be involved, but we don't know for sure.
But the simple fact is that there is no way they would have got him to agree, gone off to write the script, then come back and ask him to sign up...if he had said yes to do it they would have written up a contract that second and made sure he couldn't get out of it.

Because re-writing a script to remove a major character is a fairly big task, and one the BBC would be trying to avoid by simply writing up a contract with CE the moment he agreed to be in the special rather than waiting to sign him up.

Nice interview but I would've liked to read his thoughts on two of his major TV roles, the first being 'Our Friends In The North', and the second 'The Second Coming'. Both were fascinating and epic in scope, and I think defined him strongly as a great actor.

Ah yes, those famous interviews where David Frost had fifteen minutes to interview Nixon at a press junket.

Was there a look of dread in his eyes when you name-checked Doctor Who? A kind of 'I know what's coming next' kind of look?

Lots of planets have a north!

Genuinely: not at all.

Ah yes, that ability to completely miss an obvious piss take despite the presence of a ":-)"

I didn't hear this from a fan, but from a BBC employee. "The guy's a ****," was her exact words. I suspect in years to come the truth will come out, like we're hearing about JN-T era now. Eccleston can be very difficult to work with, when he wants to be. Moffat and the rest of the production team have to be diplomatic.

Would've been amazing if he'd been the one who turned round at the end of The Name of The Doctor. Damn you, Ecclescakes.

I had added one to my reply to make it clearer that it too was a pisstake.

I absolutely love CE, and I think I love his TV work more than anything. The first major series I can remember him in was Cracker, with CE and Robert Carlyle being the stand out actors. At 13 Robert Carlyle had me shitting myself. I always watched Hamish Macbeth with a degree of caution, expecting him to start chanting L I V, E R P, Double O L liverpool FC. Anyway, love CE, but also a bit pissed off about the Dr Who anniversary, but how can I love an actor because of his conviction to take on new and interesting roles, and then be hacked off because he doesn't revisit an old one? Damn you Eccleston, I love you.

You made the right call there, as you usually do with your choice of interview questions, I think. I've noticed your habit of trying to ask unexpected, left-field questions during interviews, and I for one greatly appreciate and respect that. I think it makes your interviews far more interesting.

But it only really screwed up after season 2 didn't it? And CE was in the first season.
Definitely a great character though, and a real shame they didn't use the full scope you felt he could have had.

Sorry but unless your BBC employee was Steven Moffat, Faith Penhale, Marcus Wilson, Danny Cohen or the head of casting I doubt they'd have any access to the type of negotiations that went on with actors for the 50th...just because someone works for the BBC doesn't mean they would know every detail about what is happening in Doctor Who, especially as almost everything related to the 50th has been considered extremely classified and only a handful of people would know anything about Eccleston's meetings with the BBC.
And, as I already said, that is simply not how the BBC do business: they don't contact someone about being in a series, write the script and then go back to the actor and try and get them to sign a contract...if you're trying to cast someone before your script is written you get them to sign a contract so they don't take on another job!

*reads interview*

hm. interesting.

*looks down at comments, hoping it is not as I expect*

damn.

Moffat's abilities as a producer aren't as great as his writing skills. The Who production office hasn't been the most stable working environment during his time.

Christopher Eccleston is probably the most famous person I've had the pleasure of speaking to. I was en route to a club in Manchester city centre about ten years ago, and asked for directions from this guy sitting by himself in a wine bar. I'm processing the reply, when I realise just who it is I'm talking to. Like an idiot of course, I get excited and blurt out "You're Christopher Eccleston !", which he doesn't seem terribly pleased about. It provides an interesting anecdote, when I eventually get to the club though.

Surely this is going to be especially well recieved in Britain?Even apart from just finding out what happens to Loki after Avengers Assemble,there's Asgardian Gods in contemporary London and The oncoming storm against The God of Thunder to enjoy.What's not to Love?Bring it on.

for what it's worth. i went to a small audience with john barrowman, who made the same point (although more diplomatically)

Thanks Simon for the reply. It was a jokey post from me. It was a nice interview.

That Eccleston was an a***? Barrowman has been quoted as saying that he was grumpy on the set of DW, but I think you have to bear in mind that JB came in more than halfway through the filming period, and CE had already been working a grueling schedule for several months. There are many other people I could quote who talk about how pleasant CE is to work with, both on DW and other productions.

perhaps you a valid point.

although he was quoted as saying at his age as an actor he'd happily read from the phone book as long as he was paid for it. but still he refused to do doctor who.

also he did say david tennant was a really nice guy and great to work with.

Sponsored Links