"HUGH DANCY TALK SABOUT EVENING"
About.com, by Diana Saenger
June 2007
Source

He first graced the TV screen in several different series, but after landing some bit parts in features films such as Young Blades and Blackhawk Down, Hugh Dancy has made his way to lead status. A notable for films featuring his native Britain including Antoine Fuqua’s King Arthur and Savage Grace starring Julianne Moore, Dancy transitions to 1950s Newport, Rhode Island in Evening. In this interview Dancy talks about his role as the troubled son of a socialite family, his co-stars and his upcoming films.

There are a lot of really strong roles for women in Evening. What was it like working on a film which had so many big female roles, from an actor’s point of view?
“It was great working with these great actresses. That’s a given. Working with Claire [Danes] and Mamie [Gummer] and Glenn [Close] and so on, and being aware that these other actresses are also going to populate the other side of the story. But that’s not to say that the experience was 100% estrogen. It didn’t particularly feel like that in the moment, partially because I was there and Patrick [Wilson] was there, but also because we were surrounded by crew. You know how it is. Even more exceptional to me than just the presence of that many females in the movie was the quality of the writing. The questions it tackled [and] then the way that – in my mind – it succeeded attacking these big questions. That felt very clear, even when we were doing it. I felt it was something unusual.”

You’re doing films in periods that have you playing a strong male role or dealing with male issues in a different context than our modern world. How do you get your head into that?
“I think personally it’s always unique to the individual. There are certain social truths. But, Buddy, for example, is living in a very interesting period. Where he is when we see him in the movie in Newport is where he is still living in a kind of throwback to the ‘30s or the ‘20s. Kind of wild Gatsby-esque times. The rules are still the same. At the same time, three hours away in New York, the beat poets are kicking in. Bohemian – the Village is coming up, and he is a crossover. He has one leg in each world. He doesn’t really know where he wants to be. That’s very specific to him and his particular background.

Equally, the guy I’m playing in Journey’s End at the moment, in the first World War, he’s in the trenches, but it’s also about where he came from. If I was playing somebody now – and I have – then I would look at it in the same way. It’s about the general social pressures. But it’s also about, specifically, who the individual is. I don’t personally make too much of a distinction. I’m also aware that there is a tendency to say anything that happens. Do you .remember Chris Rock introduced the Oscars and he talks about Russell Crowe doing period dramas? Like, he’s doing a movie that’s three weeks ago. And he lives three weeks ago and he breathes… I kind of think there is a tendency, particularly in America, to think of anything that happened yesterday as a costume drama. That’s just not the way I think about it.”

Did you have any specific idea as far as a backstory about Buddy’s sexual orientation?
“Yeah, sexual orientation, I thought was secondary. I don’t think it’s the root of his confusions. In my imagination, my guess would be that he’s never had any kind of homosexual experience. I mean, I don’t know this, you know what I mean? (Laughing) I mean Michael Cunningham might have a different idea. Director Lajos Koltai might have an idea. And they’re all right. But my theory is that he’s been at college with Ann and probably gets very drunk, and occasionally has kind of gotten lucky with young girls who think that he is exotic and glamorous. It’s always a bit tawdry. Every so often he gets really drunk and he tries it on with Ann. I think that probably happens regularly in their relationship. Every time, she just pushes him away and he falls on the floor.

The one thing I do think is that Buddy has never been capable of really maintaining any kind of substantial relationship, because he’s not grounded in any way as a person. Man, woman, it doesn’t matter. His identity is to him totally confused. That’s at the center of why he is in love with Ann [played by Claire Danes], in love with Harris [played by Patrick Wilson]. Because he just is drawn towards… I think he wants to be them, in a way. He sees Harris’ strength and his independence and thinks that’s who I want to be. He sees Ann living the life of an artist in New York. ‘That’s what I want.’ He just grabs onto them.”

Some people might believe that playing a drunk is easy…
“I don’t know I’ve met anybody who thinks that. I’ve been very gratified by people telling me how hard it must be. It’s not. It’s not easy, because the risk is you just really veer far too far.

It’s difficult because you are trying to show who somebody is, but through this extra layer of alcohol. Alcohol in some ways conceals a person and in other ways it amplifies them. Eventually if you’re drinking to repress some kind of aggression, then somewhere down the line that evening that aggression is going to resurface – maybe in a different light. So you have to think it through very carefully. There is a character arc, despite that. You also have to remember that a drunk is always fighting for control. They’re not just stumbling around until they become uncontrollable. Like Buddy, in the scene where he gives the speech at the wedding dinner, he is trying to be a sober person. Speak like a sober person. So there is a lot to think about.”

Michael Cunningham’s writing seems to have a theatrical quality as if it were set for a play. Did you find that to be the case? It’s very dialogue-driven.
“To put it another way, it’s true that there are movies that don’t rely on dialogue so much. But usually that’s simply because the writing’s bad. (Laughing) I think in general dialogue ought to always form the characters. It’s just that they don’t always achieve that. It’s amazing to me to read writing that is supple and fluid and rooted in the moment and the situation and yet gives such a strong sense of character. I agree that there’s a kind of heightened drama to it. But I think that’s in the situation and particularly a wedding, which is inherently theatrical, like a court case or something, there is always a kind of theater involved.

But what I liked about it, particularly with Buddy, is he’s wrestling away with the same questions but in a much more dramatic way. I couldn’t have done it and I wouldn’t have felt comfortable going to those excesses if it hadn’t to me tied down in reality and rooted in honesty. If it was just grandiose, all written in a dramatic way, I would have been very uncomfortable.”

Buddy’s entire family is very repressed. They all show it in different ways, but do you think that would be a hard lifestyle to grow up in?
“Maybe. For Buddy, yeah, but not for everybody. Some people love that. (Chuckles) Some people love rules. They want to know what to wear. I know if I go to walk down the Kings Road in London, I’m going to see guys wearing that uniform of the button down shirt and the red jeans and the loafers and colored sports socks and a blazer. Did you never stop to think, ‘Maybe I’ll wear something else?’ They’re happy that way. I’m not saying that’s repression, but there are a lot of different cultures that don’t reward looking outside. I don’t think that has to be a bad thing.”

In many of the films you’ve been in you’ve dealt with that kind of repression, maybe because of the British experience, but also coming into that society.
“Yeah. I mean, again I’m so wary of making sweeping statements… ‘Expert Hugh Dancy embarrasses himself with sweeping generalizations.’(Laughing) I suppose that may be true. I’ve never selected anything with that in mind. It is feasible that unbeknownst to yourself a trend emerges in the work that you do. You suddenly think, ‘God, I seem to have some access to the mindset of the outsider,’ or whatever. I really don’t know whether that’s true, or if it is why, but it may be the case.

I think usually it’s more interesting to see a character that is set apart in some way. Eventually in fact, every character has to be that way. That’s what you’re looking for in every character. It’s the grain. Even if the guy is 99% conventional, it’s the one extra percent that’s going to make him worthy of having a story told about him. Usually that 1%, if it’s a good story, is going to blossom and grow. So your job as an actor is to scrape away and scratch away and find that strength. There’s an infinity of variety. It can be anything.”

So how are you approaching that idea in The Jane Austen Book Club?
“Well, he stands out in the context of that movie in the beginning because he has never read any Jane Austen. He’s the only guy in there. He gets almost accidentally invited into this book club, because one on the women thinks one of the other women who has just gotten a divorce might like him. He misunderstands the situation and thinks the first woman wants him. He’s just a kind of a schlub and a computer nerd who reads science fiction, sitting in a room full of women who are Jane Austen experts. I didn’t really need to work on the outsider status on that one.”

Did you find in playing this role with the tension between you and Claire [Danes] that it heightened your ability to connect with her?
“No, no, no. When you work with another person as an actor, nuances of character in a relationship are a result of close understanding of the script you’ve got and then the ability to realize it. I really do believe that. I’m not just trying to avoid your question. I’ve worked with actors before that I’ve liked very much and felt the results were not so wonderful. And I’ve worked with actors and actresses that I really didn’t feel that much for and felt like we achieved some kind of so-called chemistry. I think it’s acting. That’s what it comes down to.”

... Back to Press.