#How Old Is Actor Albert Finney?

[nkatr84]

Scrooge: Old Vs New

There’s a few posts I wanted to make. The new Guardians Of the Galaxy Holiday Special. Disenchanted. Slumberland. Wednesday. That one Moon Knight fan fic sitting in my drafts. But I’ve got to talk about this.

Scrooge: A Christmas Carol on Netflix came out this year in 2022. While Critics haven’t been too kind to it (I’ll get to my theory why in a second) y’all on Tik Tok and Tumblr have been losing your minds. You’re falling in love with the music (particularly Later Never Comes). But mostly…many of you have this reaction.

The surprising hottie in question being this rendition of Ebenezer Scrooge.

And I get it. As is tradition in animated takes of Dickens immortal classic, the animators clearly took inspiration from their voice actor Mr. Luke Evans. And Mr. Evans is a very handsome man. So I’m right there with you guys simping over an old man with a sexy voice.

But! I would be remiss if I failed to educate my fellow fangirls, fanboys and all between that this movie…is technically a remake.

Directed in 1970 by Ronald Neame, Scrooge was nominated for Four Academy Awards and won a Golden Globe. Quite an achievement in a time when movie musicals were fading in popularity. And it’s composer Leslie Bricusse (who also helped bring Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory to life) was an executive producer and helped write the screenplay for this new version. And since he passed away last year, the animated film is dedicated to him.

Of the original eleven songs, five were carried over to the new movie. Happiness. I Like Life (with updated lyrics). Beautiful Day, Thank you Very Much and I Will Begin Again. Yet while the original movie received generally positive reviews from critics, the new movie only holds a 40% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. What’s the difference? I mean the animation is very nice. Sometimes downright gorgeous. Obviously the music works. I’ve heard people praising both the new songs as well as the older ones. And they actually add depth to the original story.

Well if I had to guess, the new version is very much catering to kids versus families. The Ghost of Christmas Present has cute little Minion like critters. They cut the line of Scrooge saying, “If They (the poor) would rather die then they better do it. And decrease the surplus population!” I guess because it’s too mean? Speaking of, they give Scrooge a dog named Prudence. I guess to show the kids that he’s not all bad. He has a cute doggy! He’s kinda indifferent to the dog but hey! Don’t look at the scary imagery of Scrooge watching his own ghost rise from his grave! Look at the puppy! Look at the puppy! I mean Mr. Magoo kept the mean lines in as did the Muppet’s. Plus they trusted kids with the scary stuff.

Yeah as cute as those reindeer antlers on her looked at the end, Prudence was definitely a studio note and serves no purpose. She could be cut and you wouldn’t miss anything. Plus I’m not a fan of the opening number. Too peppy and modern. I wished they had done an update of the song that opens the 1970 movie, “A Christmas Carol “

Plus I love this song from Cratchit. It’s so Christmas… I wish this one made the cut.

But I do like the new version. Later Never Comes goes way harder than “You” and Luke Evans really balances out Scrooge being an old curmudgeon and a man who knows and regrets his choices. Plus the whole thing is animated like a dream. I love Luke Evans singing “I will Begin Again.” It’s a song of hope, passion and joy. And when Albert Finney’s Scrooge sings it …well… he tried…I can’t post it here but trust me. Luke Evans is a major upgrade. They make up for it with the finale in the 1970’s version where they almost reprise every song in the movie. Plus my parents always like how they made Albert Finney up to really look like a miser than doesn’t cut his hair or even clean his nails or his house. And technically Albert Finney was a sex symbol back in the day. Where he played both the old and young versions of Scrooge. So having a sexy Scrooge is technically precedent…

So give the original movie a watch if you like this one. It can be it’s own kind of goofy at times, but it’s definitely worth a yearly viewing. As is the new version on Netflix.

[stefankarlfanblog]

Interview with Stefán Karl written for Ský magazine, on the 1st of April 1999: https://timarit.is/page/7847092

Weak for money and women's issues

First of all, Stefán Karl: What is so remarkable about being an actor?Being an actor may not be so remarkable, but if you look at acting as a phenomenon, it is remarkable.

Doctors help the sick, politicians help their friends, carpenters build houses, but what is an actor's role in society? The actor's role may not be so tangible. But as soon as one spectator is affected in a play, doesn't the actor have a role and a purpose?

Do you follow English football? Yes, but not regularly.

Which team are you with? I'm with Arsenal who, as everyone knows, is the best team apart from Hauka!.

How do you see yourself in old age? Young and lively as a lamb in the pasture. I'm going to spend my old age with friends and colleagues in a retirement home where we will have so much fun that the nurses have to change shifts five times a day.

What are you good at, besides acting? That is: do you have talents in other areas? I choose now to keep my self-esteem to myself but I can proudly say that I play the piano and the accordion, and I can also play the drums and sing. Yes, then I was a salesman at Húsasmiðinn and I think I was just pretty good.

What are you weak for? Money and women's issues. One of the weakest. There you have it girls: You must make the first step!

If you met the Pope, what would you say to him? Get off your back!

Are you religious? Yes, I can't deny it. It is always good to have faith, especially when something goes wrong. I don't attend church regularly, but I certainly wouldn't be a worse person if I did.

How would you describe the country and nation to someone who had never heard of us? I think I'd tell him a good Hafnarfjörður townie joke so he couldn't resist coming and seeing one for himself.

Do you sing in the shower? No, but I did. Then I stopped because I don't live alone.

Which country do you most want to go to? Why? To Italy. I have been to Italy once and traveled there and it is a wonderful country. I have decided that when I get married one day - whenever that will be - I will invite my wife to Venice. I decided this when I was 12 years old in Venice. So it would be nice to come to the USA and see the sights with your own eyes.

Has acting brought you the favor of women? No, you doesn't feel it now, in fact, I've come out after a show of Waiter in the soup and found a red rose on my car. But at the time, I would have rather thought that the Social Democratic Party was spreading propaganda rather than that a woman was trying to get with me. (Translator's note: the logo of the Social Democratic Party in Iceland is a red rose.)

Are you on a fast? No. But I believe in love at first sight, it also saves a lot of time!

Favorite line from a movie? "Stooooop thaaaaaat traaaaain" from the movie The Dresser starring Albert Finney. This was when the train was going ahead of him and he called the train to stop which it did. Then he got on board.

Do you get stage fright? It's unavoidable. Stage fright is part of the show and just the actor's job in general. Not getting stage fright before a show is like forgetting to put on a costume. As someone said: safety is the actor's worst enemy!

What is an actor's occupational disease? The work!

Photograph taken by Páll Stefánsson

Stefan Karl Stefansson. an aspiring actor will graduate from Iceland's Drama Academy on the upcoming 22nd of May. Many people already know him from the fun show Waiter in the soup, which was shown in Iðnó this winter, but this summer he brings out his brilliant talent with the leather jacket and chewing gum and follows in Laddi's footsteps as the dentist in Little Shop of Horrors, which will be shown in Borgarleikhúsið's. Stefán is taking off.

[adamwatchesmovies]

Scrooge (1970)

Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol has been adapted so many times you need to do more than end it with a line other than “God Bless us, everyone” to stand out. So how about a musical version of the classic story? Sounds like an odd fit but the terrific soundtrack and impressive dance numbers make 1970's Scrooge a new favourite.

Ebenezer Scrooge (Albert Finney) is a bitter miser who considers the ideals and spirit of Christmas pure humbug. He hesitates to give his underpaid assistant Bob Cratchit (David Collings) the day off and scoffs at his nephew Harry (Michael Medwin) when he suggests a holiday dinner. One cold Christmas Eve, the ghost of Scrooge's partner Jacob Marley (Alec Guinness) appears to him with a warning: "Tonight, you will be visited by three spirits. Heed their counsel and change your ways or risk an eternity of suffering."

I know you’re still incredulous at the idea of an all-singing, all-dancing Ebenezer Scrooge. Trust me, it works. It’s not like this was a story grounded in realism from the get-go with the multiple spirits and all. Plus, Christmas has a wide cannon of songs attached to it - so does the nearby New Year’s celebration - so is it really a stretch? These choices give Scrooge a way to stand out. If you’re a fan of musicals, it gives you one more to add to your lineup. How about a whole day of White Christmas, Jingle Jangle: A Christmas Story, The Nightmare Before Christmas, Meet Me in St. Louis, Holiday Inn (if you consider those last two Christmas movies) and you conclude it with Scrooge?

This is the best kind of musical. Every song adds to the story and tells you more about the characters. Some are so catchy you’ll want to rewind the film just to hear them again. I’d single out December the 25th and Thank You Very Much (for which the film received an Academy Award nomination) as the best. That later one blew my socks off. It’s a big parade march that comes up during the “Spirit of Christmas Future” segment and at first, I thought its cheery tone was ill-suited for the darkest point of the story but that’s the point. It’s so cheery it drives home how people feel about Ebenezer Scrooge just as well as a couple of old ladies cackling over his stolen possessions could. Then, the film adds a new scene, a delightfully ironic final fate that drives the lesson home even better than the song did. What’s next? a delightful reprise where the previous songs are now given a completely different meaning thanks to the transformation that’s taken place. My favourite part of musicals (and hear me out on this one) often turns out to be the end credits because that’s when we get a second chance to hear the best songs as the film ushers us out. This conclusion is that second chance but even better because it also adds to the plot.

The great thing about Scrooge is that you get all of these songs and the story you love too. The film hits all of the emotional beats, contains all the characters, events and plot points too. Albert Finney’s scratchy old man voice is a bit off-putting but it fooled me. I wasn't sure if he was an actor in makeup or a marvelously spry senior. It’s a great performance and within a few minutes, you’ll have set you incredulity aside.

Certain musicals contain nothing but hits. Others have a few good tunes and the rest among mostly forgettable numbers. I’m not 100% sure where the soundtrack to Scrooge lands. I’ll say this; any song becomes memorable if you hear it enough times and Scrooge is the kind of movie you will come back to. Just as fans of Home Alone occasionally swap it for the sequel, I predict you will eventually feel like taking a break from the George C. Scott and Alastair Sim versions of A Christmas Carol and reach for Scrooge instead. You might even include two or all three when the holiday season comes around, as this British musical is perfect as a movie you put in the background while decorating or wrapping gifts. The more I think about it, the more I like Scrooge. (December 26, 2020)

[kinonostalgie]

Murder on the Orient Express (Sidney Lumet, 1974)

As this film begins - the first big screen version of Agatha Christie's famous murder-mystery novel set on a train, the exotic Orient Express, traveling from Istanbul to Calais - it becomes immediately apparent that we are in for something old fashioned and glamourous. The names of the film's cast appear on a pink satin background during the film's opening credits accompanied by Richard Rodney Bennett's rousing symphonic score. The decision to cast huge stars as the murder suspects was an inspired choice with Sean Connery (as a retired Army Colonel) the most famous at the time although having both Ingrid Bergman (playing a Swedish missionary) and Lauren Bacall (as a crass twice married divorcée) brought the film a touch of class as they both represented an era in Hollywood known for it's elegance and glamour. The story's main character - the famous Belgian detective Hercule Poirot - is played by Albert Finney who physically transforms himself into the role - beady shifty eyes, lathered down greasy hair, a thin very pampered and dramatic moustache, the requisite french accent, a constant stream of bodily tics and extremely annoying countenance. A dream role for an actor to have fun hamming it up which Finney does with great comic delight. The rest of the passengers - a bizzarre group of unrelated characters - who become suspects in the murder of a shady businessman (Richard Widmark) are an aloof Russian aristocrat (Dame Wendy Hiller), her maid (Rachel Roberts), the trian's conductor (Jean-Pierre Cassell), an English governess (Vanessa Redgrave), a Hungarian count (Michael York), his elegant wife (Jacqueline Bisset), the victim's secretary (Anthony Perkins), his valet (Sir John Gielgud), a Pinkerton bodyguard (Colin Blakely) and an Italian car salesman (Dennis Quilley). Helping Poirot in the murder investigation are his friend, the director of the railroad line (Martin Balsam), and a doctor (George Coulouris who had been part of Orson Welles' Mercury Theatre). Tony Walton created the interiors of the train and dressed all the stars in stunning 1930s finery. The film's famous denouement, as in all of the Poirot stories, has him gathering all the suspects together and explaining how the crime was committed and then with a malicious flourish reveal the murderer. The film belongs to Finney who easily dominates every scene but there are equally memorable turns by Bacall, Bergman, Hiller, Roberts and Gielgud who within literally minutes of screen time hold their own opposite the bombastic Finney. The film was nominated for six Oscars - Best Actor (Finney), Supporting Actress (Bergman - who won her third Oscar), Adapted Screenplay, for Geoffrey Unsworth's rich cinematography, Tony Walton's magnificent costumes and for Richard Rodney Bennett's marvelous score - he created a waltz which played as the train moved. Great fun and much better than the recent remake by Sir Kenneth Branagh.

[ultrahpfan5blog]

Retrospective Review: Skyfall (2012)

So after QoS was generally considered to be a letdown after the impressive success of Casino Royale, there was a bit of a course correction required. It wasn't as if QoS was a bomb. Both Casino Royale and QoS were the highest grossing Bond films till then. But critically they needed to course correct a bit. Skyfall came in with a lot of hype since it came on the 50th anniversary of Bond in films. Sam Mendes came in and knocked it out of the park in Skyfall. In my opinion, Skyfall is second only to Casino Royale in the ranking of Bond films.

What is interesting about Skyfall is that it feels like it takes a significant step away from the previous two films. It feels aesthetically different from the previous two films and Bond himself is reinvented as someone at a different point in his life. While Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace were films with Bond as a new 00 agent. In Skyfall, he is an older agent, considered to be past his prime. So it seems like there is a big time leap in his career. The film has a fantastic opening action sequence, going from car chase, to bike chase, to fight on a train. You really feel Bond being pushed to his limit in this sequence. Yet, there are still very lovely iconic touches like when Bond leaps from the tractor into the train, he checks his cufflinks. Its really a small thing but it lends a lot of Bond's character. Skyfall is probably one of the most known Bond songs and it really lends to the mood of the film to follow.

The film's biggest strengths lie in the film making and in the performances from the actors who are all excellent across the board. The film has makes some bold choices when it comes to plot by making MI6 fallible. M in this movie is not at her best. She makes mistakes and a security leak happens as a result and people die because of the mistakes she made. There is also a legitimate argument to be made that she did wrong the villain and does manipulate Bond. As a result, she becomes an even more interesting character. If there is a true Bond girl in this movie, it is Judi Dench because she is front and center in this movie and the plot really surrounds her. Its by far her more substantial role in the franchise and she really makes the most of it. Her relationship both with Silva and Bond is fascinating, with Silva having almost an Oedipal complex with her whereas there is a clear maternal connection with Bond. Its a very fitting swan song for her.

There are a couple of other Bond girls in the movie. Naomie Harris makes an excellent debut as Moneypenny. If I am correct, I don't think we even know she is Moneypenny until the very end of the movie. But she's pretty badass from the very beginning and she has a nice witty banter with Bond. There is a nice and friendly sexual tension between the two. Its definitely a different Moneypenny from the previous eras but she is a welcome presence. One performance that doesn't get enough credit is Berenice Marlohe as Severine. She is actually pretty fantastic in the movie in a fairly brief role. She is enigmatic and seductive and a deeply tragic figure but her scenes are ones that really stick with me. Definitely the scene in the Casino is excellent.

We also get the reintroduction of Q, played by Ben Whishaw and he's immediately winning. It makes a lot of sense for the modern technology driven Q to be a younger man and its a fun switch of the dynamics between Bond and Q, where previously Q was sort of a mentor figure for Bond, here Bond is the elder person who makes fun of Q's age. One other character who is a surprise is Ralph Fiennes as Mallory. When he is initially introduced, he feels like a stereotypical government employee who is against Bond and M, but you slowly see that there is more to him than meets the eye and he's actually quite a badass himself and ends up being the new M by the end of the movie. Fiennes is great as he normally is. Albert Finney has a fun role in the last act and Rory Kinnear continues on as Tanner.

Javier Bardem's impact on this film is immense. What is interesting is that he doesn't appear until just a few minutes past the halfway mark of the movie. And even in the second half, he disappears for about 15-20 minutes after the hearing shootout. But his impact looms over the entire movie, even when he's not there. And that's a testament to his performance. He is brilliant in the role. He has an outstanding entry scene with a great monologue. You can just tell that Bardem is having a blast in this role. He manages to induce menace, rage, heartbreak, and madness. You genuinely feel some sympathy for his him because he isn't completely wrong. Its a performance that is truly right towards the very top of Bond villains and it elevates the movie a lot.

Daniel Craig is again fantastic here. He continues to give his all, both physically and emotionally in the role. The scenes between him and Bardem on the Island are some of the best acted sequences in the movie. And again, the dynamic between M and Bond sells because of how well both Craig and Dench play off each other. There are little touches that Craig does that I love so much. I already mentioned the cufflinks scene in the opening action sequence. Then there is a fight scene in a Casino where he and a goon fall into a pit and he spots a Komodo dragon and he is startled and points at it even, even when he is being picked up by the thug. Also, when he gets pissed off when he sees the DB5 get blown up in the climax. It doesn't sound like much, but it genuinely adds a lot to the character when you see it. He has good chemistry with all the cast and you even buy him when you see him struggling physically post the injury inflicted in the opening sequence. Its a performances where he delivers the humor, action, drama, emotion etc... and he does it all brilliantly.

As I mentioned earlier, the film making is terrific. Aesthetically, this film stands out and his beautiful to look at. Its no surprise that Roger Deakins is the cinematographer. There are just some gorgeous sequences throughout the movie, be it the fight in the empty office in Shanghai, the sequence in the Casino, the empty old house in the middle of nowhere, or the moors of Scotland in the climax. There is just a wonderful use of light to make every frame stand out. Sam Mendes also keeps the pacing tight. This is almost as long as Casino Royale, and just like that film, you don't feel the time. The only reason I rank this below Casino Royale is that the story telling isn't as tight as it could have been. For example, Silva's entire plan is really implausible when you think about it. No amount of preplanning would have led to everything happening exactly as he planned it because it requires a lot of random actions from people which he could definitely not predict. Then there is the fact that M endangers the ministers and everyone at the hearing despite knowing there is an eminent threat. Also, while the climax is spectacular and I get that Bond wanted to get Silva out of his comfort zone, but I still don't see how isolating himself in the middle of nowhere, with just M for backup against Silva and his entire army was a wise idea. Also, the film sets up the interesting notion that Bond is not at his best physically, but it sort of abandons the idea towards the end with Bond basically taking out Silva's whole army on his own. So there are some loose ends to the storytelling. But its easy to overlook them. The film also makes the brave choice to have Silva actually win since M dies in the end. So it is a bittersweet ending in a way. But its all done in a very satisfying manner.

Overall, its an excellent movie. Definitely top tier Bond and a very fitting movie for the 50th anniversary for Bond. A 9/10.

[starstruckteacup]

Cottagecore Films (pt. 2)

Big Fish (2003)

starring Ewan McGregor, Albert Finney, Billy Crudup, Jessica Lange, Helena Bonham Carter

William Bloom visits his storytelling father, Edward Bloom, in his final days, trying to separate the fiction he grew up with from the facts he so desperately seeks. The film follows Edward’s recounting of his life through stories so extravagant that they can’t possibly be real, or can they? Ed grows up the star of a small town, but quickly realizes he needs more from life than it can give him. He finds himself on the road untravelled, until he meets the love of his life, Sandra; he dedicates years to learning who she is so he can marry her. His love for Sandra is the central focus of many of his tall tales, but Will can’t see beyond the doubt that he is missing something. As it turns out, he is, but it’s not what he was expecting.

I truly love this movie. It’s not the first time I’ve seen it, but it’s been several years since I gave it a watch, and it once again brought tears of joy to my eyes. You quickly become invested in Ed’s high-flying adventures and his infallible love for other people, and you can’t help but wish you had known him yourself. This film is incredibly touching, adventurous, passionate, and unusual, all tied together with the appreciation of life as the simple and complex miracle that it is. I rarely call a film magical, but this one certainly has something special about it. 10/10

Goodbye First Love (2011)

TW: suicide attempt (offscreen), rape mention, miscarriage, nudity of a portrayed minor

starring Lola Créton, Sebastian Urzendowsky, Magne-Håvard Brekke

At only 15 years old, Camille is deeply in love with 19-year-old Sullivan. They spend much of their free time together, until Sullivan leaves for a 10 month trip to South America, where he writes to Camille for several months before losing all contact. Camille struggles to move on, but over the years works through her grief and begins work as an architect, where she meets her second love. However, circumstances align and she runs into Sullivan once again, seven years later. Camille struggles to reconcile her past, present, and future in this aesthetic French film.

I enjoyed about a third of this movie: the imagery--the French countryside where Camille’s summer house was located especially--the description of what makes a home from an architect’s perspective, and Camille’s growth as an independent individual. The actors were good, and it wasn’t a bad film, per se, but Camille and Sullivan’s relationship sucked much of the joy from the film, especially as its toxicity was portrayed as acceptable to the audience. Instead of showing how Camille deserved better through Lorenz’s character, their relationship nearly fails before they reconcile, with Camille never facing the repercussions of her actions. Sullivan sucks her will to live and love for life, yet the audience is expected to perceive him as the romantic dream, and Lorenz as someone Camille is settling for. The film is supposed to end on a happy note, with Camille finally becoming healthy and stable, but it rings hollow given the pacing of the film and the lack of character interactions. 4/10

Change in the Air (2018)

TW: attempted suicide (offscreen)

starring Rachel Brosnahan, Mary Beth Hurt, Peter Gerety, Aidan Quinn

A mysterious young woman named Wren moves into a small suburban neighborhood, attracting the attention of her neighbors. Jo Ann, a particularly nosy retiree, follows her actions closely in an effort to understand who Wren is and what she is doing in the neighborhood, and is soon joined by mailman Josh. Simultaneously, Officer Burkheart dedicates his own time to trying to figure out who this mysterious woman is while trying to maintain consistency in the neighborhood. These endeavors bring several characters to terms with their own deep secrets and conflicts, allowing many of them to overcome their own personal tragedies.

I wasn’t entirely thrilled by this movie. It did a lot of telling instead of showing, but I still felt like several key plot points weren’t sufficiently explained. The characters were enjoyable, but I rarely understood their actions and motivations fully, even when they announced it to the audience. It has a very peaceful atmosphere, and I liked the setting of the quiet suburban neighborhood because it makes everything feel a little more mysterious for them and to the audience. The only trouble was that several of those mysteries were never solved within the film, and I ended the movie more confused than I was at the beginning. 3/10

Part One

[anotheruserwithnoname]

A few thoughts on Sean Connery

This has definitely been a sad year for film and TV lovers, with Sir Sean Connery’s passing at the age of 90 a particularly sad milestone, at least for me.

I actually have a (very peripheral) family connection to Connery - not by way of any relation, I must stress, but when my father’s family lived in a rather lower-class part of Edinburgh in the 1940s, a young boy named Tommy Connery used to deliver groceries, years before he started using his middle name and went into bodybuilding (his vocation before getting into acting - Arnold wasn’t the first bodybuilder to make it big in the movies). For a long time I wondered if this was just a family legend until years ago I was reading an article on a British singer named Betty Boo (remember her?); she is of Scots ancestry and she made mention of how Sean Connery delivered groceries to her relatives’ (I think it was her father's) home in Edinburgh. Betty is about my age now so the chronology works - her relatives and mine must have been neighbours.

In terms of Connery’s film work, while Bond will always dominate his legacy, of course he made many other notable (and not-so-notable) films. Before Bond, he played a bad guy in Tarzan’s Greatest Adventure, appeared in a WWII-era comedy called On the Fiddle, and even had the co-starring role in a Disney musical (Darby O’Gill and the Little People). After Bond, he starred in the rather prescient The Anderson Tapes, and for fans to this day feel he should have received the Oscar for his role in The Man Who Would Be King. There was also Zardoz, which certainly made an impression, if nothing else. He was also a highlight of Terry Gilliam’s Time Bandits and managed to (spoiler alert on a 30-year-old movie) steal Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves with only a 10-second cameo.

Of course, he came back as Bond twice (once for Never Say Never Again, and, fittingly, one of his final acting roles was reprising 007 for a mid-2000s video game adaptation of From Russia with Love). But I found some of his later films to be among the coolest of his career. He played a Scottish-accented Russian submarine commander in The Hunt for Red October, a thief who had a May-December relationship with Catherine Zeta Jones in Entrapment, he was a terrific Alan Quartermain in League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, he was perfectly cast as Harrison Ford’s father in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, and of course he finally got the Oscar for The Untouchables. And while the film itself was pretty awful, I was tickled to see him finally get to play a Bond-like villain in the Avengers movie of 1998 (based on the TV show, of course).

It is a shame that he declined to come out of retirement to appear in Daniel Craig’s Bond film, Skyfall. That would have been really something. (The late Albert Finney was given the part in what would end up being his final film role.)

One other bit of trivia about Connery that has always impressed me. When he was coaxed back for one more (regular) Bond film, Diamonds Are Forever, he demanded - and got - one of the highest paycheques of any actor up to that point. He didn’t use the money to buy a house or a car. He used the money to establish the Scottish International Education Trust, which is still going strong today. That is Sir Sean Connery.

I’ll end with a Youtube clip that - not a word of a lie - I was watching yesterday. This was before the news of Connery’s passing, and it’s weird when you just randomly watch something or wonder “whatever happened to”, and right after that, they’re gone. This is Pierce Brosnan giving a touching tribute to Connery at the American Film Institute Life Achievement Award induction. Brosnan has long credited Connery with inspiring him to become an actor and, in this clip, he tells a cute story of the day Connery visited the set of The World is Not Enough.

[ljones41]

"MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" (2001) Review

"MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" (2001) Review There have been more adaptations of Agatha Christie's 1939 novel, "And Then There Were None" than any of her other novels. That is quite an achievement. The only other novel that comes close to producing this number of adaptations is her 1934 novel, 'Murder on the Orient Express".

Christie's 1934 novel managed to produce four adaptations, as far as I know - two movie releases and two television movies. The least famous of this quartet of adaptations was the television movie that aired on CBS in 2001. This version is famous or infamous for one thing - it is the only one that is not a period drama and set in the present day. "MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" made a few other changes to Christie's narrative. The television movie's beginning established a complicated romance between Belgian sleuth Hercule Poirot and a sexy younger woman named Vera Rossakoff. The number of suspects was reduced from twelve to nine. And the Orient Express was stalled by a mudslide due to heavy rain and not a snowbank caused from an avalanche. Due to the film's setting, some of the characters' backgrounds and professions had been changed to reflect the late 20th century and early 21st century setting. "MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" begins in Istanbul, Turkey; where private detective Hercule Poirot had just solved the murder of a dancer at a local nightclub. After a brief quarrel with his lady love, Vera Rossakoff, Poirot sets out to fly back to London. But an encounter with his old friend Wolfgang Bouc, an executive with the the Compagnie Internationale des Wagons-Lits, leads Poirot to return to London via the famed Orient Express train. During the eastbound train journey, an American millionaire named Samuel Ratchett tries to hire Poirot to protect him from a potential assassin who has sent him threatening letters. However, Poirot refuses the job due to his dislike of Ratchett. During the second night of the journey, heavy rain causes a landslide, blocking the train to continue its journey. And Rachett is found stabbed to death inside his compartment, the following morning. Bouc recruits Poirot to solve Rachett's murder. I have a confession to make. I had disliked "MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" when I first saw it on television all those years ago. My main reason for disliking the television movie was the fact that it had a modern setting, instead of one set in the 1930s. It was not a period movie. And for a story like Christie's 1934 novel, I resented it. However, I do believe the film's modern setting provided one major flaw for its narrative. Since the late 20th century, passengers for the Simplon Orient Express have to book passage on the train long before the date of its departure - six months to a year, more or less. The idea of Poirot managing to get a compartment aboard the Orient Express at such short notice in 2001 strikes me as pretty implausible. And when one adds to the fact that the train travels to and from Istanbul at least once a year, makes this narrative in a modern setting even more implausible. Another problem I had with "MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" was it made the same mistake as the 2010 adaptation from "AGATHA CHRISTIE'S POIROT". They used the wrong rail cars. The 2010 television movie used the blue and cream Pullman cars for the journey from Istanbul to Calais. The 2001 movie used the brown and cream Pullman cars, usually reserved for the Orient Express from London to Folkstone, as the main train, as shown below:

Do I have any other problems with "MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS"? Well . . . yes, I have one further problem. But I will address it later. Aside from these problems, did I enjoyed this recent re-watch of the television movie? Yes, I did. More than I thought I would. Which is ironic, considering that I disliked the movie so much when I first saw all those years ago. I finally realized that I had automatically resented the film for not being a period drama. And over the years, I had erroneously believed that the movie was set aboard a modern train and not on a restored one from the past. It took my recent viewing of the television movie for me to realize I had been wrong. However, I did noticed that the sleeping compartments did look surprisingly bigger than usual. Despite some modern updating in the film's visual look, the characters' background and dialogue; "MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" did a first-rate job of adapting Christie's novel. What many might find surprising is that screenwriter Stephen Harrigan and director Carl Schenkel did not inflict any drastic changes to Christie's plot, unlike some recent Christie adaptations from the "AGATHA CHRISTIE'S POIROT" series and one or two miniseries produced by Sarah Phelps. Harrigan and Schenkel did not drastically change the movie's narrative, aside from reducing the number of suspects and having the train delayed by a mud slide, instead of a snow drift. Yes, the backgrounds and professions of the characters were changed due to the modern setting. And characters also change nationalities - like Bob Arbuthnot, an American tech CEO (British Army colonel in Christie's novel); Senora Alvarado, a widow of a South American dictator (a Russian princess in the novel); Phililp and Helena von Strauss, a German or Austrian couple traveling the world (the husband was a Hungarian diplomat in the novel); and even Wolfgang Bouc, the Franco-German Compagnie Internationale des Wagons-Lits executive (who was solely French in the novel). This version of "Murder on the Orient Express" was not the first or last time when some of the characters' backgrounds and nationalities were changed. All four adaptations (including the highly regarded 1974 version) were guilty of this. But despite these changes, Harrigan and Schenkel stuck to Christie's narrative. And thanks to Harrigan's direction, this version proved to be a lot better than I had originally surmised. I certainly had no problems with most of the film's performances. "MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" provided solid performances from Amira Casar, Kai Wiesinger, Dylan Smith, Nicolas Chagrin, Adam James, Tasha de Vasconcelos, and Fritz Wepper, who managed to create an effective screen team with star Alfred Molina as the investigative pair of Poirot and Monsieur (or Herr) Bouc. I thought David Hunt did an excellent job of conveying the aggressive, overprotective and slightly arrogant traits of American CEO, Bob Arbuthnot. I enjoyed Leslie Caron's colorful, yet autocratic portrayal of Senora Alvarado, the widow of a South American dictator. Meredith Baxter was equally colorful as an American character actress, traveling around Europe as a tourist. Her portrayal of Mrs. Hubbard reminded me of a younger version of a character she had portrayed in the 1980 miniseries, "BEULAH LAND" - but without the Southern accent. And I was really impressed by Natasha Wightman's performance as British tutor Mary Debenham. What really impressed me about Wightman's performance is that her portrayal of Miss Debenham was the closest to the literary character than any of the other versions. There was one performance that fell flat with me and it came from Peter Strauss, who portrayed the victim, Samuel Rachett. If I must be brutally honest, I found it rather hammy. Strauss, whom has always struck me as a first-rate actor in other productions, seemed to be screaming in nearly every scene. However, there is one scene in which I found his performance impressive. The scene involved Rachett's attempt to hire Poirot as his bodyguard and with a performance that permeated with subtlety and menace, Strauss reminded audiences of the excellent actor that he had always been through most of his career. I have never come across any real criticism of Alfred Molina's portrayal of Belgian detective, Hercule Poirot. Well . . . I did come across one article that discussed Molina's performance from Vulture magazine. But the critic seemed more focused on the movie's modern setting and Poirot's relationship with Vera Rossakoff, than Molina's performance. Personally, I thought the British actor did a superb job in portraying the detective. He managed to capture all of Poirot's intelligence, mild eccentricities, slight pomposity and talent for emotional manipulation. One thing I can say about Molina's portrayal is that his performance as Poirot was probably the most subtle I have seen on a movie or television screen. Whether someone would regard this as good or bad, is in the eye of the beholder. But I feel that this subtle performance suited Molina's style. Some have commented that Molina's Poirot was more "youthful" than other portrayals. Hmmmm . . . how odd. Molina was in his late 40s when he shot the television movie (perhaps 47 or 48 years old). Yet, Albert Finney was a decade younger when he portrayed Poirot in the 1974 film and his Poirot came off as a middle-aged man. David Suchet was five or six years younger when he began his twenty-four years stint portraying the detective for ITV's "AGATHA CHRISTIE'S POIROT". And during those early years, his Poirot also seemed slightly middle-aged. Because of this, I find this observation of Molina's Poirot as "youthful" rather questionable. It is a pity that the "official" opinion of "MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" is so negative. I used to share this opinion until I did a re-watch of the television film with a more open mind. Like others, I had been dismissive of the 2001 version, due to its modern setting. I now realize I had been rather narrow-minded and prejudiced. Despite its flaws - and it had a few - "MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS" proved to be a lot better than I had originally surmised, thanks to director Carl Schenkel, Stephen Harrigan's teleplay and an excellent cast led by the superb Alfred Molina. I hope that one day, other Christie fans would dismiss their prejudices against the movie's setting and appreciate it for the entertaining production it truly is.

[maryxglz]

... Hiddleston also worked with Finney and remembered him fondly. "He was the most kind, the most gracious, the most inspiring actor," Hiddleston said. "It was really my first significant professional acting role, playing Randolph Churchill in The Gathering Storm, in which [Finney] played Winston Churchill. I was 20 years old, very nervous, and he could not have been more charming and helpful, kind and considerate. And he bought me a whiskey afterwards!"

As for the evening’s gala, the aim of which was to raise funds to benefit those wanting to break into the industry, Hiddleston explained how BAFTA does “so much work, often unsung work, about leveling the playing field for everyone, keeping the doors open for everyone no matter where you’re from, whatever background. If you have a story to tell, BAFTA wants to hear from you."

[insanityclause]

Eddie Redmayne, Tom Hiddleston, Patrick Stewart, Michelle Yeoh, Jeremy Irons and Anna Friel honored the charitable side of BAFTA on Friday night as London began its celebrations in anticipation of Sunday’s film awards with the lavish annual Film Gala, this year at the city’s Savoy Hotel.

[...]

Hiddleston also worked with Finney and remembered him fondly. "He was the most kind, the most gracious, the most inspiring actor,” Hiddleston said. “It was really my first significant professional acting role, playing Randolph Churchill in The Gathering Storm, in which he (Finney) played Winston Churchill. I was 20 years old, very nervous, and he could not have been more charming and helpful, kind and considerate. And he bought me a whiskey afterwards!”

As for the evening’s gala, the aim of which was to raise funds to benefit those wanting to break into the industry, Hiddleston explained how BAFTA does “so much work, often unsung work, about leveling the playing field for everyone, keeping the doors open for everyone no matter where you’re from, whatever background. If you have a story to tell, BAFTA want to hear from you.”

[poirott]

Hello. Love your blog! Could you describe what you find as the best quality of each Poirot iteration?

Hello and thank you for the great question! I wasn’t sure whether you meant the Poirot tv series and movies in general, or just the actors playing Poirot. I picked the latter but have also commented on the actors. :)

Hereare things that first come to mind when I think of each (more well known) adaptation:

MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS (1974) WITH ALBERT FINNEY – glamourand flair, satisfying mix of subtlety and theatricality, Poirot feels part ofthe group yet separated at the same time (role of the judge), Poirot’s intensityoff the charts (makes me think that’s his “Chief of Police mode" he slips into without even realizing), “old-fashioned” feel of the movie suits the 30s time period, solid direction,

POIROT MOVIES WITH PETER USTINOV (1978 - 1986) – fun and pleasing,humourous (also added humour in slower scenes), great likeability factor (especiallyin Ustinov’s jovial, deceptively harmless Poirot who is softened around the edges but still whip-smart), great ensambles, Poirot respected by other characters despite his eccentricities, scene-stealing iconic actors, underrated as a whole,

AGATHA CHRISTIE’S POIROT TV SERIES WITH DAVID SUCHET (1989 - 2013) – closeto the text while also giving main characters more to do, rich in detail, crowd pleaser, “feel-good tv”, a lot of added humour, chemistry between the main quartet of actors, Poirot’s character evolutionthrough the years, Poirot’s OCD is shown, definitive portrayal of Poirot, covers every Poirot mystery there is (or almost all of them,depending on how you look at it),

MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS (2017) WITH KENNETH BRANAGH – 30snostalgia, buoyancy and charm (with very charming Poirot), golden age of travel, great cinematography and direction and camera work, high stakes, emotional, poison ofdeep grief, perfect costumes, changes some things but still faithful to the book, great cast, Poirot’s OCD is shown, Poirot has a character arc despite time constraints, biggest moustache :),

THE ABC MURDERS WITH JOHN MALKOVICH (2018) – sombre and dark tone, often weighty, inventiveness(for example, certain characters get more background), the pervading creepiness, engaging mystery within amystery (new origin story for Poirot), fascinating Poirot, Inspector Crome more interesting than in the book.

Thanks again for the ask, it was fun breaking down each version! I love all my Poirots.

Cheers!

[freecherryblossomsuit]

Peter O’Toole Blog Hot Artwork(Pics) Netflix Mature Sizes Weight Affairs

Peter O’Toole Blog Hot Artwork(Pics) Netflix Mature Sizes Weight Affairs

You Can Search PETER O’TOOLE UNDERPANTS SIZE CHEST SIZE MUSCLE SIZE OR ENDORSEMENTS, KATE O’TOOLE UNDERPANTS SIZE CHEST SIZE MUSCLE SIZE OR ENDORSEMENTS, LORCAN O’TOOLE UNDERPANTS SIZE CHEST SIZE MUSCLE SIZE OR ENDORSEMENTS, PETER O’TOOLE HIDDEN HOT SCENES WHY DELETED IN HARRY POTTER, KAREN BROWN PETER O’TOOLE HIDDEN HOT IMAGES, PETER O’TOOLE HOTX AND ROMANTIC MOVIES AND TV SHOWS LIST, PETER…

[missmaji]

Hiddleston also worked with Finney and remembered him fondly. "He was the most kind, the most gracious, the most inspiring actor,” Hiddleston said. “It was really my first significant professional acting role, playing Randolph Churchill in The Gathering Storm, in which he (Finney) played Winston Churchill. I was 20 years old, very nervous, and he could not have been more charming and helpful, kind and considerate. And he bought me a whiskey afterwards!”

As for the evening’s gala, the aim of which was to raise funds to benefit those wanting to break into the industry, Hiddleston explained how BAFTA does “so much work, often unsung work, about leveling the playing field for everyone, keeping the doors open for everyone no matter where you’re from, whatever background. If you have a story to tell, BAFTA want to hear from you.”

[thriftycritic]

The Dresser: Malvern Festival Theatres

with Julian Clary and Matthew Kelly

A play about plays in which fear flickers perpetually at the edges

Whether or not Harwood’s opinion of the critical fraternity accords with that of his character’s (“Hate the critics?” says Sir. “I have nothing but compassion for them. How can one hate the crippled, the mentally deficient, and the dead?”), The Dresser has always been well regarded and stands as a classic within his oeuvre. It was captured on celluloid in 1983 with Albert Finney and Edward Fox, later in a televised version with Anthony Hopkins and Ian McKellen (2015), while theatrical reprisals have involved some interesting pairings too, including Reece Shearsmith opposite Ken Stott (2016) and Nicholas Lyndhurst opposite Julian Glover (2005).

Set in wartime London, as the bombs are dropping around them, the play depicts the decline of one of the remaining great actor-managers of the day, desperately propped up by Norman, his long-time dresser and devotee. The principle actor, known only as Sir, a grandee of the fading repertory tradition, is in the grip of a lachrymose breakdown, with less than an hour to go before the curtain goes up. He can’t remember his lines, even as he applies his make-up. Norman, his fey and affectionate defender of twenty years, must disentangle his scrambled Shakespeare and urge him to remove his black face paint, for tonight he is playing, not Othello as he had assumed, but King Lear.

There is a sense of mildew and decay to Tim Shortall’s set design: the dressing room captures sharply the Learesque theme of decline – of repertory theatre, of the actor-manager tradition, of the ageing man himself, as well as, of course, the old social structures of the twentieth century.

Matthew Kelly is excellent as Sir, the crumbling, narcissistic thespian ‘tottering between confusion and chaos’. At various times he is slumped motionless on his chaise longue, at others he is fully erect and gesturing towards the heavens, vacillating as he does between moribund despair and theatrical grandiosity. Despite the shakiest of starts (his entrance his painfully mistimed), Sir comes through in the end. His spirits are high and he launches a bombastic rant at the crew for not generating a loud enough storm during the famous tempest scene. Norman – long inured to these off-stage outbursts – punctures his pomposity with the sarcastic putdown: ‘I’m pleased that you're pleased.’

Julian Clary’s dresser is likeable, vulnerable, catty and loquacious. He has a habit of proffering anecdotes about his various male friends, who we imagine might have been more than simply his friends. To Madge (Rebecca Charles), the starch stiff, buttoned up, stage manager who has long held a flame for the decaying actor, he says tartly: “We all have our little sorrows, ducky, you’re not the only one. The littler you are, the larger the sorrow. You think you loved him? What about me?”

For Julian Clary, Norman’s veiled sexuality is a departure from the unapologetic exuberance of his popular onscreen persona – for this is the 1940s after all, and imprisonment a real possibility. Clary may be an accomplished performer, and as you would expect he tickles the laughter out of the play’s lacerating humour, but he doesn’t quite flex the full emotional range of his character, or tap into the terrible poignancy of the plays closing moments.

The show must go on, as the old adage goes, even in the midst of war, even in the midst of a nervous breakdown, even as the city is blitzed. But what happens when the lights come down and the performance comes to an end?

'For the first time in my life', confides Sir, 'the future is hidden from me. I am frightened of what is to come.' This is the fear flickering at the edges of a play that is ultimately about endings and the uncertainly that lies beyond.

January 18th - January 22nd

Directed by Terry Johnson

Written by Ronald Harwood

Cast includes Emma Amos, Stephen Cavanagh, Samuel Holmes.

[kevrocksicehouse]

Tom Courtenay, the theater maven who only acted in really good movies, is 84 today. A few of his silver screen appearances.

Billy Fisher in Billy Liar. D: John Schlesinger (1963). In this link between the Angry Young Man films, and the explosion of Swinging London, Courtenay is a twenty-something young man living at home in a dead-end job who constantly loses himself in Walter-Mittyish daydreams as a defense against the small-mindedness of early-sixties England. (When we see him with his drab and mean family it’s clear how much of a self-defense his fantasies are). When he connects with a former girlfriend (Julie Christie in early radiance) who challenges him to live the way he dreams, the actor dramatizes the gulf between his aspirations and his nerve, a gulf the crossing of which is by no means assured. A small, whimsical tragedy.

Norman in The Dresser. D: Peter Yates (1983). Courtenay spent years playing the “dresser” (an all-purpose valet) to a grand Shakespearean actor (Albert Finney in this film) who is mentally failing during a tour of wartime England. Courtenay gives us all the ironic complications of a fussbudget whose desperate competency at keeping the great man together is also an addiction to his own narrow identity. This alternately heroic and pathetic performance netted him an Oscar nomination.

Geoff Mercer in 45 Years. D: Andrew Haigh (2015). When a couple (Courtenay and Charlotte Rampling) about to celebrate their 45th anniversary get news about long-lost old girlfriend of his, it hits their staid, happy marriage hard, and the films echoes of Rebecca and Vertigo escape their melodramatic roots to plant themselves into a comfortable middle-class domesticity that they nevertheless shatter. Rampling was justifiably extolled as a woman learning how little she understands about her husband, but Courtenay is equally good as a man whose outsized grief blinds him to the emotional torment he’s causing his wife. And the movie lets them display acting fireworks without histrionics, without really, even raising their voices.

[klstheword]

In the pecking order of Christmas stories, A Christmas Carol is second only to the baby Jesus. Even if you’ve never read it, or had it read to you, you know about that flinty-hearted miser Ebenezer Scrooge and his redemption during one long dark night of the soul.

Bill Murray, Albert Finney, Michael Caine and Alastair Sim have all played Scrooge in one of the endless film remakes and reboots there have been over the years. Now comes the story behind the story, The Man Who Invented Christmas: a heavily fictionalised biopic with Dan Stevens playing Charles Dickens, bashing out A Christmas Carol in six weeks after contracting a nasty dose of writer’s block in 1843. Thanks to the success of Oliver Twist, Dickens is literary-rock-star famous. But at 31, after a handful of flops, he has a gnawing anxiety that his powers are on the wane. And with four kids, another baby on the way and debts piling up, he needs to make some serious cash, fast.

The film is a Quality Street treat for the holidays, with a gooey sweet centre – daft but immensely likable, and performed with pantomime gusto by a top-notch cast. Dickens yomps about London, meeting people who inspire the creation of Scrooge, Tiny Tim and the gang. These characters then literally come to life in his study as he writes, and they’re an unruly bunch, ruthlessly mocking his failure to finish his comeback. (Christopher Plummer is terrific as Scrooge.)

And with his flamboyant star turn as Dickens, there’s Stevens, a man who finally looks to be laying to rest his own ghost of Christmas past. Cast your mind back to 2012, when the shock death in the Downton Abbey Christmas special of his beloved character Matthew Crawley had the faithful crying into their sherry glasses.

Unlike many actors, Stevens is not at all uptight when chatting about the character who made him famous. Nevertheless, in the past five years, he has done everything possible to distance himself from Crawley, the interloping heir to the Downton pile. He has cross-dressed in the cult favourite Vimeo show High Maintenance, murdered with psychopathic charm in The Guest, freaked out on the Marvel TV spin-off Legion and locked up Emma Watson in Beauty and the Beast. He even looks different these days. Gone is the floppy blond hair, and the once boyish face is chiselled into sharp angles. Stevens credits the weight loss to moving to New York where he finds it easier to look after himself, working out at the gym and cutting out dairy.

Different, too, has been the reception granted Stevens’s post-Downton work. A pleasantly surprised tone crept into reviews, a perceptible sound of critics retracting knives and grudgingly acknowledging that, oh hang on, he’s actually a bit good, isn’t he? Stevens throws his head back laughing when asked how he feels about this change in critical fortunes. “It’s interesting. You do one show that goes everywhere, and people associate you with that. Do I think Downtown is my best work? Probably not. But if people enjoy it, or if that’s what they think of when they think of me, so be it. It served me well.” If he is offended by the question, he is too polite to say. Dan Stevens is scrupulously polite, so careful with his words that he often leaves you wondering what he really thinks.

Stevens studied English at Cambridge and was a Booker prize judge in 2012, reading 146 novels in seven months (the Downton costume team stitched secret pockets into his jackets for his Kindle). But he shrugs when I ask about historical accuracy, or the lack of it, in his latest film. (The Man Who Invented Christmas has been criticised by experts for, among other things, the inaccurate size of its newspaper headlines.) “Frankly, whether it’s historically accurate I’m not that concerned about. I was interested in that moment of the creative process, watching a great man struggle – to me, that’s dramatically and comedically interesting. Certainly I was keen not to play Dickens as a bearded old sage.”

He tells me that one of his co-stars, Miriam Margolyes, has a theory that Dickens was bipolar. Does Stevens buy that? “It’s a very interesting interpretation. I think there’s something to be said for it…” he tails off.

Needless to say, the film does not dwell on Dickens’s iffy relationships with women. (A year before publishing A Christmas Carol, he had this to say about his wife in a letter to a friend: “Catherine is as near being a donkey as one of her sex can be.”) “I think he was a good father and a terrible husband,” Stevens says diplomatically. “But yeah, I think it being a Christmas film, we wanted it to be fairly full of laughter. I don’t wish to take anything away from the man, and therefore you have to address the dark side of his nature and his work. There were moments when he was bleak and depressive. But I think there were moments when he was great fun to be around, very silly and playful.” I must say that, having watched the film, I’m still none the wiser about which yuletide customs Dickens has bragging rights on. Pudding, definitely. Turkey? Mistletoe?

Stevens loves Christmas, unironically, in a full-on, festive jumpers and stockings-hanging-on-the-fireplace kind of way. “I always have. Our house is pretty lively at Christmas,” he says. He is married to the singer Susie Hariet and they have three children. Family festivities at their gaff kick off on Christmas Eve, watching The Muppet Christmas Carol. Who does the cooking? “My mum and I usually team up. We’re quite a formidable duo in the kitchen.”

Stevens is well-spoken but not as posh as he seems. Now 35, he was adopted at seven days old, and raised in Wiltshire, Essex and Brecon in Wales. He spent his early teenage years rebelling against anything and everything, but still got the grades to win a scholarship to a prestigious boys’ boarding school in Kent at 13. He wasn’t happy, feeling isolated and as if he didn’t fit in with the other kids. What was going on? “I dunno. I guess I didn’t always toe the line,” he answers a tad testily, and with a definite air of finality.

I mention that going to a top university from a comprehensive, I always felt envious of the privately educated kids who never questioned whether they were talented enough to be in the room. “The entitlement thing is a problem,” Stevens says. “It’s interesting, living in America and seeing a different system. It’s definitely got as many flaws, but there is a sense that your own achievement and drive and curiosity can achieve great things, in a way that I think is stifled in Britain.”

By the time he landed Downton, Stevens had already toured the US opposite Rebecca Hall in a production of As You Like It, and appeared on stage in the West End with Judi Dench. Did he feel any disgruntlement at the time – being a Serious Actor suddenly lumped in with a Sunday night soap opera? He shakes his head: “I never felt that people weren’t taking me seriously. I did appreciate that some people were watching Downton with a kind of ironic appreciation – perhaps the Guardian readership particularly…” he shoots me a grin, adding: “and my friends, too. But no. There was no resentment. I still see a lot of the guys. It changed all of our lives. It had a seismic effect on all our careers.”

It goes without saying that appearing in a show watched by 12 million people opened doors that appearing in off-Broadway Shakespeare never could. But as soon as he left the show he bolted for New York. What was that all about? Did the comparisons to the young Hugh Grant scare him out of the country? “No! I was just very excited about the work I was afforded over there. People there were prepared to see me do something dark and weirder. Or something action-y and mental. Or something big and silly, like Night at the Museum. It couldn’t have turned out better.”

As for Dickens, he got his instant classic. A Christmas Carol sold out its first run of 6,000 copies before Christmas Eve. The tale melted hearts of even the most dyed-in-the-wool cynics – one American businessman gave his staff an extra day’s holiday. Not that Dickens made the killing he’d hoped for. After getting carried away with gilt lettering and fancy paper, he never trousered the £1,000 he had banked on. God bless us, every one.

The Man Who Invented Christmas is out in the US; released in the UK on 1 December