Old MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

The Next "It' Brit TV Guy: Actor David Tennant

There ought to be a special Emmy award for whoever casts the leading men for PBS’ MASTERPIECE THEATRE and MYSTERY. They’ve found yet another floppy haired, skinny-sexy actor to make thegirls go crazy and turn sexually ambiguous young men into lifelong Anglophiles. He’s David Tennant, a 35 year old Scots-born actor who’ll be all over TV this fall. Tennant plays the lead role in CASANOVA (on PBS Masterpiece Theatre, beginning Sunday Oct. 8) and he is the new incarnation of the SciFi network’s DR. WHO (Fridays at 9pm).
The Los Angeles Times has a look at Tennant in both series. Reporter Robert Lloyd describes Tennant’s cut-glass facial structure as “vulpine,” which is one of those writerly ways of saying that the actor both looks like a wolf and is rather foxy. Without sounding all gay about it. On DR. WHO, his sci fi pal Rose (Billie Piper) describes the hero as Rose characterizes him as “a big old punk with a bit of rockabilly tthrown in.”

Perfect.


Tennant’s another in a long line of what a friend of mine calls Britstuds–those stage-trained, TV drama-seasoned actors who can act the hell out of any role–hero, villain, oddball character type–and steal any movie. (You know who you are, Bill Nighy and Jim Broadbent.)

Before Hollywood discovered Clive Owen and Colin Firth, these actors–tall, dark and posh–were mainstays of PBS crime and costume dramas — the lavish literary adaptations coproduced by the BBC, ITV or Channel 4.
Even Ralph Fiennes, a couple of years before he made his sensational film breakthrough in SCHINDLER’S LIST, caught many eyes with a miniscule role in the first installment of PRIME SUSPECT with Helen Mirren. As a murder victim’s grieving boyfriend, Fiennes appeared in just two scenes, but he was so distractingly, attractively neurotic that audiences assumed, on no evidence whatever, that he had to be guilty of something. Turns out he was marked for stardom: Steven Spielberg caught his performance in PRIME SUSPECT as well as his next British-made film, WUTHERING HEIGHTS, and cast him in

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon