Tom Hardy (10 page)

But don’t just rely on this particular viewer’s opinion – instead take it from the horse’s mouth. In February 2012, Tom appeared on ITV’s
T
he Jonathan Ross Show
. This particular instalment of Ross’s programme had attracted a great deal of advance publicity, thanks to an audience member apparently reporting to the media that relations between the two men had soured during the course of the interview. Though Tom had been reticent when quizzed about the
Dark
Knight Rises
film (with good reason, not wanting to spoil the surprise for film fans), things allegedly took a turn for the worse when Ross unearthed a clip from Tom’s ‘Find Me a Model’ win. Tom admitted the clip was ‘awful’ but the banter that followed was all a good-humoured wind up, as both parties were at pains to point out subsequently. Tom later remarked: ‘It was funny as hell and embarrassing, yes, but I was in on the gag and winding Jonathan up to put him in an awkward seat for a laugh.’ Tom then didn’t mince his words when suggesting which clip of his work should have been shown had the goal been to show him up, saying: ‘If people want a good laugh at me desperately trying to get up the ladder, tell ’em to watch
Minotaur
. That’s a pile of sh*t.’

Similarly strident opinions were in evidence when it came to
analysis of the next motion picture in which Tom had a role – particularly if you chose to canvas opinion from the French.
Marie Antoinette
was the third directorial offering from Sofia Coppola, daughter of
The Godfather
and
Apocalypse Now
director, Francis Ford Coppola. Prior to making
Marie Antoinette
, she had scored a commercial and critical hit with
Lost in Translation
, the film that made a star of Scarlett Johansson.
Marie Antoinette
saw the director reunited with Kirsten Dunst, an actress with whom she worked on
The Virgin Suicides
and who has sometimes been cited as her muse. Following
The Virgin Suicides
, the pair had expressed a desire to collaborate again and
Marie Antoinette
presented them with the perfect vehicle to do so.

The film was based on the book
Marie Antoinette – The Journey
by Lady Antonia Fraser. Marie Antoinette is often portrayed by historians as a shallow and frivolous woman – and by some, even as being the cause of the French Revolution. The book and therefore the film on which it was based are rather less critical of her and present her instead as a young woman struggling to come to terms with being uprooted from Austria and used to make a political alliance between Austria and France through her marriage to the Dauphin. Forced to deal with the protocol of life at Versailles and a husband who has little interest in her sexually, she seeks solace in expensive clothes, fine food and frivolity.

Probably largely thanks to her success with
Lost in Translation
, Coppola secured backing for her
£
21 million venture from Colombia Pictures. The film was clearly made to reach out to a young female audience and, as such, was laced with modern twists – there was, for example, a distinctive
and incongruous soundtrack with music from the likes of The Strokes and Siouxsie and the Banshees and a lot of screen time was devoted to showing off sumptuous dresses and fabulous shoes.

Tom’s role in the film was a small one and he only appears in a couple of scenes. He plays a character called Raumont who first makes an appearance on screen during the period of time when Marie Antoinette is occupying Le Petit Trianon, her nature retreat within the grounds of Versailles. He is one of her circle of friends at court whose main occupations seem to be gambling, dining and partying. There is a suggestion, too, that he is a little jealous of the queen’s obvious attraction to Count Axel Fersen.

The film premiered at Cannes in May 2006 and, perhaps expectedly, got a poor response from French filmgoers who angrily hailed it as revisionist fantasy. Not everyone agreed, though, particularly on this side of the Channel. Many critics felt that it was technically a good film but that it lacked credibility as a historical piece. Writing in the
Observer
, Jason Solomons defended the film, saying: ‘This is a funny, beautiful and, yes, cool film, blending fashion and pop with subtle comments on celebrity, emptiness and excess.’ He did, however, go on to say that ‘Coppola’s poor little rich girl schtick can be annoying’.

From the lush grounds of Versailles in the 18th century to the urban stickiness of a summer’s day on Hampstead Heath – and a very different kind of character for Tom to get his teeth into. Looking over Tom Hardy’s cannon of work, it’s a rare occurrence to see him turn in a comic performance – which is a shame because, when watching him in interviews
and reading his comments in the press, it is clear that he is witty and has a keen sense of humour. In
Scenes of a Sexual Nature
, Tom showed he was every bit as capable of delivering comedy as he was intense, serious drama.

As an exercise in making a film from scratch,
Scenes of a Sexual Nature
is a standout example. It was made on a shoestring budget of
£
500,000 and was shot in less than three weeks – and just to make the whole process even more fraught, the script was completed just two weeks before shooting started. For producer/director Ed Blum it was a baptism of fire as, although he’d directed for television and made a short film, this was his first foray into a full-length feature.

The idea for the film was the brainchild of Blum and his friend, television writer Aschlin Ditta. Originally, Blum had wanted to write seven short story pieces but, between the two of them, they realised that if they made the stories about 10 or 12 minutes each, they could weave them together into a feature-length film. What he was certain about at this stage was that he wanted the action of the film to take place outdoors and that it was to be filmed in a simple and uncluttered way.

It is credit to Blum and Ditta that they succeeded in recruiting a stellar British cast for their film. Considering they were pitching to actors’ agents with an unfinanced script and a new director, this was a huge accomplishment. There were several factors that drew actors to the project, the primary one being the strength of the script – most loved the simplicity of the idea and the honesty of the writing. Blum observed: ‘To attract really good actors you need really good parts and material and the individual stories really appealed to them.’
And one of the stars of the film, Adrian Lester, agreed, noting that in the script, ‘Nothing happens, but everything happens.’

Once a couple of big names had attached themselves to the film, interest snowballed and other actors were soon volunteering their services. Hugh Bonneville was amongst the first to come on board and, because Gina McKee had expressed a desire to work with him again, it wasn’t long before she agreed to appear as well. With two actors of their stature involved, more impressive names were soon added to the call sheet including one of the hottest properties at the time, Ewan McGregor. Other stars included Andrew Lincoln, Mark Strong, Catherine Tate and, of course, Tom Hardy. For Tom, one of the big draws was that, for his scenes, he would be predominantly working with Oscar-nominated Sophie Okonedo (with whom he would also be paired in the BBC’s
Oliver Twist
). Although the actors were paid Equity minimum for their work, on the upside the structure of the film meant they were only required for two or three days’ shooting in total, so could fit the project in around their other work commitments.

Although the title of the film suggests the content might be near the knuckle, it’s far from it. The ensemble piece covers the stories of seven unconnected couples over the course of one sunny summer afternoon on Hampstead Heath. The strands that make up the narrative paint pictures of people of varying ages and backgrounds, all at different points in their relationships. It’s a slightly contrived set up and the range of characters has an ‘all-inclusive’ feel to it: we are offered a glimpse of, for example, a gay couple, a happily divorced couple, a young married couple and a pair on a blind date.

Tom’s character is a young man called Noel who happens upon Anna (Sophie Okonedo) just as she has been dumped by her boyfriend Ludo (or Monopoly as Noel calls him during the course of their conversation). Noel is a lecherous but essentially harmless desperado in search of sex. He and Anna engage in a tit-for-tat conversation with Anna discharging barbed comments at this hapless character who has stepped into her line of fire. Ultimately, the confused and emotionally vulnerable Anna demands sex from Noel right then and there, on the heath, to which he at first nervously, but then enthusiastically, consents… only to have Anna reject him and walk off, leaving him with trousers around ankles and (to the delight of Hardy fans once again) bare bottom on display. This is the principal scene for Noel but we encounter him again as he loafs around the Heath seeking a woman who is as desperate as he is, only to be spurned each time.

Tom appreciated the chance to work alongside British acting royalty: ‘It was exciting because I knew that the standards were going to be high,’ he said. Perhaps because of the people he would be working alongside, he admitted he was nervous before he had to film his scenes, but that ultimately this was a positive thing as he can produce his best work when he is scared of the situation before him.

Whilst some of those who wrote about the film found the piece as a whole to be superficial and laboured, most picked out redeeming features from the individual performances. The luckless nature of Tom’s character and the humour to be found in his impetuosity make his scenes amongst the most memorable in the film. Tom was singled out for praise on more than one occasion, with the
Evening Standard
commenting that he was ‘pure comic relief.’ Toby Clements in the
Telegraph
stated: ‘Tom Hardy as the demented sexual predator is a delight.’

Light-hearted roles weren’t something readily associated with Tom Hardy, but in
Scenes
he proved that he could more than deliver – though Noel does have a slightly deranged aspect to him that we might more easily associate with a Tom Hardy character. In years to come, Tom would revisit comedy on a much grander Hollywood scale – but sadly to a less favourable reception than he got for this low-budget British flick.

The miniscule budget of
Scenes
stands in stark contrast to the
£
16 million budget of the next job that came Tom’s way. In 2007, the disaster movie
Flood
dramatised what would happen if the Thames Barrier were to be breached by a huge surge of water.
Flood
was based on a book written by Richard Doyle, who believed that the rising water levels caused by global warming were a serious threat to the capital. He wrote the book in 2003, having spent two-and-a-half years studying issues of climate change and its effect on weather patterns.

The film was made by UK production company Power, in association with both South African and Canadian production companies. It was shot over 11 weeks in South Africa and on location in London. The big names attached to it were Robert Carlyle, who plays a marine engineer, Tom Courtney who takes on the role of his estranged meteorologist father and David Suchet who plays the deputy prime minister.

Tom plays Zack, one of a pair of London Underground workers caught up in the mayhem. His part in the film consists mostly of chasing around dark tunnels underneath the city whilst pursued by furious surges of water – or being
semi submerged in the water once it has caught up with him. As the characters are a pair, the action is nicely set up for one of them to come to a watery end while the other tries in vain to rescue him – but which one will it be?

In an effort to arouse interest in the film, publicity shots were released showing familiar London landmarks partially below water. The distributors refused to show the film to the press before it opened to the public in August 2007 – it had been rushed out to cinemas to take advantage of the fact that Britain was suffering an incredibly wet summer. This was a rather illogical move and, as the
Daily Record
pointed out: ‘Why would we want to subject ourselves to more torrential rain in the name of entertainment?’

The film had its television debut on ITV1 in May 2008. TV reviewer Nancy Banks-Smith opened her critique with: ‘When you feel lazy, there’s a lot to be said for tosh, and tosh is available by the bucketful in
Flood
.’

Oh well, Tom, you can’t win them all! Aquatic disaster films have a habit of sinking without trace.
Waterworld
, anyone?

Though
Scenes of a Sexual Nature
had been a masterclass in how to turn around a film on a sixpence, the Old Vic’s
24-hour
gala was more akin to the ‘shotgun’ theatre that Tom had been involved in with his own company. Since 2004, actor Kevin Spacey had been in place as the artistic director of the Old Vic theatre in London. The idea for the 24 Hour Plays Celebrity Gala had evolved there under his guardianship to become an annual event. Its purpose was to raise money for the theatre’s Old Vic New Voices development programme, which showcased new writing.

The line-up of household names was announced the month prior to the gala and, as well as Tom, included the likes of Tamzin Outhwaite, Dominic West, Patricia Hodge and Hollywood star Vince Vaughan. The object of the exercise was for the cast to perform six plays, written from scratch at the theatre in the space of 24 hours – not too much to ask, then!

The proceedings began at 10pm on Saturday, 7 October 2006, when the actors involved came together to develop six short plays – which would then be penned overnight by writers such as Colin Teevan and Snoo Wilson, amongst others. The plays were then rehearsed by the assembled actors from 8am on the Sunday morning – and finally performed in front of an audience of about 1,000. Talking to the
Evening Standard
about the event, Kevin Spacey said: ‘The 24 Hour Plays is one of the most thrilling and terrifying experiences an actor can have in a theatre. It’s an adrenaline rush like no other and a great event for the audience.’