A British Conspiracy in TV? We get to the bottom of it

January 13th, 2008 by admin

From The Toronto Star, Saturday, July 28th, 2007.
by: Rob Salem /Jul 28,2007 04:30 AM
LOS ANGELES- Hugh Laurie is only slightly taken aback when I accuse him of fronting a vast
conspiracy to steal bread from the mouths of Canadian actors.

The Oxford-born House hero is undeniably the vanguard of a new, more subtle “British Invasion”-
usurping the traditional role of imitating Americans that was once our almost exclusive domain.

It is hard not to imagine he and his English ilk secretly sipping tea in the back room of some
underground L.A. pub and laughing in their posh, superior way at all those poor Canadian actors whose
professional livelihood they have now claimed as their own.

Laurie, who was predictably honoured with an O.B.E. for his stellar service to Queen and country, does not even bother to muster a denial.

“Beautifully done, sir,” he enthuses, dropping the American act. “You have your own answer. I can only apologize.”

Undaunted, I press for an explanation. “I can only assume it’s because we’re cheap.” he shrugs, knowing
full well this won’t satisfy. “British actors coming over here…..if it’s anything like my experience, what
drew me was an absolutely stunning script. It could have been a Latvian circus piece, or it could have
been in piece of American television– it didn’t really matter in that regard. It was just a stunning piece of writing. you know, it’s sort of like sprinkling bread crumbs.. Actors will flock to stunning pieces
of writing. and I suspect that’s what’s happened with us.”

No conspiracy, no secret tea-drinking cabal? “No, no.” he laughs dismissively.”Although it may happen,
We could form a cricket team or something/”

This isn’t getting us anywhere. So I turn to David Nutter, a TV director and producer who has worked
extensively in Canada on American series like X-Files and Smallville, directed new faux-American
Damian Lewis(Life)in Band of Brothers, and is currently passing off300’s Lena Heady as American icon Sarah Connor in his own series, The Sarah Connor Chronicles.

But he appears to have been conscripted too. “I think it’s about getting the best product, ” he offers noncommittally. “I think that with the advent of shows likeRome, and other HBO shows….they’re
getting more notice…..People (in the industry) are able to see, ‘Oh, look at this person. Look at that person. Let’s try to get them on the show,’”

But then, just as I had about given up hope, one of the writers from House sidled up, took me aside and
conspiratorially confided, “I’m Canadian. In fact, there are four of us writing on the show, one of them
an executive producer.”

And I had my answer. As adept as Hugh Laurie may be at aping Americans, it takes a team of Canadians
to put those words in his mouth.

Actors are relatively powerless. Even Laurie admits, it’s all in the script. We aren’t out of work, just
gone undercover, taking over the industry from within.

Posted in 2007 | Comments Off

Hugh Laurie unlike his ‘House’ character

January 13th, 2008 by admin

Hugh Laurie unlike his ‘House’ character

Tuesday, July 31, 2007 

Alex Strachan CanWest News Service

BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. — He uses words like “parsimony” and “equanimous” and “propinquity” but he’s not at all intimidating to talk to. He doesn’t lash out at children — not in public, anyway — he doesn’t bully underlings and he doesn’t hit anyone with a walking stick. James Hugh Calum Laurie — Hugh Laurie to those who know him, and Dr. Gregory House to the 22 million viewers who watch House in any given week on Global TV and the Fox network in the U.S. and Canada — is actually a swell fella.

A 2007 Emmy nominee, a double Golden Globe winner and recipient of this year’s Screen Actors Guild Award for best male actor in a drama series, Laurie has every reason to be a stuck-up English snob, but he isn’t. Born in Oxford, educated at Eton and Selwyn College, Cambridge and a former champion rower (junior cox) for England’s national rowing team, he initially thought he might pursue a career in anthropology and archeology.

But then came a gig with the legendary comedy ensemble group Cambridge Footlights — a kind of Monty Python for upper-crust society ‘nobs — and a close friendship with Emma Thompson and her pal Stephen Fry.

Laurie and Fry buddied up for A Bit of Fry and Laurie and Rowan Atkinson’s Blackadder series, before turning to more serious drama.

He auditioned for House on a home video while filming a remake of the 1965 Jimmy Stewart adventure film Flight of the Phoenix in Namibia. House’s Canadian creator, David Shore, and director Bryan Singer liked what they saw so much they tapped Laurie to play a character the Peabody Award committee would later call an “unorthodox lead character, a misanthropic diagnostician” treating “cases fit for a medical Sherlock Holmes.”

Now, Laurie’s old friend Emma Thompson would like in on House in a possible guest role.

In just three seasons, House has experienced a meteoric rise in the ratings: It ranked 24th out of 115 primetime programs in its debut year, with 13 million viewers in the U.S. It jumped to 10th in 2006, with 17 million viewers, and again this year, to seventh, with 22 million.

Laurie thinks he understands Dr. House’s appeal.

“He’s a character who is worth putting up with. First of all, the fact that he saves lives — that’s a pretty endearing quality … His honesty, his anarchy — I think these are attractive qualities, though possibly best seen at a certain remove.”

When viewers last saw House, he had driven away much of his staff with his bursts of vitriol. They will all return during the coming season, though Laurie would not say when or under what circumstances.

source: theoriginalhughlauriesite

Posted in 2007 | Comments Off

LA Times.com “After Cleaning House”

January 13th, 2008 by admin

After cleaning ‘House’
In a bid to stay atop the network heap, Hugh Laurie’s doc goes on a hiring-and-firing spree. Hey, it’s all in character
By Maria Elena Fernandez / Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 23, 2007 THE Emmy statue would have gone so nicely with the surfboard.

But, really, who needs a stuffy old Emmy when the people who know what’s hot have named you the Teen Choice TV Actor? Hugh Laurie has two Golden Globes at home and has earned two Emmy nominations, but America’s adolescents last month picked him over Matthew Fox, Wentworth Miller, Milo Ventimiglia and Jared Padalecki as their favorite male TV star on the awards show presented by Fox and Global TV.

Not bad for a 48-year-old, huh?

Or as Laurie, star of Fox’s Emmy-nominated “House,” put it, “Given that the ages of all the other nominees probably don’t add up to mine, I felt that was a real triumph. It’s a huge thrill for me and I can’t deny it.”

Winning the Teen Choice surfboard, which Laurie says he will use “to iron my shirts or something,” is actually not as much of an anomaly as it might seem, because “House” ranked as the top-rated scripted show among 12- to 17-year-olds last season. More important, the medical mystery drama also pushed past surgical soap “Grey’s Anatomy” to garner the season’s highest number of advertiser-coveted 18- to 49-year-old viewers for all scripted shows.

Now, in an attempt to keep that momentum for its fourth season, “House” producers have concocted a story line that takes advantage of House’s irreverence and acerbic humor and, interestingly, forces art to imitate life. Just as 40 fellowship candidates are competing for not-so-dreamy jobs with Laurie’s Dr. Gregory House, guest actors are vying for regular roles on the Fox drama. The writers are still mulling over which two or three will stay.

“What can happen often in TV is that if something is successful, everyone is nervous about changing anything in case they risk upsetting the boat,” Laurie said. “But, of course, by the time you actually get a sign that you should change something, it’s too late. I think it’s very clever on the part of the writers that they have used the impetus we have at the moment to very slightly change directions. It’s perfectly in keeping with House’s way of going about things. You make House do something at your peril.”

Cross-generational appeal

LAURIE, whose characters on Britain’s “A Bit of Fry and Laurie,” “Black Adder” and “Jeeves and Wooster” were not as high-minded as the infectious-disease specialist he plays now, says it makes him nervous to think about the show’s triple-threat success — high ratings, critical acclaim and awards — out of fear “that almost immediately it will evaporate like the morning dew.” But he has come up with a credible theory on why the cranky, charismatic doctor has cross-generational appeal.

“Not that anybody cynically designed it this way, but I do think that House in some ways appeals to an older audience because he expresses all the impatience that old people have with the way the modern world is going and the touchy-feely, anti-scientific way the world is going,” Laurie said. “But he also, I think, connects to teenagers who are similarly impatient with all the rules and restrictions on life. And that rebellious side of House really does appeal to teenagers.”

If that is the magic formula, then this season, which begins at 9 p.m. Tuesday, should follow suit because the scheme that House hatches when he is forced to hire doctors to replace Foreman, Cameron and Chase makes his pretending to have cancer last season seem almost sane. The third-season finale packed a wallop — the genius doctor who claims he prefers the company of his guitar was left alone, literally. After Foreman (Omar Epps) tendered his two-week notice, House hastily fired Chase (Jesse Spencer), which, in turn, prompted Cameron (Jennifer Morrison) to quit too.

The shake-up was not something creator David Shore had planned from the beginning of the season, but one the writers happened upon as they explored the effect of Foreman’s departure on the team. Then, as the writers played with the idea of how House would handle losing everyone, Shore realized he was in the enviable position of reinvigorating his winning blueprint without forcing it, a challenge all hit shows face as they age and are sized up against new programs.

“Rather than, ‘Oh my God, oh my God, we’ve run out of stuff, it’s starting to get boring, it’s starting to get dull, we’ve got to change something, what are we going to change?,’ we changed it based on our own agenda,” Shore said. “Let’s try it now while the show is still working very well. We’re just expanding the world. The show is not different. It’s just growing a little bit.”

To be sure, the May finale caught fans by surprise. All summer, Internet message boards have been filled with the musings of frustrated and excited fans alike — some charging the producers with “ruining the show” for the sake of a “gimmick,” others speculating that House’s three fellows at Princeton-Plainsboro Teaching Hospital will all be back because the producers would never fire three series leads of a hit show at the same time.

Certainly, no one has been fired — and fans who don’t want to know more should think twice about reading the next few paragraphs.

When the season begins, House — and the viewers — have no idea where the three doctors went.

By the second episode, we learn that Cameron has been reassigned to the emergency room at Princeton-Plainsboro, Chase works in surgery and Foreman is at New York Mercy Hospital. But eventually, as Epps disclosed on the Emmys red carpet on Sunday, “he’ll be back begrudgingly.”

And their former Vicodin-addicted boss is as brutally honest and self-indulgent as ever.>P? Deciding that he does not need a staff, House takes to doing things, such as bouncing his ideas off the janitor until Dr. Lisa Cuddy (Lisa Edelstein), the dean of medicine and hospital administrator, and oncologist Dr. James Wilson (Robert Sean Leonard) step in and force him to hire help in a story line that takes full advantage of the threesome’s comedic rapport.

“It seems monumental, but it’s really organic, House being House,” executive producer Katie Jacobs said. “How many years can you really survive working with this kind of boss? And when the season starts, he’s by himself. He likes himself.”

Given no choice but to replace his three fellows, House decides to hire 40 temporary candidates, a move Cuddy must tolerate because she does not have to pay them more than she paid Foreman, Cameron and Chase. The rest plays out like a game of “Survivor,” with doctors eliminated on a weekly basis until six are left in the fourth episode. House even makes them wear numbers so he doesn’t have to bother learning their names.

“For Cuddy, this is like if you’re water-skiing and all of a sudden the speed boat takes off and starts whipping around and you’re trying to hold on,” Edelstein said. “He’s just gone out of control. Imagine if he has three people to hurl insults at and now he has 40 people. It’s like the show is magnified at this point because there’s just more people to abuse on it.”

If the “reality” game seems vicious, consider this: The new actors playing doctor are jumping the same hurdles, except that they don’t have to put up with a grouch’s mean streak off-camera. At recent table reads, Laurie has noticed that the actors vying to become regulars have been reading their scripts back to front. Edelstein said she finds the new season’s scripts so exciting that she has been waiting for the table reads to find out who gets fired at the end of each episode.

“It really is rather a cruel environment, in many ways,” Laurie said. “But what’s really delightful is that the actors involved, instead of eyeing each other jealously and competing and trying to stab each other in the back, they are a sort of happy band of brothers. They almost, almost sing songs around the campfire.”

The group includes Olivia Wilde (”The O.C.” and “The Black Donnellys”) as an intriguing physician whom House can’t figure out; Edi Gathegi (”Lincoln Heights”) as a black Mormon; Peter Jacobson (”The Starter Wife”) portraying a plastic surgeon; Anne Dudek (”Mad Men”) as an ambitious know-it-all; and Kal Penn (”24″) as the doctor most invigorated by the genius he wants to work for.

Shore and his writers are now in the process of choosing House’s two or three new fellows, which takes place in the eighth episode.

“On any other show I’ve worked with, I don’t know how this would feel,” Shore said. “But this just feels like something House would do. Interviewing and hiring seems like something he wouldn’t do. Hiring 40 people and then firing 37 of them feels like something he would do.”

Laurie agrees but finds comfort in knowing that the audience knows House better than anyone at Princeton-Plainsboro.

“For all that horrible, random, destructive behavior, there always remains something redeemable about House,” Laurie said.

“Nothing that House does is for public approval. In the same way he doesn’t care about the criticism, he also doesn’t care about the applause either. He’s just doing it for his own reasons, and we the audience know something. We have a hint that underneath all of that, he may not be an angel, but he’s on the side of the angels.”

source: LA Times.com

Posted in 2007 | Comments Off

Boxing helps Hugh Laurie cope with the House work

January 13th, 2008 by admin

Boxing helps Hugh Laurie cope with the House work
by TAHIRA YAQOOB 25th November 2007

At 48, it takes a lot of work to hang on to your reputation as television’s sexiest man. Hugh Laurie, unlikely heartthrob and star of US TV series House, has resorted to boxing to keep fit. Laurie, who moved to LA from Britain nearly four years ago to play the drama’s eponymous grumpy doctor, was back for his weekly session in the gym, face red and brow furrowed as he performed dozens of sit-ups. Perhaps the former star of comedies such as Blackadder and A Bit of Fry and Laurie is feeling the pressure of his sexiest man title, bestowed by America’s influential TV Guide. Whispers of a mid-life crisis are circulating in Hollywood – encouraged by his decision to buy a bright orange vintage Porsche 911. “He goes to a boxing class at least once a week near his home and is by far the oldest in a group of about 12,” said a source. “He is usually quite morose but cheers up enormously during his boxing sessions.”
The actor, who has won two Golden Globes for House, has spoken of the toll of his tough work schedule – and the fact that he so rarely sees his wife Jo, 51, and their three children, who have remained at the family’s London home. One of the few things which lifts his mood is boxing.
“It is fascinating,” he said. “I swank around thinking I am a big cheese, but you do not feel like that when you are in the ring with a chap who knows what he is doing.”

Posted in 2007 | Comments Off

Hollywood writers’ talks break down

January 13th, 2008 by admin

Published Date: 08 December 2007
Source: Press Association
Hollywood writers’ talks break down

Negotiations between striking Hollywood writers and studios have collapsed
Negotiations between striking Hollywood writers and studios collapsed after a day in which the sides traded accusations. The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers announced on Friday that the round of talks that started on Tuesday had broken down, stalling efforts to end the five-week strike that has sidelined many prime-time and late-night TV shows.

The Alliance said it was “puzzled and disheartened” by the Writers Guild of America’s ongoing negotiating strategy “that seems designed to delay or derail talks rather than facilitate an end to this strike”.

In response, the Guild said the chief Alliance negotiator slammed the door on bargaining after presenting an ultimatum and before the union could respond to his latest proposal regarding crucial new-media compensation issues.

“As we prepared our counter-offer, at 6.05pm, Nick Counter came and said to us, in the mediator’s presence, ‘We are leaving. When you write us a letter saying you will take all these items off the table, we will reschedule negotiations with you’,” according to a union statement.

A detailed Alliance announcement on the talks’ collapse was released a short time later. An email message sent to the alliance requesting comment from Mr Counter was not immediately answered.

The Guild said it remained “ready and willing to negotiate, no matter how intransigent our bargaining partners are, because the stakes are simply too high”.

Hopes that a settlement might be imminent were dashed just two days after the sides had expressed their first hint of optimism.

The Alliance reiterated its position that its latest offer aimed at settling a central contract issue - compensation for the internet and other digital media - makes it “possible to find common ground”.

As word of the breakdown spread, some writers expressed frustration. “It’s disheartening that a month into this, I’m not getting the overwhelming sense that we’re getting any closer to a settlement,” said Robert Port, a writer for the CBS series Numb3rs. “I hope we can continue to negotiate and wrap this thing up.”

Copyright (c) Press Association Ltd. 2007, All Rights Reserved.
Published in The Yorkshire Evening Post, December 8, 2007

Posted in 2007 | Comments Off

[Interview] - Ending Season Three With a Bang?

December 31st, 2007 by admin

Lawrence Kaplow is obstinately tight-lipped about the House season three finale, scheduled to air May 29. He does reveal that he co-wrote it with Thomas Moran; that the teaser was conceived before the rest of the episode, shot before the episode was fully written, and took considerable preparation, special effects, and stunt men; that executive producer Katie Jacobs, who’d directed for the first time on the Kaplow-penned “Half-Wit,” was directing this one, too; and that the rest of the episode started filming on Friday.

But will he give me any hints what it’s about? “I don’t think I should.” Will it end on a cliffhanger? “Hmmm.” Does someone shoot House? “I think fans will be pleased.”

So what did I get out of him? About that intricate teaser: “It’s not insane, like Mars blows up, but for our show, it’s big.”

I ponder the headline “Mars Does Not Blow Up in House Finale” as an a propos line from the last episode runs through my head: “I asked you what two plus two equals, and a day later you tell me ‘not 25.’”

Perhaps my tactical error was to beg for details while warning him repeatedly that I hate spoilers. Hard to say, though.

Write What You Know: “There are aspects of all our personalities that we give to House.”

“You have to understand: Shore is House,” Kaplow says, explaining the sense of humour of show creator David Shore, and, therefore, of his indelible character. “It’s not even sarcasm, it’s just truth, it’s painful truth, maybe an exaggeration of reality.”

But not surprisingly, Kaplow seems to have a Housian streak of his own. Stubbornness might be part of it. So might sarcasm.

When our interview is scheduled for 9 p.m. on a Tuesday, he asks if I have TiVo. My way-too-literal, brand-phobic brain answers: “Yes. Well, the Canadian version.” His reply: “Canadian TiVo … what’s that, a VCR?” He toys with me as I flounder in trying to frame a question about his string of addiction-exploring episodes. He mocks me for asking him to recall the early days, “like we were on in 1947.” And, as with House’s wit, it kept me laughing on a Tuesday evening.

Yet he reveals a humility and humanity that House would scorn, and that even causes Kaplow some lighthearted self-flagellation. He worries he’s heightened my expectations after that finale build-up. “I hope you’re not going to say, ‘Oh my God, he could have told us this, because this sucks.’”

I ask him about the career-escalating year-and-a-half since our last interview, a period that saw him win a Writers Guild Award for “Autopsy” and sign a development deal with 20th Century Fox.

“I was surprised anyone was aware of me. I keep my head down and I am truly interested in the work I do. I have such a good time doing it. I am so happy doing it.” He pauses. “That sounds so Pollyanna. Kill me.”

Fiction Versus Reality: “This is when real life and our TV show intersect, and you’re floored.”

He even berates himself for digressing after he tells me the most touching and insightful anecdote of the interview.

“We get excited when we find a really bad disease. We’re happy. We’re saying ‘Oooh, someone’s spleen can fall out their eyeball. That’s fantastic. And it strikes children. This is so cool!’ Because for us, it really is great to find something that plays on all those emotions,” he starts. “But there are real people out there with real diseases, the ones that are on the show, and then we get letters saying thank you.”

There was a quick line in “Half-Wit,” the episode where House fakes cancer to score drugs, mentioning a clinical trial at Duke University. The line was a shout-out to Kaplow’s friend, who had been a patient at Duke and who he thought would get a kick out of hearing it mentioned on air. “They got flooded with calls from people who were sick with brain tumours asking if there was hope,” he marvels.

“The writers are just having fun, telling stories. But then because it’s a medical show, people sometimes are watching it not just to see the characters and who’s kissing who, but for answers. And that’s where it sort of makes you ashamed.”

That intersection between fiction and reality hammers home the importance of working with the medical consultants, including staff writer and doctor David Foster.

“It brings responsibility to try to get the medicine right,” Kaplow says, before explaining the constraints of television. “Sometimes we get criticized from doctors who say that would never happen. And the truth is, in your practice that would never happen because this is not the norm, but we have documentation from here backed up to NBC Universal showing that this is possible, this is what can happen. But we can’t tell you the 15 steps it took to get there, because that would be really boring.”

Despite the accolades and the sense of responsibility, Kaplow feels no pressure to top himself. “I don’t set out to do something special, I set out to do something cool,” he says, revealing that “Half-Wit” was born out of the idea that he’d like to see House fake cancer. It then took conversations with Foster to get a medical story to make it work.

As a producer on the show, he has a hand in scripts other than those with his name on them, and he explains how tricky it is to shape the medical stories. “They need to be told simply so the audience can follow them, and at the same time be a mystery. So they are very difficult to pull off and they take a lot of work.”

Shaping the season is part of the job, too. “We try not to give the same thing every single week. Sometimes it’ll be a lighter story. The goal of every episode is not to make somebody cry,” Kaplow points out. “You’re not going to therapy when you watch television.”

He is one of a handful of writers who have been with the show since those early days, way back in 2004, but he hasn’t reached a point where he’s desperately hunting for medical oddities to feed House’s appetite for a mystery. “You stay buried in a story and then you come up for air and look around the world, maybe you read a newspaper for the first time, and all of a sudden all these stories are leaping at you.”

When we spoke, he was coming up for air after putting the final touches on the last script of the season. While he won’t even give a clue as to what it’s about (not that I’m bitter), he will say the show has hit a stride with the final run of episodes. “I think fans are going to have fun,” he promises. I’m going to go out on a short limb and guess that this won’t be one of those lighter episodes, though.

The Heart of House: “I guess I’m happy people see him as a role model. I just don’t want to be friends with those people.”

My floundering question about how we’ve seen House’s drug use progress through the seasons leads him to point out that “we’re no longer just talking about pain in his leg, but we’re talking about where he is mentally. Wilson is arguing that depression is a choice, and that for Wilson he chooses not to be, and that House chooses to be.”

Starting with the season two finale, we’ve looked deeper into the man who maybe sees his medical skills as a pass into a world where he doesn’t fit, who maybe clings to his misery as a sign of his superiority. We saw in “No Reason” — co-written by Shore and Kaplow — that he would give up his brilliance for a shot at normalcy. Then in “Half-Wit” we saw he would make a similar choice for a patient.

So with that knowledge, his sympathy-pushing actions to score drugs by faking cancer take on a more poignant overtone.

“Is it a desperate act to feel good? Is it a desperate act to feel normal?” Kaplow asks. “House would do anything to just be average. And unfortunately he’s cursed with a mind that will not allow him to rest. I think that brings about a lot of his pain, forget about his leg.”

We’ve seen House forced to question his strict adherence to rationality over emotion. We’ve seen him briefly cured of his pain and his limp. We’ve seen him in rehab and in jail. And yet, he remains the same old House.

As he must, Kaplow asserts. “It’s been said before that TV characters never really change. They’re born in the pilot and we uncover other flavours in them, but who they are is somewhat immovable.”

One of House’s immovable traits is his stubbornness (but I bet he would have given me a clue about the finale). You can’t say he’s not true to himself, even if that self is not always admirable. He almost defiantly refuses to change, even having difficulty with small-scale normalcy like getting a pizza with a friend, or going on vacation.

Kaplow brings up the possibility that change might not be the answer anyway. “There was a really cool study a few years ago about how everyone has a default state of being on the spectrum from miserable to happy,” he recounts. “If you’re normally fairly depressed or bitter and people are telling you to be happy, the stress of people telling you that, and your efforts to try to be happy, can make you more depressed than you would be in your normal state.”

Because House can’t be normal, it seems he exuberantly embraces his misery and superiority. Referring to the abrasive doctor’s drug-experimentation revenge on a former classmate in his season two episode “Distractions,” Kaplow stresses the bigger lesson about his character. “I think if House ended up with a stroke and was slurring his words and was in a hospital bed unable to move, he would still breathe into a tube and his last words would be, ‘I was right.’ And he would smile.”

That doesn’t mean House isn’t affected at all by these challenges to his point of view. “I do think he’s self aware. I don’t think he’s in the dark about who he is at all,” Kaplow responds to the critique that he hasn’t learned anything. “I think people like to think that deep down he has a heart of gold. Um, no, he doesn’t. He really doesn’t.”

He even balks at the suggestion that House shows glimmers of humanity, calling it an “odd” sort of humanity. “He gets annoyed at irrational choices, so he will tell the truth rather than a lie to get his way out of a conversation.”

“This was set up in the pilot,” he recalls. “When House comes in to talk to the kindergarten teacher and he convinces her to live, he’s not doing that because he’s a good guy. He’s doing it because he’s annoyed with her decision. It’s a stupid decision. Maybe that’s humanity. I don’t think it is. I think it’s illogical, which annoys him, which is why he says death is always ugly to someone who wants to die.”

Beyond House: “It’s a procedural, so there are various aspects to each character that are necessary to tell the story.”

House is clearly the centrepiece of the series, but he’s well-served by a diversity of secondary characters. Kaplow admits to a special fondness for Wilson, a fondness he shares with the show’s lead actor.

“Hugh [Laurie] has always maintained that one day the show will be Wilson, and they’ll forget all about this wise cracking doctor, what’s his name, he took Vicodin or something. He’s said that Wilson was the real show,” Kaplow laughs. “That’s typical self-deprecating Hugh, but at the same time, it is a lot of fun to mess with Wilson. And it’s fun to watch Wilson try to keep up, and the two of them torment each other.”

But “you fall in love with all of them,” he says of the characters he puts down on paper and sees come to life on-set through the talent of the actors playing them. “These people are in your head while you’re writing the scripts, and then you watch them move around, and they do it in ways you weren’t even thinking.”

And what exactly are they doing on-set at the moment, shooting the finale? “Since you’re a fan of the show I think you’d be pissed if I ruined it for you.”

So he won’t tell me how the season ends, or even how its special-effects laden teaser begins, but he will say this: “We’ve been teeing up a lot of things in the last couple of episodes and those tensions will continue to play out over the next while.”

Yeah, that’s not vague at all. I can promise you this: Mars does not blow up. Earth, now — he didn’t say anything about Earth.

Posted in 2007 | No Comments »

[Interview] Hugh Laurie - The Observer

December 31st, 2007 by admin

I am an idiot. I am! A complete and utter idiot.’ Hugh Laurie stretches his long, thin face, bringing a rubbery expression of astonishment to it; he turns down his lips; his brows corrugate; his electric-blue, blazing eyes boggle. He does make himself look a creditable idiot, or a lanky schoolboy caught in a spasm of acute self-consciousness. He calls himself berk, fraud, twit. He uses words like blimey and gosh and oh heck, like a blathering fool from an antique issue of Boy’s Own . ‘Joke,’ he says apologetically as soon as he makes one, anxious lest I miss it. ‘Sorry,’ he says at the end of long sentences, staring at me helplessly, ’sorry I’m talking such tosh, such twaddle; I know I must be disappointing you.’ Then he half-covers his sad-fool mouth with a hand, as if to stop any more treacherous words escaping. It should be annoying, this hectic English ruefulness. It should be a kind of disguised vanity. It isn’t.
Going straight

With his boggling eyes and idiotic grimaces, Hugh Laurie has cornered the market in blathering English fools. So what’s he doing playing a sexy romantic lead?

Film Unlimited

Nicci Gerrard
Sunday May 7, 2000
The Observer

‘I am an idiot. I am! A complete and utter idiot.’ Hugh Laurie stretches his long, thin face, bringing a rubbery expression of astonishment to it; he turns down his lips; his brows corrugate; his electric-blue, blazing eyes boggle. He does make himself look a creditable idiot, or a lanky schoolboy caught in a spasm of acute self-consciousness. He calls himself berk, fraud, twit. He uses words like blimey and gosh and oh heck, like a blathering fool from an antique issue of Boy’s Own . ‘Joke,’ he says apologetically as soon as he makes one, anxious lest I miss it. ‘Sorry,’ he says at the end of long sentences, staring at me helplessly, ’sorry I’m talking such tosh, such twaddle; I know I must be disappointing you.’ Then he half-covers his sad-fool mouth with a hand, as if to stop any more treacherous words escaping. It should be annoying, this hectic English ruefulness. It should be a kind of disguised vanity. It isn’t.

Article continues
‘The secret is out. He’s a great actor, our new Cary Grant or Tom Hanks,’ says Ben Elton, who has just directed him in his own directorial debut, Maybe Baby, casting Laurie against the apparent grain of his acting talent as the romantic lead.

‘He is very loveable,’ says Emma Thompson, who was, many years ago, his girlfriend, and has been his friend for two decades. ‘He is one of those rare people who manages to be lugubriously sexy, like a well-hung eel.’

‘He’s a remarkable man to know,’ says his great friend Stephen Fry. ‘I owe him everything. He’s the real thing. Gifted, phenomenally intelligent, and wise.’

‘And he’s beautiful,’ says Ben Elton.

‘Yes,’ says Joely Richardson, who plays opposite him in Maybe Baby . ‘Hugh is mysterious, and very beautiful.’

‘Blimey!’ says Laurie, stretching his beautiful eyes until they look as if they will pop out, grimacing wildly. ‘Gosh!’

But it is true. When Hugh Laurie stops pulling the face of amiable fool, his own face is beautiful: gaunt, vulnerable, tender, sweet, strangely haunted. And although it may be hard to imagine him playing the lead in a romantic comedy, it’s difficult, once you’ve seen him doing it, to remember this is his first shot at doing it. Maybe Baby is the story of Sam and Lucy, who are happy in love, successful at work (he’s a TV commissioning editor, she a theatrical agent), surrounded by friends. But they cannot make a baby, no matter how enthusiastically they try. The high spirits of the opening scenes - sexy underwear, acupuncture, intercourse along the ley lines - present a familiar Hugh Laurie, the rueful Englishman with the turned-down smile and high-rise eyebrows making quips between the sheets. Gradually, the pleasure recedes with the onset of sperm tests and hormonal injections. Unable to create at work, Sam finally breaks his writer’s block by betraying Lucy and turning their story into a TV drama. Things fall apart, and the comedy becomes a tale of loss. Here is a new Laurie, letting himself stand still and quiet, not hiding behind the gestures, grief-struck and unravelling. ‘Amazing despair,’ agrees Emma Thompson, who also appears in the film. ‘But that’s very much part of Hugh - an existential despair.’

When we meet, he says that he found it hard, indeed ‘almost unbearable’, to watch himself in Maybe Baby. When takes of the film were played back on the monitor, he would put his head in his hands. He never watches himself, he says. He hates to read articles about himself (’interviews, they steal your soul, your identity, your privacy - so you can just make stuff up if you want’). He can’t bear the sound of his own voice. ‘Inside your head, your voice is interesting; it goes up and down and is full of light and shade and emotion. When you hear it, though, it’s… uh… it’s horrible. Retarded.’ Difficult for an actor, I suggest, to hate the look of his face and the sound of his voice. He seems surprised: ‘Don’t most people think that of themselves? Unless they are exceptionally attractive. Most of us, though, don’t we wince at how far short we fall from the picture we have of ourselves?’ Self-mocking voice: ‘Blimey, I thought those trousers looked good on me.’

Ben Elton, who has known Hugh Laurie for nearly 20 years, cast him in Maybe Baby because ‘I always felt with Hugh that there was a secret waiting to be let out. He thinks a great deal. He is not good at selling himself. Of course he’s terrific at comedy, playing the amiables and idiots, but those who know him well - and not that many do - know that as well as doubt and insecurity he has great inner strength; huge depth and thoughtfulness. When I asked him to play Sam, he was all: “Blimey, Ben! Do you think I can do it?” But when I looked at him through the camera, the vulnerability was heartbreaking. He is a complicated fellow, and really quite special.’

Joely Richardson also calls him special. ‘I met him during 101 Dalmatians. I was sort of fascinated by him; I found him mysterious. There is a lot more to him than comedy - though he is brilliant at that, he has comic timing no amount of money can buy. Ben had to fight to have Hugh as his leading man; it was a risk. And Hugh, he didn’t feel he deserved to be there. He was very nervous. But as an actor he was also hugely brave. He bares his soul at the end of the film. So it was a risk absolutely worth taking, for both of them.

‘Hugh has this heartbreaking quality. When his face is still, the pathos is extraordinary. There are two sides to him. There’s the Hugh who dances around and cracks jokes, tangos all over the place. And there’s the other side: tortured, dark. I love them both.’

Laurie says he was very apprehensive before the film about acting grief, and afterwards he was ‘very shaken. I felt as if I’d had a near-miss in a car crash. I was physically shaking. Thing is, I’ve never trained as an actor. I’ve got no diploma in acting out grief. I don’t know the “normal” way to do it.’ He drinks a slurp of coffee and stares past me. ‘ The Unbearable Lightness of Being, that’s a good title, don’t you think?’ he asks, unexpectedly. ‘This is the big struggle. Is the object to care utterly, or not to care at all? Should I access grief, as they put it, and trust the camera will see that, so if I’m feeling something truthful, that will emerge? Or am I going for the lightness of grief? Do I just have to resemble grief, represent it, and not let myself be filled with it? It’s like that famous example in Marathon Man, with Laurence Olivier saying to Dustin Hoffman: “You should try acting, dear boy, it’s an awful lot easier.”‘

Which was he, then, heavy or light? He lights the first of many cigarettes, after he has courteously asked my permission. ‘The truth is, I don’t know. I don’t know what I would do again if I had to. I’ve not trained in this job, acting. I don’t feel like an actor. What does an actor feel like? Not like me, anyway.’

Instead, he says, he feels like a tree - or like the little bit of bark on the tree - which has been struck by lightning. (Has lightning struck your tree, they say in Hollywood, meaning the electric dazzle of fame.) Hugh Laurie is, to anyone looking at his life from the outside, a success. He grimaces every time this word is said; luck, he says, it has only been a matter of luck. He grew up the youngest son of a GP. He went to the Dragon School, Eton, where he dreamed of being an action man, a policeman, an actor. Then to Cambridge to study anthropology, where he won a blue in rowing and was president of Footlights, and got a third. He met Emma Thompson here, and Stephen Fry and Tony Slattery. He was part of the Cambridge Footlights that won the 1981 Perrier Award at Edinburgh, and which he then took to the BBC in 1982. He met Ben Elton and was in Blackadder. He is the Fry of Fry and Laurie . The Wooster in Jeeves and Wooster. The star in the forthcoming Stuart Little, a comic tale about a mouse, that is a huge hit in America. He has written a best-selling, critically acclaimed novel. He has close friends, a good marriage with his wife Jo, three beloved children (Charlie, Bill, Rebecca). He has money, security, affection, a future that looks bright and steady.

‘Yes.’ He pulls a contrite face. ‘I’ve been lucky. The lightning has struck my tree.’ Of course, the trouble with luck is that it can end. You have no control over it. The ‘luckier’ Laurie is, the more scared he becomes. Life is thin ice. He’s skated over it so far, but underneath are dark waters. And the other trouble with luck is that you don’t deserve it. Hugh Laurie feels unworthy.

He wishes, he says, that he had a prison story to tell, like Stephen Fry has. Instead, his story is ‘timid, dull, middle-class’. He grew up in a comfortable family, six years younger than his next sibling, a brother to whom he wasn’t particularly close. He was ‘loved and cared for. Lovely parents, lovely sisters and brothers. But I was sort of an only child, because I was so much the youngest. Sort of alone.’ He did, though, have ‘problems’ with his mother, ‘and she with me. I was an awkward and frustrating child. She had very high expectations of me. Long after I had stopped being a child, I heard from my sisters that I was the apple of her eye, her golden boy, but I didn’t realise it at the time. I knew she had high expectations, which I constantly disappointed.’ He says that he cheated in French tests, smoked in the school loos, moved his lips when he read; his school reports were ‘desperate’. ‘I was lazy. I lied. About everything, all the time. I was a fussy eater. Once Mum caught me with two pieces of liver in my pocket and sent me back to the table to eat it. It took three hours and then I caved in. I gave up on the piano - that was a battle I won. I went on hunger strike and didn’t eat for three days.’ He makes one of his faces: ‘It’s still not a prison story, is it? I’m terribly jealous of Stephen Fry for his theatrically bad childhood.’

Not a prison story, but Laurie clearly had periods of quite intense unhappiness as a boy. ‘However, I’ve never been convinced,’ he adds, ‘that happiness is the object of the game. I’m wary of happiness. It is’ - ironic tone here - ‘a snare and a delusion. It’s jolly nice sometimes, like steak and chips, but is it a goal?’ He stops for a minute and puts his head on one side, considering. ‘I have the luxury of asking something like that, of course. Because I can eat steak and chips whenever I want, and my life is secure and, well, “happy”. Oh my God, I’m so sorry, I’m so, so sorry to be talking such a load of tosh. I may have to go out and punch a policeman. Do a bit of porridge.’

After Eton - where, says Fry, Laurie could never have been a natural Etonian - he went to Cambridge. Emma Thompson met him in their first term. ‘He was a rowing blue. Gigantic. I first saw him when we were auditioning for parts in the pantomime Aladdin. He looked a bit like Indiana Jones, wearing a lot of khaki. I saw him sitting there and I jabbed my friend in the ribs and said: “Star. Star. Star!” I knew at once. He sat on the stage and did an impression of the Emperor of China trying to attract someone’s attention - it was extremely funny and clever. He was always so funny, the funniest person I’ve met. I remember once driving back from some Footlights performance, and hearing on the radio that somebody had been kidnapped and driven off in a Ford van. We were in a Ford van, so Hugh did a lot of struggling and thrashing around on the front seat, to see if we would be stopped. And I laughed so much I had to stop for a wee.’

Fry also met him at Cambridge. Indeed, he says that meeting Laurie ‘was the best thing that could have happened to me, both in career terms and emotionally. He is absolutely my best friend. People sometimes call me a Renaissance man, but I’m not and Hugh is. He’s a natural athlete. He’s a gifted musician. He is clever, perceptive, has natural charisma. Sometimes it is thought that I’m the loud mouth and the dominant one, but we have been an equal partnership. And we have not been jealous of each other - I’m genuinely thrilled when good things happen for him. And I’m particularly thrilled by the way his acting career is going.’

And his writing career, for Laurie has also, like Fry, written a novel, The Gun Seller. He is working, he says with a wide, anxious grimace, on his next one now. He does a kind of browbeating act about the writing: Gosh, how do I dare? But his publisher, Tom Weldon of Michael Joseph, insists that he is ‘unusually talented in many different ways, but in 50 years’ time, I think he’ll be known for his fiction. He’s a complete perfectionist, and very tough on himself, almost too tough on himself, but this means his books are written with incredible care. His writing is clever, intricate and at times joyous, and I am very proud to be his publisher.’

Real depression - ‘heavyweight unhappiness’ - began in his late teens and has continued through success, marriage, fatherhood. Maybe it is a chemical imbalance, he says, though he won’t take drugs for it (once, he admits shamefacedly, he did resort to St John’s Wort). He hates the idea of drugs that will alter him - and anyway, is not convinced that he wants to be altered. He wouldn’t mind having ‘a life that I like’, but at the same time admits to sometimes clinging to his unhappiness, which is a known, familiar state; part of what makes him Hugh Laurie. (’But then,’ he wags a long finger at me, ‘who is Hugh Laurie? Aha!’) He is anxious when talking of his depression, because he is so conscious that he has ‘nothing at all to complain about’. He shrivels his nose. ‘Perhaps that’s my problem - where is the struggle? There has been no struggle. Where’s the passion of my life? Where is its purpose?’ He answers himself almost at once: ‘Having children, that’s my purpose. I am eternally in my children’s debt. They stop me thinking about other stuff.’ (Fry puts it the other way round, saying that his friend is the best father he’s ever met.) ‘I have thought of killing myself when things got really bad,’ he continues, ‘but I was dwelling too much on the conversations that would be had at my funeral for it to be convincing. “That’ll show them.”‘

Show whom, though? ‘Aha!’ He looks triumphant. ‘Who? Nobody, of course. I’m nobody’s victim. I can’t remotely feel sorry for myself. In fact, I’m riding for a fall, don’t you think? I’ve had a few slips, but I’ve had no falls, have I? And the slips were all of my own making. My own stupid, stupid blunders.’

So we talk of the ’slips’. First of all, Hugh Laurie feels that he has not risked enough in his life. ‘I’ve not been tested. I remember hearing Enoch Powell interviewed, and his big regret was that he would have liked to have died in the war. I understood what he meant - that feeling of unworthiness, to continue to survive and enjoy the fruits of a victory that others die for. I’m of a different generation, but I still feel that unworthiness. I feel huge emotion when I think of the war - especially of the First World War. All those boys going down together to the recruiting office. How endlessly tragic. Whatever grand thing they were doing it for, I’ve not made the most of, have I? What is freedom? The freedom to eat ravioli at three in the morning? Not enough, is it?’

When I speak to Emma Thompson, she picks up on this yearning of Laurie’s to prove himself. ‘There are men around, fortyish, like Sebastian Faulks, say, who would do wonderfully well at war. Hugh definitely belongs to that generation. Maybe something like war would have solved his feeling of unworthiness, but there isn’t one for him, thank God.’

And Fry, who has faced his own dark nights, says that comedians are maybe cursed with a lucidity about the world and ‘therefore a clarity about themselves. So perhaps we torment ourselves. Comedy, even when it’s surreal, draws attention to the absolute and the particular. You take something big and make it concrete. It can be scary.’

Laurie tells me how, for his 40th birthday last year, his wife gave him a parachute jump. He trained for it, but when the day came, the wind was too high and they couldn’t do it. The women in the group were upset, the men relieved. ‘Us blokes, we were all there because we felt in some pathetic way we wanted to be tested, to know what it is like when the guy opens the door and says, “Jump!”, and you jump. Could I do it?’

You’re scared of failure, I ask. ‘Yes!’ He is emphatic. Very scared. ‘Very, very.’

Because you’ve never failed? ‘Perhaps. Perhaps I am so conceited I dare not risk failure. Or perhaps I dread it just because I know it will happen.’ His blue eyes brighten. ‘Call me a conceited pessimist.’

His other slip - which we approach tentatively - is that a few years ago he had an affair with the director Audrey Cooke when he was filming The Place of Lions in Australia, and was outed by the tabloids (’Hugh in Love Tug over Blonde!’). Being Hugh Laurie, the affair was not just a fling while in another continent, and being Hugh Laurie - married to a wife he loves, father of three children he adores - his guilt is still considerable. He says that ‘there is nothing to say that will make it better for anyone, so it is better not to say anything. The public exposure was an agent in the whole process; it didn’t just show what happened, it affected it.’ He adds hastily, ‘I’m really not saying “poor me” here. It was all my fault. And I was shocked by what happened. The pain. Everyone’s pain. I’m nervous of saying, in a facile way, that it has changed me. I can’t just say, “Oh I’m fine now” - that sounds like a man who’s about to start drinking again.’

Change, he says, is very hard for anyone. Until last year, he was in therapy. He began when he realised that he was bored even by dangerous things like driving racing cars. The world was flat, stale. He stopped because he went away for work, but he will probably return again pretty soon: ‘Not because I am in dire need still, but because my therapist is an extremely nice, bright woman and I find it a fascinating process.’ His eyebrows shoot up and his blue eyes bulge. ‘Did I really say that? Listen to me. “Fascinating process.” God, I make myself sick sometimes.’ Being willing to have therapy means that theoretically Laurie does believe that it is possible for him to change, ‘but actually I feel that I have just got older. Nothing does much good. I still hold out the hope that I will find ways of dealing with people that are better. More honest. In the meantime, I am just older.’

Part of this reason for feeling older, though not much wiser, is that both his parents have now died and he is on ‘the front line’ or ‘the top floor’. ‘I’m the next to jump, in fact. Yes, I will make that jump in the end. Though I’m the youngest in my family and there are other people before me. Not before me, as in to die before me,’ he adds hurriedly, ‘but before me in age and wisdom. I can ask for help and advice. Though it is not like having parents, is it? Do I miss them? Yes. Except the funny thing is that I don’t miss their company, since I was so separate from them for such a long time. I went to boarding school at an early age, and once you leave home like that, things are never the same again. No, what I miss is the knowledge that they are there.

‘My father, a lovely man, died a few years ago when I was in the States. I knew he was unwell, and before I went I made a deliberate decision not to resolve things, not to have that final conversation. I didn’t say goodbye and have the big talk. Because,’ he says, ‘I didn’t want to give him my permission to leave. I wanted him to have unfinished business, as if resolving things would somehow be unlucky. I guess I was scared to let him clear the in-tray. I regret that now, but probably I would do the same again.’

Nor did he have any kind of resolution with his mother, who died when he was 29 of motor neurone disease; the woman who expected so much of him and whom he felt he constantly disappointed; who probably gave to her golden boy his debilitating self-doubt, his dread of competition, his fear of love and risk, his endearing vulnerability. ‘No, no resolution, not at all. Or maybe very, very slightly. A small amount of movement.’ He holds up his thumb and forefinger in measurement. ‘Maybe two inches.’ Two inches along what road, I ask. ‘Oh,’ he grins savagely. ‘Say, two inches along half a mile.’

Laurie’s self-deprecation goes very deep. He continually cracks scathing jokes about himself, makes gargoyle grimaces at his own words. He calls this behaviour his ‘default system’. Fry believes that he is terrified of being seen to be cocky. ‘He’ll sit at the piano and pull silly faces rather than allowing your attention to be drawn to his brilliant playing. God knows we all feel unworthy, but he feels it more than most. He knows he is lucky, but he can never take that for granted. There are some people from working-class backgrounds who treat people like shit because they’ve come so far. They don’t need to prove themselves. Hugh is more likely to be apologetic. He’s a seriously emotional soul.’

His friends get annoyed with him for so underselling himself. ‘His extreme deprecation is his only really annoying habit,’ says Fry. Thompson agrees: ‘He is surrounded by people who love him passionately and have spent a good part of their adult lives saying, “Hugh, you are marvellous.” He is the most infuriating and the most wonderful of people. He, of course, would say yes to being infuriating and no to being wonderful. And the infuriating thing about him is that he won’t accept he’s fantastic. I don’t know if the paradox will ever be answered now. Probably it never will be.’

He is clearly well-loved. He is clearly very loveable. Nobody has a bad word to say about him, so he provides the bad words himself. ‘I am an idiot.’ He has no enemies, so he becomes his own self-wounding enemy. ‘Blimey, I’m a fool.’

• Maybe Baby is released nationwide on 2 June

Posted in 2000 | No Comments »

[Interview] - Hugh Laurie Gets New ‘House’ Mates!

December 31st, 2007 by admin

Fred Topel
Special to Hollywood.com

Dr. House is back–but we can’t be so sure about his interns. After Foreman quit at the end of last season, House fired Chase and Cameron to boot, and producers revealed that House will be interviewing new candidates for the three open positions. They call it Survivor: House Style. He will still see his former team, but they may only be in his imagination.

House star Hugh Laurie, who earned another Emmy nomination for his portrayal of the pill popping doctor, opened up to Hollywood.com about hiring a new team, meeting the queen and more.

Hollywood.com: How will House torture the new intern candidates?

Hugh Laurie: He has many devious means of inflicting psychological torture. Every candidate, every team of candidates, gets their own specific torment that they have to go through.

HW: With such a tight ensemble, how does it feel to let other people in there?

HL: It feels fine. Actually, that’s a better question for them rather than me, because I feel like I’m sort of doing the same thing every day. I think everyone feels optimistic about where we’re going and they feel good about being in a show that they’re proud of. Both the new people and the people who have already done it feel proud of what they do–and that’s the main thing.

HW: It adds some freshness to the show now that it’s in year four…

HL: Oh yeah, definitely. I think the smartest thing about it is that the writers and producers are making this change while it’s still their decision. The conventional thing would be to have a network or a studio saying, “”Don’t change it because it’s fine, it’s fine. Don’t change anything.”" Then by the time you need to change it it’s too late. But what they’ve decided to do is to control the direction it goes in now before it becomes a panic measure. I think it’s so smart and it’s such a good way to go.

HW: Have you ever read anything in one of the scripts so outrageous even you have a hard time?

HL: No. I think I never have read anything that was un-actable. I’ve read things that I thought, ‘Wow, this is going to be tough. We are going to have to get this right because if we don’t this whole thing isn’t going to work at all.’ But no, David Shore is just simply too smart a writer, as are his cowriters. They are just too smart to really hang anybody out to dry, as it were.

HW: Has anything ever made you hate him as a person?

HL: No, no. I completely agree that House is not an easy proposition. He may not even be morally a good man. But then, the truth is we don’t only like the people who are morally good. Of all the friends we have, are they the 10 morally best people we ever met? No, of course they are not, that is not how we choose our friends. Thank God, because it would be a weird universe if we did.

HW: Women love House. Do you think they want to save him?

HL: I don’t know if that’s true really. Clearly this is a troubled character. There was an episode, one of my favorite episodes ever of Star Trek, favorite moment in Star Trek was when Captain Kirk looks over the cosmos and says, “”Somewhere out there someone is saying the three most beautiful words in any language.”" Of course your heart sinks and you think it’s going to be, “”I love you”" or whatever. He says, “”Please help me.”" What a philosophically fantastic idea, that vulnerability and need is a beautiful thing. Actually, House is a character in need of human contact and some kind of redemption. That “”Please help me”" aspect I think is an important element in the show.

HW: What was it like to be made a member of the Order of the British Empire by the Queen?

HL: I haven’t been honored by many Queens in my life [so] not many things to compare it with, but it was a huge thrill. Of course it was a huge thrill. I went to Buckingham Palace and I put on a royal set of tails. I spoke to her for about 14 seconds. I think that is all you are allowed, which I completely understand. She’s got to do 100 people in an hour. You got to keep it plucking on. It was a very big thrill.

HW: Was it a surprise? How did they let you know about that in the first place?

HL: They just write to you saying, “”If this happened would you, we aren’t saying it will, but if it did, would you?”" You indicate, you sort of check the box, you just tell them. I remember my middle son said, “”Dad, do you have to be so obvious about it?”" So I toned it down. That was a very good response.

HW: Did the Queen appear to know anything about the show?

HL: I don’t know. She’s just too damn professional to give it away! She is extremely good, I’ll tell you. You can’t tell. I’d like to think that I swim across there at some point, but I couldn’t be sure of it.

Posted in 2007 | No Comments »

[Interview] - Man about the House

December 31st, 2007 by admin

By Richard Clune

October 28, 2007 12:00am

HUGH Laurie is at odds with a line in the script. Oblivious to the cast, crew and occasional visitor, Laurie’s lithe frame paces through the rooms of the fictitious Princeton-Plainsboro Teaching Hospital, home to his cantankerous, albeit brilliant, small screen alter ego, Dr Gregory House.

Hand on chin, deep in thought, Laurie eventually expresses his concerns to writer Eli Attie.

Their discussion is brief, the line cut, then Laurie returns to filming.

This is the intensity with which Laurie works; an intensity that has helped House achieve global success - but also leaves him tired.

“I can’t switch off,” the 48-year-old later tells The Sunday Telegraph. “I’m always thinking about the show. I’m too neurotic and anal and too convinced we’re going to fail to relax.

“Every show we do is a disaster, I’m convinced of it. I go home and my head is full of all the mistakes I’ve made.”

Given the accolades and acclaim attached to the series and Laurie’s deft portrayal, such words seem strange.

While he continues to periodically visit a therapist in an ongoing battle with “mild depression”, Laurie doesn’t view his professional pessimism as a by-product of the illness.

“No, I don’t think it is part of that,” he says. “I’m aware of the fact it’s a bit weird. It’s partly a superstition.

“I don’t believe in God, but I have this idea that if there were a God, or destiny of some kind looking down on us, that if he saw you taking anything for granted he’d take it away.

“So he’ll be like: ‘You think this is going pretty well?’ Then he’ll go and send down some big disaster.”

On paper, Laurie’s words read as those of an extreme pessimist but each sentence is punctuated by a wry smile.

Admittedly “drained” - his role demands 14-hour days, five days a week - Laurie is devoid of the TV industry’s false sincerity and smiles.

On the subject of his family, he describes the distance dividing them as an ongoing struggle.

While he maintains a small Los Angeles apartment, his wife, Jo Green, and three children keep the family home in London.

“It wasn’t a massive move when I first considered (doing House). What usually happens is you do a pilot and of the very few picked up, only about a quarter go to a second year.

“So I thought I’ll have three fun weeks. I never dreamt I’d be here three-and-a-half-years later.

“But I do go back and forth as much as possible, as do my wife and kids.”

As if sensing that his words are morose, Laurie quickly restates his enjoyment in the title role.

“House is likeable. Not because he’s morally good, but there’s something about American television that it always has this really aspirational element, that we can better ourselves or aspire to be good morally. I think often that doesn’t make for good drama.”

Posted in 2007 | No Comments »

[Interview] Hugh Laurie - Radio Times, August 2005

December 31st, 2007 by admin

The diffident star of medical drama series House talks to Andrew Duncan about being reborn in the USA.

On earning the lead role in House

“I did a couple of scenes on tape, sent it off, with no expectations. A month later I’d forgotten about it and my agent said the producers wanted me to fly to Los Angeles to test ‘for that medical show’ - economy, by the way, which made me pretty sure I was an outsider. The producers thought I was American, or so they say. I don’t think it ever occurred to anyone an Englishman could play Gregory House.

“A couple of things I’d done had been on television here - Blackadder, Jeeves and Wooster - but it’s rare to meet anyone who’s seen them. I had no ambition to do an American series. If it was being shot in north London by the BBC, that would have been fine.”

“I suppose it’s no surprise that in the entertainment business there are sudden turns in a short space of time. This happens to be my big change
of direction.”

On the character of House

“I didn’t realise House would be the central character, more the bitter comic relief appearing occasionally. I relish his wounded nature - the lameness, the scarred Byronic hero. I’d love to say I supplied a lot of these things, but they were all there, perfectly described by the writers. I merely stand there and read it out. I was thrilled to play an intelligent character as I’ve made a living for quite some years being fools.”

His attitude to the success of the show

“I planned an enjoyable few weeks making a single show. I had no expectation of it lasting. So to be here a year and a half later is
most peculiar.”

“Apparently I have an Emmy nomination. I still have to pinch myself to make sure I heard correctly.”

“I don’t watch the show, or read reviews, nor meet many people I’m not working with. I hear, vaguely, we’re doing all right [16 million viewers in the US], but I don’t know enough to be embarrassed, or proud. I get on with it. It’s, umm, very exciting.”

On the differences between US and UK TV

“Americans have become less insular in the past 20 years. Gradually they’ve become happy to embrace foreigners, for whatever reason. But there’s a significant difference between British and American writers. Americans believe in the heroic, and try to write better, more optimistic, versions of themselves, but apart from James Bond, or perhaps Harry Potter, British writers don’t.”

What’s next for him

“I’m massively late on producing a second novel, which is only about halfway there. I don’t know what I’ll do next. There’s been no heightened interest in England - and I didn’t expect it. They might think even less of me, if that’s possible. I’m the bloke who minced around on American TV. I still have a yen to open a bar and play the piano. Perhaps in Lisbon. I’ve never been there, but I like the sound of it.”

(c) http://www.radiotimes.com

Posted in 2005 | No Comments »

« Previous Entries