#like this 'fleabag is a bad feminist' yeah so? she says that as one of the first lines in the show

[zevranunderstander]

idk how to phrase this but like. people retroactively calling Fleabag a privileged, dissociative portrayal of feminism which is Bad, Actually, are lowkey deranged to me because, yeah, Fleabag IS about the expierience of womanhood. but like. through the lens of ONE woman? like, nowhere in the show is it ever implied that fleabag's expieriences are supposed to be universal, relateable core pillars to womanhood?

its almost like half of the population of the world is female and I think it's kind of weird that all stories about women always have to be feminist and activist, and can not just be an exploration of an imperfect woman, they have to be correct about *all* of womanhood?

i also think that the people saying this don't really understand the character of fleabag and i do think that the show is feminist in many ways, but even when no person working on this show would have had any intention of making this a "feminist story", i think that would have been their right to do that?

breaking bad, fight club, american psycho, lolita, etc. all tell the stories of white men who are objectively horrible people. and these stories still treat these characters with a level of empathy and understanding of how they got there and why they are like that. the stories don't excuse their behavior because of that, they are simply a fictional analysis of a person who is not virtuous or good in a lot of ways.

but women, people of color, disabled people, and other minorities are never given the same right to just tell a story about a character, the character has to be virtuous, a good role model, a representation of their whole group, likeable, flawed only in an "unproblematic" way, never make a bad decision, and its insanely limiting in what stories can be told by writers, when they want the approval of the general audience

and i so genuinely want more fleabag women, who may interact with feminism, but who are actual human beings in a real world, who have real flaws and who can be selfish and cruel, but who are still treated with empathy by the story

[denimbex1986]

He’s lounging on a couch in a small, windowless room in a Manhattan studio, where he’s been dutifully shooting promotional material for Birdy all day. But he seems bright and alive, his broken foot long since patched up. In a way, the injury may have helped him tap into the psyche of his character, an increasingly broke medieval lord whose sartorial and aesthetic tastes set him apart from the “draconian, macho atmosphere” of his realm, Scott says. There’s a sense of vulnerability alongside complex masculinity at work in this decidedly feminist film, aided by Scott’s tender rendering of Lord Rollo.

In an interview with Vanity Fair, Scott chats candidly about tackling the role, what it was like working with Dunham, and how playing the instantly iconic Hot Priest in Fleabag has left an eternal stamp on his career. 

Vanity Fair: What was the first thing that made you say yes to this project?

Andrew Scott: It was definitely Lena. I think Girls is extraordinary. I remember seeing it and thinking, Wow. Such a singular voice. That’s the stuff that you look for. A writer that’s not scared to put their autograph on something. Whatever she puts her mind to, she’s going to have a vision and she’s going to deliver a message. 

Did you have a favorite Girls character?

It was more the spirit of it. I remember that extraordinary scene where they break up—Lena’s character and Adam Driver’s character. It was such a sad, brilliant scene. And the fact that she did it at that age [is impressive].

Your character gets a memorable introduction from Birdy. She writes: “He’s often vain, usually drunk, and always greedy.” It’s her perspective, but there are those elements to him, which you tackle in a fun way. How did you approach a character who is so louche?

Oh, with absolute abandon. [Laughs] We talked about costumes that he should be wearing. It was incredible working with [costume designer] Julian Day. Lord Rollo would be wearing Gucci now if he could. He likes to spend money, he’s interested in art. He’s just one of those straight men. 

Going back to the costumes, I was watching this thinking you must be so comfortable. You’re wearing robes on top of robes. Was this the most comfortable movie you’ve ever done?

It would’ve been, but, unfortunately, during the movie I fell down stairs and I broke my foot.

Oh god! I’m so sorry.

Yeah. I think that’s an exclusive. [Laughs] There were these very slippery mahogany stairs and I just fell and smashed my foot. So for a lot of the movie, I’m walking around with a big boot. I was very grateful for [the costumes] and that I wasn’t putting on a pair of skinny jeans or something. 

Have you ever worked on a film where you had that kind of injury before? Or was this a first?

No, it was my first time that’s ever happened. It’s amazing how much it fucks things up.

Did you learn anything about yourself as an actor through working through that kind of challenge?

A little, I think. When you’re in pain, you feel so weirdly vulnerable. I had to take [the cast] off at times. You’re in crowds saying, “Please don’t stand on my foot, please, please, please.” 

The first AD is like “Be careful around Andrew!”

Yeah. But we did okay. We managed it! 

I’m curious what Lena is like on set. How does she give a note?

We did a lot of improvisation. She’ll come back and say, “I love that line!” Like all the best directors, you reward the good and you ignore the bad. [Laughs] She’s incredibly effusive and fun. She understands performing as well. You’re not required to do 75 takes of something with diminishing returns. You feel confident because she feels confident. 

I noticed at TIFF that she said she turned you from “Hot Priest” to “Hot Medieval Dad.” I wanted to ask about the phenomenon of getting “hot” prefixed to your characters after playing Hot Priest on Fleabag. I imagine it’s flattering, but also strange. Does it happen a lot?

It only happens when you are talking about things [at festivals], or doing press. There are worse things to be called, I suppose.

Right, it makes sense that it happens with press. It’s not happening in your day-to-day life, where your friends are like, “This is my friend.”

“This is my hot Irish friend.” [Laughs]

If they were true friends, maybe they would do that.

If they were true friends, exactly!

People loved Fleabag Season 2 so much. Hot Priest left such an indelible mark. It made me wonder how present the legacy of that show is in your day-to-day life.

It’s definitely a piece of work that people just love. They love it. It’s a symbol, a little bit like this movie, of the people that create it, and that’s why it’s joyful. I feel very proud of it. Fleabag is so generous and wonderful and adds to the feeling of compassion in the world, but it’s done through the prism of comedy. It influences people with a sleight of hand that takes such skill. 

I did a rewatch recently and it’s just so good. 

It’s a gorgeous thing. And men respond to it as well. Men really love it because it’s inclusive. It’s really inclusive. 

That’s another thing to say about Lena as a director—the set was incredibly inclusive. Movie sets can be macho places, so to have people in key positions, it changes the atmosphere.

How does it change it for you?

It’s just novel. The thing I love about working in movies, or just working as an actor, is that it doesn’t require a certain class of person, or certain sex, or gender, or race. You can be working with lots of people. I love the idea that if you’re in a play about grandparents and 16-year-olds, then the people that you have to surround yourself with for a two-month run on the West End are 80-year-olds and 16-year-olds. That’s where our empathic instincts can grow. When you’re on a set where everybody is very different, but you all feel the same joy through work, you all run away to the circus together. Lena has insisted on certain jobs being fulfilled by different types of people and it makes a difference.

Have you had the experience of being on a super macho set? How did that impact you?

It’s not particularly that it was ever awful, but I do think I’ve come to question [it.] You go, Oh, this job doesn’t just belong to this type of person. You can have a female DP. Why not? What, they’re not interested in cameras? It’s just not true. The only thing that matters is that you’re able to do your job. As long as we don’t confuse that with tokenism. As a gay person, I never want to get a job because they think, Oh, we’ve got to tick a box here. I want it because I’m good at my job.

I just worked with Andrew Haigh on a film and it was wonderful. I haven’t worked with a lot of gay directors and it’s nice. That’s not to say one is better than the other. It isn’t a sin to be a straight white male. There are many talented people who deserve a place at the table. It’s just that other people should be included as well. And also, we’re allowed to make mistakes. I think we live in a culture where mistakes aren’t allowed to be made. I really do believe the idea of being able to say, “I don’t know” is the basis of every artistic or scientific breakthrough there’s ever been. All the really brilliant artists that I feel I’ve been lucky enough to work with are comfortable saying, “I don’t know. What do you think?” The culture of “Never make a mistake and if you do make a mistake, you’re gone” is dangerous.

It closes off art. But to that point, I feel some people make those mistakes by being hyper-visible and being on social media and saying things they don’t need to say. I feel you’ve taken yourself out of that equation by not being on social media.

I refute the idea that you have to be on social media. Don’t tell me what I have to be on. If that’s a basis upon which I’m going to be employed, then I’ll look at something else to do. [Laughs] You’ve got to not be bullied.

There’s so many more questions I could ask about that. But I did want to ask about Ripley coming up. Can you say anything about your interpretation of the character?

It was a very tough thing to do, and it was an enormous undertaking. I haven’t seen it yet. I feel like it could be really extraordinary. It’s certainly beautifully written and we shot in some absolutely extraordinary places; Italy and here in New York. I hope I haven’t fucked it up.

For a lot of people, the frame of reference is the movie adaptation, but I imagine this is quite different.

This definitely takes its source material from the Patricia Highsmith novel. The movie, which is extraordinary, changed some things from the novel that we’ve reinstated. It’s got a very singular atmosphere. I remember when we did Hamlet, we would go, Are we just doing this scene like this because 15 other productions have done this? My job was to go, Okay, throw all the famousness of it away. How would you play this if you weren’t afraid? Or if you weren’t weighed down with people’s expectations of what you should do? That’s the challenge of it. I’ve done a lot of literary adaptations and I actually very rarely go to the original source material. The writer does so much for you. Their job is to get the book and interpret it into the script, and my job is to interpret the script. It’s just a cleaner way of working for me. I don’t want people to think I can’t be bothered reading the book, but I never wanted to veer too far from playing as a child. When you’re a kid, you’re so encouraged to play. You go, “You’ll be this and I’ll be this,” and you begin to play. I suppose I don’t want to academify, to make up a word, acting too much. [Laughs]

I’m sure there are plenty of people who would like to hear you academify acting.

You can only do what feels right for you. I know a lot of incredible actors who like to journal and do the research. That’s a really important part of it. I totally get that. [But] what works for me? What gives me access? Sometimes, it’s just being able to jump in without a parachute so that you can be alive and free.

In Catherine Called Birdy, Andrew Scott plays Lord Rollo, a man of supreme leisure who dresses like the founding father of medieval comfort. He swans around in silky robes over silkier caftans, lounging his days away on soft, fluffy poufs as he plots ways to marry off his teenage daughter (the titular Birdy, played by Bella Ramsey) to a wealthy suitor. The film, written and directed by Lena Dunham and based on the novel by Karen Cushman, was almost the most comfortable shoot of Scott’s life. But then, early on in the production, the actor fell down a flight of stairs and broke his foot.

[wendynerdwrites]

For the record, I am NOT an Emilia Clarke stan AT ALL BUT

...Making fun of her for losing the Emmy is fucking asinine. Look, I’m not thrilled with some of the stuff she says either. I have made that clear. I was literally mocking something she said the other day. But she cherished the fuck out of Daenerys as a character and had that character destroyed. And anyone who wants to argue that the writing for Dany was good can eat my ass. I have made it very clear how I think Dany is nowhere near the hero people think she is, but I’m not going to pretend that the show didn’t make almost every wrong decision regarding her characterization for several seasons. The writing Emilia had for seasons assured her that she was playing an altruistic liberator and feminist icon. They left out almost all of the overtly questionable shit Dany did in the books and internal strife and then all the awful shit she did in the show was framed as “YAS QUEEN!” BS or didn’t have their actual implications and circumstances addressed at all. So yeah, I do kind of get where Clarke has been coming from. On top of that, they had Daenerys get murdered via embrace with her lover, had her “choose fear” over being spurned by a man, and had her replaced by an “emotionless” dude who was left out of an ENTIRE SEASON OF THE SHOW. So yes, sorry guys, but there was a TON of sexism surrounding Dany’s writing.

The whole show has been soaked in misogyny for a long ass time and Daenerys is no exception. Does it annoy me that Clarke was defending that bullshit until it was her character that went down? Sure. I totally think she says things that are questionable at best and are loaded with double standards. No question. But she fucking loved Daenerys for a lot of VERY good reasons. And she is hardly pulling her feelings from her ass. The fact that Daenerys was a feminist character screwed over by shitty, sexist writing is a pretty popular (and fairly defensible, to an extent) take, especially for show-only people. Thousands upon thousands of people agree with her and she is far from the only person saying such things, okay? So of COURSE she is going to add her voice to that discourse.

Is Dany’s storyline just sexism? Hell no. I’ve met many Dany stans who have admitted she is a tyrant well before season 8. But that doesn’t mean that she wasn’t an extremely important character and to pretend that Emilia Clarke, of all people, doesn’t have more reason than anyone (save for maybe GRRM) to be salty and unhappy about how she was written is absurd. And while it wasn’t “just” sexism, there was a shitload of it in there regardless.

I know some people are going to say, “Well, she can feel whatever she likes, but to say so publicly is unprofessional”. Alright, fine, but then you have to apply that same standard to Kit Harington calling the final season “Disappointing” and saying that his response to season 8 was to not even watch it. You have to apply that standard to Peter Dinklage mocking the shit out of D&D and season 8. You have to take Ian McElhinney to task for going public about how he literally wrote a letter to D&D back in season 4 about killing off Barristan. But no one does. I wonder what those other actors have in common.... hmmm...

Emilia Clarke was just given the scripts she was given. And she poured her heart and soul into that character. Daenerys Targaryen MADE HER as an actress. She spent a third of her damn lifespan playing Daenerys. Not just the scenes we saw on screen, but countless hours of multiple takes, filming deleted footage, rehearsing, table-reading, memorizing lines, costume fittings, makeup, effects work, screen tests, press, award shows... Imagine spending eight years of your life being told “YAS QUEEN! FEMINIST ICON!” doing all these iconic moments where your character frees slaves, makes grand speeches about destroying evil men and leading people, then in the final hour being told “BTW, your character is a mass-murdering psycho now. Go study speeches by the most evil men in history to rehearse.”

You think, with Clarke’s schedule, that she has time to consider all the implications and obvious consequences of everything Daenerys does? She doesn’t write or direct the show. She has to devote all her energy to portraying the character in the script. And she was doing this despite the fact that during the run of the show, her brain nearly exploded twice. Like, literally. She survived two aneurysms and had to undergo painful treatments and surgeries, had to process all of that trauma and then go back to work as if nothing was amiss.

So excuse her for maybe being pissed that the rug was ripped out from under her regarding a character she was so devoted to.

Talking about it does not warrant losing an Emmy. She wasn’t saying anything that countless other people weren’t. You don’t have to agree with her, but mocking her for it is fucking gross.

Also: The Emmy’s are complete horseshit. The actresses on GoT are ALWAYS shafted at them, and always have been. You want proof? Lena Headey, the best damn actor on the show (sorry Dinklage fans, but I feel like he got really tired of his character --- for very good reasons--- after season 5 and he seemed like he was sort of phoning it in in seasons 6-8. By the very high Dinklage standards, anyways. Not that he wasn’t good, he was, but not season 1-5 good. You could see his frustration with the writing on his face. Meanwhile Lena was consistent throughout the whole show, and I will put Cersei’s best moments up against Tyrion’s any day), has nothing. Lena Headey doesn’t have an Emmy for playing Cersei. You know what part of GoT DOES have Emmy’s? The episode with the line, “You want the good girl, but you need the bad pussy”, for writing. Seasons 5 and 8, for Best Drama. Consider that for several seconds. So pretending that the Emmy’s has anything to do with merit or “professionalism” is delusional AF.

I don’t find it funny that Emilia lost. Granted, I don’t really have strong feelings on her winning or losing, because seriously, fuck the Emmys (I also don’t have strong feelings about shows and actors I love like Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, Fleabag, Alex Borstein and Phoebe Waller-Bridge winning because once again, fuck the Emmys). But I definitely have strong feelings about people mocking her for it. It’s stupid, unfair, and gross.

And for Sophie/Sansa stans joining in: Sophie lost too. And congratulations, you are now in the same league as people who make fun of Sophie over Dark Phoenix bombing. Feel good about yourselves?

[blueinkedfrost]

Heathers - Bud Dean

Bud Dean has about three canonical personality traits - explosives obsession, exercise/fitness obsession, not a very good parent. Four personality traits if you count his and J.D.'s sarcastic roleplaying exchanges as a trait. Everything else is absolutely conjecture.

Bud's other important trait is that, for a character who has 2.5 brief scenes in the movie, he's a real spotlight stealer. He's extremely interesting! This is why he tempts people to conjecture about him.

In terms of defending Bud, he's not the worst character in the movie! He only killed one person and a memorial oak tree, and in both cases was legally acquitted of responsibility. He's not a very good parent, but none of the other adult characters are particularly good either.

And, very importantly, what is 'Bud' a nickname for? I think his full name should be Burton, as it makes a nice little reference to Ira Levin's A Kiss Before Dying, which you should definitely read without spoilers.

Here are my Bud conjectures, in the order that we get information in the movie.

The first thing we learn about J.D.'s home environment is that he moves around a lot but there's a Snappy Snack Shack in every town.

J.D. I've been moved around all my life. Dallas, Baton Rouge, Vegas ... Sherwood, Ohio. There's always been a Snappy Snack Shack ... Keeps me sane.

This early in the movie, 'Keeps me sane' just sounds like hyperbolic banter. Later we realise that J.D. has some very serious issues, and Snappy Snack Shacks as his one source of stability in an unstable life were not an adequate means of support. When Veronica comments on J.D.'s motorbike, he explains a bit more of his background:

J.D. Yeah, just a humble perk from my dad's construction company. You've seen the commercial, right? "Bringing every state to a higher state".

Then it's Veronica who says the company name and Bud's name, 'Big Bud Dean Construction'. So the background here is:

Bud's business causes him and his son to move around a lot - we'll figure out that the constant moving and having no friends has a negative effect on his son's mental state. Maybe Bud would've been a better parent if he'd sent J.D. to boarding school. It seems like Bud prioritises his work over his kid, although in his defence he needs to earn a living. 

The company's clearly doing well enough to have popular T.V. ads. Bud's very competent at what he does. 

Naming your company after yourself makes you a self-made man with a high opinion of your creator. (It's not even just 'Bud Dean Construction', it's a boastful 'Big Bud'.) In contrast, Veronica's family, established in Sherwood, might have inherited money, as her parents seem to lead pretty leisurely lives.

We meet Bud in person when he walks in on J.D. and Veronica watching television (Veronica quickly removes her hand from around J.D.'s shoulders). Comparing Bud's physical appearance to Veronica's father, he has a lot more grey in his hair; it's possible Bud's meant to be older, although different people go grey at different rates and he is very physically fit.

Bud and his son communicate by putting words in each other's mouth. This roleswapping exchange is offputting, and an indication of the chaos that surrounds J.D.

J.D. Hey, son, I didn't hear you come in. BUD. Hey, Dad, how was work today? It was miserable. Some damn tribe of withered old bitches doesn't want us to terminate that fleabag hotel.

This exchange makes me conjecture that Bud's on the more misogynistic end of the Heathers spectrum, although this movie sets the bar pretty low (J.D. has the dubious distinction of 'only male character to show a vague awareness that date rape is wrong'). Veronica says 'bitch' too and she'd probably identify as a feminist, but Bud uses particularly vivid, imaginative language to denounce these women - tribe of withered old bitches, then later the judge told them to slurp shit and die. (Which the judge probably did not literally do.) This combined with the backstory on Bud's wife and Bud's dismissive attitude toward Veronica makes me think Bud doesn't think much of women.

Bud and J.D. then talk over an anecdote in "fucking Kansas", where Bud was arraigned but acquitted for illegally blowing up the Memorial Oak Tree with thirty fireworks attached to the trunk. Bud is willing to break the law and clever enough to get away with it, and doesn't care much for trees, environmentalism, or history. J.D. repeats the story as if Bud's told it many times before.

Then there's a nonverbal exchange that's quite interesting. Veronica offers to shake Bud's hand and he refuses, walking on a treadmill and giving her a perfunctory wave instead. He's clearly very interested in exercising and not very polite to her. Veronica leaves in a hurry soon after.

J.D. Veronica, this is my dad. Dad - Veronica.

VERONICA. Hi. (Bud refuses her handshake.)

J.D. Son, why don't you ask your little friend to stay for dinner?

VERONICA. I can't, uh, my mom's making my favourite meal tonight. Spaghetti, lots of oregano.

After the role reversal conversation and the handshake refusal, Veronica seems to find Bud offputting and leaves quickly. Since Veronica later asks J.D. 'Do you like your father', she doesn't find Bud likeable. However, in Veronica's second encounter with Bud, she's sarcastic about him within his earshot ('the beaver's home'), so she probably doesn't find him particularly scary or threatening.

J.D.'s last line before Veronica leaves is this tantalising beginning of a reveal, that Veronica is completely disinterested in asking for more information about:

J.D. How nice. Last time I saw my mom, she was waving from a library window in Texas. Right, Dad? BUD. Right ... son.

There's an earlier script version that gives more information about Bud's attitude here:

J.D. The last time I saw my mom, she was waving out the window of a library in Texas. Right, Dad?

BIG BUD DEAN stops rowing to grin a You-Think-You're-Tougher-Than-Me-But-You're-Not smile to J.D.

BUD. Right, son.

Bud literally killed J.D.'s mother while he watched, but instead of thinking that some kind of emotional support might be appropriate, he sees mentions of her death as a tough-out contest. Bud probably wins that contest, and along with it a 'bad parenting' prize. The way J.D. brings up his mother's death makes it feel like an unhealed wound - J.D.'s poking at the scab, trying to get some sort of reaction out of his father that he doesn't get at all.

In Bud's second appearance, J.D. and Veronica are again in the living room. Veronica threw the photo of J.D.'s mother at him in frustration, not knowing what it was. Bud walks in with a videotape, gloating over how We beat the bitches ... the judge told them to slurp shit and die. He shows the video of his deconstruction job.

BUD. I put a Norwegian in the boiler room. Masterful! And then, when that blew, it set off a pack of thermals I stuck upstairs. Some days it's great to be alive.

Bud has a high opinion of his own talents (warranted - he clearly did a good job of demolishing the hotel) and loves destruction. The video seems to be much more for enjoyment than analysing his work; he watches it and laughs. Deconstruction is a job that clearly someone has to do, and lots of people like explosions in moderation - but, for Bud, he loves them. While watching the video, J.D. clearly also starts to feel excitement and consider how he could blow up Westerburg High School. Like father, like son.

When Bud leaves, Veronica asks J.D. a question.

VERONICA. Do you like your father?

At that point in the story, Veronica's disturbed about the three murders J.D. planned and she's also noticed Bud's love for destruction - it's plausible that she asked that question hoping for a definite 'no, I'm not as destructive as my father'. She doesn't get that definite no.

J.D. I've never given the matter much thought. I liked my mother. They said her death was an accident, but she knew what she was doing. She walked into the building two minutes before my dad blew the place up. She waved at me, and then ... boom.

(The camera zooms in on the picture of a light-haired woman casually dressed on a beach, in sunglasses. The sunglasses probably symbolise 'we didn't need to find a stock photo that looked like Christian Slater'.)

Since Bud literally pulled the trigger on Mrs. Dean, it's tempting to take the way she died as symbolic of It's-Just-Possible-That-I-Might-Have-Had-Some-Issues-With-My-Husband. The death was ruled an accident; she would have walked into the building of her own will; Bud probably didn't know she was there. If Bud was a decent or semi-decent spouse, then forcing him to literally kill her was a shitty thing to do. (Similarly, Martha's method of committing suicide would've been horrifying to the car driver, but in Martha's case, she didn't know that it would be one specific driver.)

While it's not spelt out, it's easy to picture Bud as an awful or abusive spouse. Ruling Mrs. Dean's death an accident was probably quite lenient from the coroner, considering that Bud was responsible for securing the demolition site and could have been considered negligent. In this real life example where a person was killed in a demolition (it's a very sad story), the contractor's responsibility was certainly considered. In some religions, there's a stigma against suicide, which means that ruling a death accidental is considered kinder to the family. Maybe the Deans are (nominally, anyway, as they don't seem remotely devout) Catholic.

(By calling her Mrs. Dean, I'm even making an assumption that they were married, which also isn't explicitly stated - but it's a pretty safe assumption.)

J.D.'s line on whether he likes his father is I've never given the matter much thought. I liked my mother. His mother was the better parent of the two, with J.D. feeling affection for her but indifference to his father. I think J.D.'s line reminiscing about his mother is a genuine emotional moment from him. Not long after this, J.D. shoots the radio playing 'Teenage Suicide' for no obvious reason. He's an impulsive character, but also a pretty calculating one, so it's hard to understand what motivated him there. Unresolved anger from reminiscing about his mother's death seems a convincing explanation.

Bud's final brief scene in the film actually shows him in a relatively positive light. While J.D. is building the bomb to blow up the school, Bud knocks on his son's door. He's not seen, only heard.

BUD. Hey, pop, I need some help with my homework!

J.D. Not right now, tiger, I'm a little busy.

Bud tries to reach out and engage his son; his son asks him to back off; and Bud respects J.D.'s boundaries and does so. (Of course, in this particular case, obviously things did not end well.)

And then J.D. goes off and tries to blow up the school with a trigger in the basement and packs of thermals in the gym. Veronica says the line Like father, like son. She literally means that the bombing style is the same. But it's really tempting to extend her line to mean more. J.D. displays a lack of empathy and concern for human life. Could those traits be inherited from his father? Bud doesn't show much empathy and concern for his son, and doesn't seem to have any friends or any interest in remarrying. Bud's exercise habits are solitary exercise, on his personal machines (not even at the gym with other people around!). Bud shows some grandiosity in his opinions about himself, such as calling his company 'Big Bud Dean Construction' and his interpretation on exactly what the judge told the protesters. It's tempting to read Bud as the 'sociopath who succeeds in business' stereotype - someone who channels his love for explosives into mostly legal channels, is willing to break the rules (see also the Memorial Oak Tree), and doesn't care for other people's feelings.

In a movie that uses a lot of colour symbolism, Bud's colour scheme greatly varies - a red and grey tracksuit in his first scene, (bright) blue and black in his second, unseen in his third. He prefers casual clothes or exercise clothes. Red is used to symbolise power (Chandler's scrunchie); grey seems pretty neutral; blue is Veronica's colour, symbolising intelligence; black is J.D.'s colour, symbolising destruction. Power, intelligence, and destruction pretty much fit Bud's character, although it's weird to see him in blue as he and Veronica hardly have anything in common. The photo of Mrs. Dean shows her in light colours, perhaps showing that she was more vulnerable and weak.

In terms of what I like about Bud, I really like his competence and his sarcasm. He's obviously good at what he does (blows up hotels, runs a successful company, keeps physically fit). He's clever enough to blow up a memorial oak tree without getting caught. His exchanges with his son show that he's rather verbally apt. Bud seems to be doing exactly what he wants to do in life with no inner angst whatsoever, which is a lot more than most Heathers characters can say.

Overall, how terrible a parent was Bud? It's pretty open. In the suicide note for Heather Chandler, J.D. contributes Suicide is the logical answer to the myriad of problems life has given me, which you can imply that he was also using to talk about himself. 'Myriad of problems' sounds like there might be more to J.D.'s issues than 'My mom died and I move around a lot', but that's a major conjecture. Bud clearly gives his son enough pocket money to support a motorbike, a smoking habit, and a convenience store habit, as well as way too much access to weaponry. Bud's not very emotionally supportive, and rather neglectful; his son stays the night away from home on at least two occasions (before killing Heather and before killing Kurt and Ram) without Bud apparently caring much.

Given J.D.'s issues, it's tempting to blame his father to a greater or lesser extent. However, J.D. is seventeen, not seven, and responsible for his own actions. J.D.'s penchant for killing other people's bullies seems like it might tie in to past bullying he experienced himself, where if he went after his own tormentors it would be too much like admitting weakness. It's believable enough to assume his father was one of the people who hurt him, whether by action or neglect. J.D. seems to mind when Heather Chandler targets Martha and when Kurt and Ram target the nerd at the funeral, in a twisted way of showing empathy; J.D. also has some feelings for his mother and for Veronica, despite how dark he becomes. Bud isn't shown to care for anyone at all.

Through Bud's exercise obsession, he's physically tougher than his son, and he seems more emotionally callous as well. No wonder he survives the movie where his son doesn't.

Go Team Bud?

[chargrowsref]

ASIDE

Sat in Vera’s falsely comfortable living room, on her brown leather sofa that she bought in the DFS sale, and her 32in tv hangs sadly on the wall. The fake fire; a silver curved piece of metal. Charlotte walks into the room and places her pint sized glass of Robinsons orange squash on the coffee table. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: God, this coffee table does not sit right in the room, it’s slightly to the left of the fireplace. How annoying. 

V.O VERA: She disapproves of the way I choose to decorate my house, but fuck her.

VERA: What are we watching? 

CHARLOTTE: Fleabag(2016), it’s meant to be really good. Phoebe Waller-Bridge wrote it and is also in it, she’s the one that also wrote Killing Eve(2018). 

VERA: oooh yeah, I really liked that. 

V.O VERA: I haven’t even watched it.   V.O CHARLOTTE: She didn’t even watch it. 

Charlotte plays season one, episode one of Fleabag(2016)

CHARLOTTE: This is funny. I like it, it immediately establishes the connection between us and her - straightaway. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: She immediately establishes that she’s addressing us by using terms such as “you know when”.

VERA: Yeah it does, Is she Fleabag then?

CHARLOTTE: Yeah, I don’t know what her actual name is in this. This is bizarre the way it feels like she’s talking directly at us.

V.O VERA: God, we get it. She repeats herself too much. I never repeat myself, I find that educated people tend to repeat themselves because they forget what they’ve said because of all the self importance flying around their brain. 

VERA: Yeah.

“To be fair she’s not an evil step mother, she’s just a cunt” (Fleabag,2016)

VERA: Oh goodness I’m not sure about the swearing used in this programme. Bit much. 

CHARLOTTE: Have you not noticed that the really “bad” language is mainly used when she’s addressing us, the audience, it’s like she has a connection with us and feels comfortable to be able to say anything. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: This is what my own step mum is like, dismissive of me and as for my dad never says what he’s really thinking in front of her. 

V.O VERA: Look at the way she holds her glass like she knows what she wants - she doesn’t know what she wants. Her thoughts runaway from her and come back again, you can tell by the expression on her face.   

VERA: oh yeah, I guess thats the tactic of breaking the fourth wall, to build a connection with us.   

CHARLOTTE: Well yeah, the fourth wall marks the boundary between mis-en-scene and the real world, so if that’s broken, then we are no longer passive audience members. 

CHARLOTTE: I wonder what the first film was that broke the fourth wall?

VERA: Google it. 

CHARLOTTE: Wikipedia says the first recorded film is a silent film titled Men who have made love to me (1918) by Mary MacLane. 

VERA: Can you trust Wikipedia?

V.O VERA: hmmm, says she doing a degree but trusts wikipedia, bit suspicious.

CHARLOTTE: Hmm, let me research it a little more.

V.O VERA: Look at her face when she concentrates.

CHARLOTTE: AH, found a blog website about it. This is like the Fleabag of the 1900s, so the silent film was about a woman and her struggle with men and came from Mary MacLane’s confessional novel called The Story of Mary MacLane(1902). It says that “MacLane was a self-admitted egotist, and her writing was frank and filled with outrageous thoughts” (Buck, 2013).

VERA: That’s exactly what Fleabag is. Fleabag is the contemporary Mary MacLane. Although how did the film break the fourth wall if it was a silent film?  

CHARLOTTE: That’s a good point..It says here that she (Mary) “appears, languidly smoking while addressing the audience (via title cards) about the trouble with all men” (Buck, 2013). 

V.O CHARLOTTE: I wonder if the technique of breaking the fourth wall has been used in essays? How would that work?  

VERA: It’s funny isn’t it that Fleabag as you said earlier is pretty groundbreaking but it actually has been done before, think how groundbreaking this would have been in 1918. 

CHARLOTTE: I know, it’s crazy. I wonder if Phoebe Waller-Bridge is aware of McLane? 

VERA: Probably not. 

CHARLOTTE: But surely if you creating something so confessional she would need to research Because Fleabag is fictional. 

VERA: Is it? 

CHARLOTTE: Yeah Fleabag(2016) is fictional but McLane’s is an adaptation of her confessional novel. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: This is incredible that two very similar women exist in different times but doing the same thing. I wish I could watch MacLane’s film to draw comparison’s between the two. I could buy her book.   

VERA: Who came up with the technique of ‘breaking the fourth wall’?

CHARLOTTE: It started in theatre, and the technique used to break the fourth wall is called ‘aside’ which is when a characters dialogue is spoken but not heard by the other actors on stage (Literary Glossary - aside, 2019) 

V.O VERA: She doesn’t listen to me properly. 

VERA: Yeah I know but who created it. 

CHARLOTTE: I think it was Denis Diderot who theorised it. But I think it’s been around for a very long time. 

V.O VERA: The way she sits silently thinking makes me feel uncomfortable, everything she does makes me feel uncomfortable but not uncomfortable in a way that makes me want to back away but in a way that makes me want to stop her. Claims to be educated but can’t tell me a simple fact, pfft. 

VERA: Oh okay. 

CHARLOTTE: I need to go home in a minute. 

VERA: Yeah I need to get to bed. 

CHARLOTTE: Shall we watch the rest of this separately?

VERA: Yeah, How do I get it up on my tv.

CHARLOTTE: Go to recorded programmes because I’ve downloaded all of the series for you. 

V.O VERA: Yeah and I bet it’s taken up all the space. 

VERA: Thanks.

CHARLOTTE: Right I’m going to go, Shall we go for coffee on Saturday? 

VERA: Yeah, text me. 

CHARLOTTE: Okay, Bye. 

VERA: Bye. 

V.O VERA: She’s left her glass out on the bloody table. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: I watched the whole two seasons of Fleabag from the comfort of my bed, I prefer watching it alone because it means I don’t have to listen to the sound of Vera breathing or explain my thoughts to her. You know when you love someone but sometimes just them being in your presence annoys you, but not because it’s anything they’re doing it’s just your own mind disliking their presence.  

 V.O CHARLOTTE: I wonder if Vera has watched the rest of this. Can’t believe I’m already on series two, episode four. I wonder if  she’ll finally bone the priest. 

“His neck.” (Fleabag, 2019)

CHARLOTTE: hahahaha. 

  V.O: I used to think things about my boyfriend when we were dating, in my mind I would be ecstatically observing and commenting on his beautiful face. We’ve all been in this situation she exposes our inner thoughts and I think that’s why is works as a comedy as well as an emotional confessional narrative. 

CHARLOTTE:Oh no he can hear her!

V.O CHARLOTTE: The Priest can hear when she’s talking to us about his “beautiful neck”. Other characters noticing the cinematic technique that Fleabag uses to address us is significant to the character himself. It takes him to a new level. As he, like us, can hear her and therefore understands/has a connection with Fleabag which is what we’ve all wanted all along. He notices things about her and not just surface details, he deeply notices to the point he’s questioning her characters technique. It’s uncomfortable for Fleabag when he questions her, asking “You just said, His beautiful neck” (Fleabag, 2019) Fleabag glances at the camera with a panicked face and slowly replies “no, no, I said they were already gone.” (Fleabag, 2019) 

V.O CHARLOTTE: This scene breaks the fourth wall and then critiques that technique within the storyline. Because we all imagine that breaking the fourth wall is the characters and the audiences “secret” With another character confronting this technique this late on in the series I think is significant and may be an indication to how this character is conceptually important. It’s about him and her and no one else, not even the audience. It’s like he’s trying to eliminate us in order for  them to be alone, When she has him she no longer needs us because he listens. 

 CHARLOTTE: Please be the priest at the door. Ahhh.

CHARLOTTE: OH MY GOD. AHHHHH. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: SHE DIDN’T JUST BREAK THE FOURTH WALL SHE EFFING TOOK IT WITH HER  OWN HANDS. SHE’S IN COMPLETE CONTROL OVER US AND OUR RELATIONSHIP TO HER.  

CHARLOTTE: Oh my god! 

 V.O CHARLOTTE: I think this just proves that he takes over from us, her physically removing our view of them by moving the camera shows that he replaces us. Especially when throughout the whole two series she’s even been addressing us during sex. This keeps the audience excited because we aren’t being shown the whole intimacy between the two fo them. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: I feel close to Fleabag, as Ilse Lafer discusses in his essay titled, Behind the fourth wall (2010), Lafer suggests that the fourth wall “is the threshold where two spaces interlock, where the difference between fiction and reality becomes manifest.” And I feel this is true with Fleabag (2016,2019), She feels real, not like a normal character in a film. She feels real and I feel a connection to her. Her confessions and dark humour is like something that is shared between close friends, She makes you feel like you’re her friend.

V.O CHARLOTTE: Although for me personally I relate to Fleabag in ways I haven’t ever found with a fictional character, I must acknowledge that maybe I relate to her because I am too a cis white woman, living in London, navigating an awkward father - daughter relationship, has a step-mother who won’t look me in the eye, and has a sister in which I am very different to. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: It brings up questions about confessional writing and confessional feminism as well. I think confessional writing can lend a hand to feminism, but I think if you suggest that its wholly feminist then you’re suggesting that feminism is solely for that one type of woman whose writing it is. As Lara Zarum suggests,

“confessional writing is a radical act, providing a template for women to be their own subjects. But the troubling paradox is that, in their quest to spin a narrative out of the fabric of their lives, these writers often fall back on the same objectifying impulse of male writers and artists since time immemorial.” (Zarum,2015)

CHARLOTTE: hmmm, I didn’t even think about this when making Vera watch this. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: I need to talk to her about if she felt a connection with Fleabag in order to see if what Zarum is suggesting works in this case. 

Charlotte and Vera had coffee together in Camberwell to catch up.

V.O VERA: I ordered a tea because I like to keep things simple and Charlotte ordered her usual - a Latte with skimmed milk. The sun was creeping behind the clouds and an occasional slice of sunlight would hover over Charlotte’s hand as she played with the loose silver ring on her right index finger. That annoyed me. 

 CHARLOTTE: This sun is so beautiful. 

V.O VERA: She always notices the intricate beauty of nature. 

VERA: It’s lovely isn’t it? My washing will dry nicely on the line today. I didn’t enjoy the rest of Fleabag(2016), I just don’t understand the humour.

V.O CHARLOTTE: Maybe the confessional style in this case is excluding. 

CHARLOTTE: WHAT? 

A short moment of silence

CHARLOTTE: I don’t understand how you couldn’t of enjoyed it; it’s funny, it’s sad - it’s life. 

V.O VERA: Here she goes.

CHARLOTTE: Did you not feel a connection with Fleabag? The technique of breaking the fourth wall was used in an intricate and funny way to reveal more depth to the character making them feel like a real person. What didn’t you like?

VERA: I did but I also didn’t, I felt the way she addresses you a bit awkward. I also think I was just too old for there to be a real connection. 

CHARLOTTE: That’s whats so good about it. She challenges you as a viewer, you can be a passive audience member physically but mentally you worry about her, you think about what she should do and what you would do in those situations. You also make connections between her experiences and your own. But then I guess I’m coming from the position of a young woman who is very similar to her. 

VERA: Yeah you are weirdly alike in some aspects of your family situation. Do you not think it relies too heavily on the interaction between audience and actor/character? I can think of films and television programmes that break the fourth wall without physically addressing me. That for me makes it more exciting because I feel like I shouldn’t know this information.  

CHARLOTTE: I get what you’re saying but I don’t think so, because when she doesn’t want or need to address us she doesn’t. Whereas shows like Peep Show (2003-15) for example; it relies almost solely on  all of the humour being channeled through both Mark and Jeremy’s inner voice characters. 

VERA: Oh yeah, I forgot about Peep Show. 

CHARLOTTE: How could you forget about peep show? 

V.O VERA: Well I obviously haven’t forgotten about it entirely. 

VERA: Yeah, now you’ve said that I have to agree with you, even when other characters are being funny, the voiceover’s reaction to the situation makes it funny because the connection the audience have are with Jeremy and Mark. 

CHARLOTTE: yeah. 

CHARLOTTE: Did you notice in Fleabag (2016) how the direct address at first is seemingly funny and carefree and then the more we learn about her struggle with grief and rage The way she addresses the audience changes. It becomes more awkward the more we know about the darker side of what going on inside her mind. 

V.O VERA: The stripe in her hair annoys me, proportionally it’s all so wrong. The colour is uneven. The texture looks like straw. 

VERA: I think That’s reflective of real life relationships, sometimes people are scared to share with others incase they share too much and push the other person to leave. 

V.O VERA: If only she knew what I think about her. 

CHARLOTTE: Yeah thats true. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: She looks troubled, I wonder what she’s thinking? 

The two women left the cafe to walk home, they both walked along Peckham Road Before Charlotte had to turn right onto Crofton Road.

VERA: Have you ever watched American Physco(2000), It’s very different to Fleabag(2016-19) but it does break the fourth wall. 

CHARLOTTE: Oh I have, a very good film. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: This is shocking that she’s suggesting some examples. 

VERA: See I really enjoy how that film breaks the fourth wall because we’re let into a dark secret that Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale), is a murdering psychopath. 

V.O VERA: ooooo Christian Bale is a bit of a dish.

CHARLOTTE: Do you think you enjoyed it because he wasn’t physically addressing you?

VERA: Yeah and I think voiceover is really effective. 

CHARLOTTE: But I read an article the other day about voiceover’s and a critic called Matt Seitz was suggesting that,

“because the voice-over is simple to understand and doesn’t ask the audience to hold more than one thought in its head at the same time.” (Seitz,2016) 

 CHARLOTTE: It makes watching a film or television programme easy to watch and makes the audience more passive than if you were to be addressed like in Fleabag(2016-19).

VERA: I disagree with him, because of the voiceover in this particular example the fact that the audience can hear the voiceover is ignored. It’s not making the storyline easy for us to follow, it’s just making it more exciting because without it eventually we would know that he’s a psychopath but we’re being let in little by little. The audience become more invested because of our strange obsession with the vulgar and the unpleasant, it hooks people in. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: Wow, she’s actually getting really into this. 

V.O VERA: She’s passing to try and think of something to say, she’s going to try and out smart me. 

CHARLOTTE: But you wouldn’t know he was a psychopath you’d just think he was a murderer without the voiceover.VERA: Well you would know that he wasn’t a normal man. 

V.O VERA: God she’s just trying to make me look so stupid. 

CHARLOTTE: But you wouldn’t know the full depth of his illness, and those gruesome details are what draws you to the film. 

VERA: Hmmm, you know my favourite voice-over part is when he’s on the tanning bed. He talks about his mask slipping while wearing the tanning goggles and the parallels between is inner world and his out world meet.  

V.O CHARLOTTE: MY POINT EXACTLY!!!!

CHARLOTTE: Well that scene wouldn’t be as good then if there was no voiceover because the added voice adds that layer of juxtaposition between image and language. 

V.O VERA: Why is she getting so angry with me? Thank god it’s her turning in a second. 

VERA: I get what you’re saying. I do just think American Psycho(2000) is better than Fleabag(2016-19) and that’s just my opinion. I don’t enjoy the direct confessional relationship that Fleabag forces on you, and I’m allowed to think differently to you. 

CHARLOTTE: I wasn’t suggesting that you had to agree with me, I respect your opinion. What other films or books are confessional? Maybe we could watch some different confessional films that you would like. 

VERA: I can’t think of any off of the top of my head but I’ll have a think about it. 

CHARLOTTE: Alright, well this is my road. 

V.O VERA: Thank God for that. 

VERA: Indeed it is. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: I hope she’s okay she seems a bit annoyed at me. Maybe I was being too argumentative or too critical of her opinion.

CHARLOTTE: Bye, I’ll see you soon. 

VERA: Bye Love. 

V.O CHARLOTTE: Sometimes I don’t know how to tackle mine and Vera’s relationship, we’re so close yet so distant. She excites me but simultaneously makes my mind feel like its pouring out of my ears from boredom. I wonder all the time what she thinks of me, what thought’s are slithering around her head. I wonder what thoughts are slithering around your head.

Bibliography 

Books:

Lafer, I (2010) Behind The Fourth Wall: Fictitious Lives - Lived Fictions. : Verlag fur moderne Kunst Nurnberg. 

Film:

American Pyscho (2000) [CD-ROM] Edward R. Pressman. Available: Lion Gate Films. 

IMAGES:

Grocutt, C. (2019) Bed. 

II. Grocutt, C. (2019) Cafe Table. 

III. Grocutt C. (2019) Vera’s Living Room.

IV.Jones, V. (2016) Fleabag. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p040trv9(28/03/2019).

Sheppard, J. (2016) Lumberjack Cafe Available at: https://www.timeout.com/london/restaurants/lumberjack (Accessed/downloaded: 8/04/2019).

VI.  (2000) American Physcho script. Available at: http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/American_Psycho_Harron_Turner.html 

Online Articles:

  Zarum, L. (2015) Is Confessional Writing feminist?. Available at:https://newrepublic.com/article/122840/confessional-writing-feminist (Accessed: 8/04/2019).

II.Obordo, R. and Guardian Readers (2019) 'I will miss her extremely: You review the end of Fleabag. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/apr/09/i-will-miss-her-extremely-you-review-the-end-of-fleabag (Accessed: 9/04/2019).

Television Programme: 

'Fleabag' (2016)  Series 1 and episode 1, BBC, 21st July 2016. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p040trv9/fleabag-series-1-episode-1 (Accessed: 18/03/2019).

‘Fleabag’ (2019) Series 2 and episode 4, BBC, 25th March 2019.

    Available at:https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p073cnqq/fleabag-series-2-episode-4 (Accessed: 28/03/2019)

IV. Peep Show (2003 - 2015) Series One to Series Nine, Channel 4.

     Available at: https://www.channel4.com/programmes/peep-show

Websites

Buck, Julie. "Mary MacLane." In Jane Gaines, Radha Vatsal, and Monica Dall’Asta, eds. Women Film Pioneers Project. Center for Digital Research and Scholarship. New York, NY: Columbia University Libraries, 2013. Web.   September 27, 2013.   <https://wfpp.cdrs.columbia.edu/pioneer/ccp-mary-maclane/

II. Literature Glossary - Aside (2019) Available at: https://www.shmoop.com/literature-glossary/aside.html (Accessed: 7/04/2019).

III. Harron, M and Turner, G. American Psycho Script. Available at: http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/American_Psycho_Harron_Turner.html (Accessed: 5/03/2019).

[widgenstain]

And here I was thinking we’d actually get an interview he doesn’t mention Hamlet in!! (adding what was behind the paywall for my blog:)

“It’s amazing how much it fucks things up,” Scott laughingly recalls in a recent interview.He’s lounging on a couch in a small, windowless room in a Manhattan studio, where he’s been dutifully shooting promotional material for Birdy all day. But he seems bright and alive, his broken foot long since patched up. In a way, the injury may have helped him tap into the psyche of his character, an increasingly broke medieval lord whose sartorial and aesthetic tastes set him apart from the “draconian, macho atmosphere” of his realm, Scott says. There’s a sense of vulnerability alongside complex masculinity at work in this decidedly feminist film, aided by Scott’s tender rendering of Lord Rollo.

In an interview with Vanity Fair, Scott chats candidly about tackling the role, what it was like working with Dunham, and how playing the instantly iconic Hot Priest in Fleabag has left an eternal stamp on his career.

Vanity Fair: What was the first thing that made you say yes to this project?

Andrew Scott: It was definitely Lena. I think Girls is extraordinary. I remember seeing it and thinking, Wow. Such a singular voice. That’s the stuff that you look for. A writer that’s not scared to put their autograph on something. Whatever she puts her mind to, she’s going to have a vision and she’s going to deliver a message. Did you have a favorite Girls character?It was more the spirit of it. I remember that extraordinary scene where they break up—Lena’s character and Adam Driver’s character. It was such a sad, brilliant scene. And the fact that she did it at that age [is impressive].

Your character gets a memorable introduction from Birdy. She writes: “He’s often vain, usually drunk, and always greedy.”

It’s her perspective, but there are those elements to him, which you tackle in a fun way.

How did you approach a character who is so louche?

Oh, with absolute abandon. [Laughs] We talked about costumes that he should be wearing. It was incredible working with [costume designer] Julian Day. Lord Rollo would be wearing Gucci now if he could. He likes to spend money, he’s interested in art. He’s just one of those straight men.

Going back to the costumes, I was watching this thinking you must be so comfortable. You’re wearing robes on top of robes. Was this the most comfortable movie you’ve ever done?

It would’ve been, but, unfortunately, during the movie I fell down stairs and I broke my foot.Oh god! I’m so sorry.Yeah. I think that’s an exclusive. [Laughs] There were these very slippery mahogany stairs and I just fell and smashed my foot. So for a lot of the movie, I’m walking around with a big boot. I was very grateful for [the costumes] and that I wasn’t putting on a pair of skinny jeans or something.

Have you ever worked on a film where you had that kind of injury before? Or was this a first?

No, it was my first time that’s ever happened. It’s amazing how much it fucks things up.

Did you learn anything about yourself as an actor through working through that kind of challenge?

A little, I think. When you’re in pain, you feel so weirdly vulnerable. I had to take [the cast] off at times. You’re in crowds saying, “Please don’t stand on my foot, please, please, please.”

The first AD is like “Be careful around Andrew!”

Yeah. But we did okay. We managed it!

I’m curious what Lena is like on set. How does she give a note?

We did a lot of improvisation. She’ll come back and say, “I love that line!” Like all the best directors, you reward the good and you ignore the bad. [Laughs] She’s incredibly effusive and fun. She understands performing as well. You’re not required to do 75 takes of something with diminishing returns. You feel confident because she feels confident.

I noticed at TIFF that she said she turned you from “Hot Priest” to “Hot Medieval Dad.” I wanted to ask about the phenomenon of getting “hot” prefixed to your characters after playing Hot Priest on Fleabag. I imagine it’s flattering, but also strange. Does it happen a lot?

It only happens when you are talking about things [at festivals], or doing press. There are worse things to be called, I suppose.

Right, it makes sense that it happens with press. It’s not happening in your day-to-day life, where your friends are like, “This is my friend.”

“This is my hot Irish friend.” [Laughs]

If they were true friends, maybe they would do that.

If they were true friends, exactly!

People loved Fleabag Season 2 so much. Hot Priest left such an indelible mark. It made me wonder how present the legacy of that show is in your day-to-day life.

It’s definitely a piece of work that people just love. They love it. It’s a symbol, a little bit like this movie, of the people that create it, and that’s why it’s joyful. I feel very proud of it. Fleabag is so generous and wonderful and adds to the feeling of compassion in the world, but it’s done through the prism of comedy. It influences people with a sleight of hand that takes such skill.

I did a rewatch recently and it’s just so good. It’s a gorgeous thing.

And men respond to it as well. Men really love it because it’s inclusive. It’s really inclusive. That’s another thing to say about Lena as a director—the set was incredibly inclusive. Movie sets can be macho places, so to have people in key positions, it changes the atmosphere.

How does it change it for you?

It’s just novel. The thing I love about working in movies, or just working as an actor, is that it doesn’t require a certain class of person, or certain sex, or gender, or race. You can be working with lots of people. I love the idea that if you’re in a play about grandparents and 16-year-olds, then the people that you have to surround yourself with for a two-month run on the West End are 80-year-olds and 16-year-olds. That’s where our empathic instincts can grow. When you’re on a set where everybody is very different, but you all feel the same joy through work, you all run away to the circus together. Lena has insisted on certain jobs being fulfilled by different types of people and it makes a difference.

Have you had the experience of being on a super macho set? How did that impact you?

It’s not particularly that it was ever awful, but I do think I’ve come to question [it.] You go, Oh, this job doesn’t just belong to this type of person. You can have a female DP. Why not? What, they’re not interested in cameras? It’s just not true. The only thing that matters is that you’re able to do your job. As long as we don’t confuse that with tokenism. As a gay person, I never want to get a job because they think, Oh, we’ve got to tick a box here. I want it because I’m good at my job. I just worked with Andrew Haigh on a film and it was wonderful. I haven’t worked with a lot of gay directors and it’s nice. That’s not to say one is better than the other. It isn’t a sin to be a straight white male. There are many talented people who deserve a place at the table. It’s just that other people should be included as well. And also, we’re allowed to make mistakes. I think we live in a culture where mistakes aren’t allowed to be made. I really do believe the idea of being able to say, “I don’t know” is the basis of every artistic or scientific breakthrough there’s ever been. All the really brilliant artists that I feel I’ve been lucky enough to work with are comfortable saying, “I don’t know. What do you think?” The culture of “Never make a mistake and if you do make a mistake, you’re gone” is dangerous. It closes off art. But to that point, I feel some people make those mistakes by being hyper-visible and being on social media and saying things they don’t need to say.

I feel you’ve taken yourself out of that equation by not being on social media.

I refute the idea that you have to be on social media. Don’t tell me what I have to be on. If that’s a basis upon which I’m going to be employed, then I’ll look at something else to do. [Laughs] You’ve got to not be bullied.

There’s so many more questions I could ask about that. But I did want to ask about Ripley coming up. Can you say anything about your interpretation of the character?

It was a very tough thing to do, and it was an enormous undertaking. I haven’t seen it yet. I feel like it could be really extraordinary. It’s certainly beautifully written and we shot in some absolutely extraordinary places; Italy and here in New York. I hope I haven’t fucked it up.

For a lot of people, the frame of reference is the movie adaptation, but I imagine this is quite different.

This definitely takes its source material from the Patricia Highsmith novel. The movie, which is extraordinary, changed some things from the novel that we’ve reinstated. It’s got a very singular atmosphere. I remember when we did Hamlet, we would go, Are we just doing this scene like this because 15 other productions have done this? My job was to go, Okay, throw all the famousness of it away. How would you play this if you weren’t afraid? Or if you weren’t weighed down with people’s expectations of what you should do? That’s the challenge of it. I’ve done a lot of literary adaptations and I actually very rarely go to the original source material. The writer does so much for you. Their job is to get the book and interpret it into the script, and my job is to interpret the script. It’s just a cleaner way of working for me. I don’t want people to think I can’t be bothered reading the book, but I never wanted to veer too far from playing as a child. When you’re a kid, you’re so encouraged to play. You go, “You’ll be this and I’ll be this,” and you begin to play. I suppose I don’t want to academify, to make up a word, acting too much. [Laughs]

I’m sure there are plenty of people who would like to hear you academify acting.

You can only do what feels right for you. I know a lot of incredible actors who like to journal and do the research. That’s a really important part of it. I totally get that. [But] what works for me? What gives me access? Sometimes, it’s just being able to jump in without a parachute so that you can be alive and free.

This interview has been edited and condensed. 

In Catherine Called Birdy, Andrew Scott plays Lord Rollo, a man of supreme leisure who dresses like the founding father of medieval comfort. He swans around in silky robes over silkier caftans, lounging his days away on soft, fluffy poufs as he plots ways to marry off his teenage daughter (the titular Birdy, played by Bella Ramsey) to a wealthy suitor. The film, written and directed by Lena Dunham and based on the novel by Karen Cushman, was almost the most comfortable shoot of Scott’s life. But then, early on in the production, the actor fell down a flight of stairs and broke his foot.