Tom Hardy (6 page)

Barely had Tom taken his final bow at the Hampstead Theatre than he found himself travelling up to Sheffield’s Crucible Theatre to work under the direction of Robert Delamere once more. This time, the play was
The Modernists
written by Jeff Noon, a writer better known for his fantasy novels than for his plays.
The Modernists
is set in Soho in the early 1960s and the drama centres around four musicians who are Mods in the old sense of the word. They live at a time before Mods became associated with violence, parkas and scooters; they follow a strict dress code and they speak using a very specific vocabulary. In fact, they are somewhat dandy and not at all like the popular projection of the Mod. Tom’s role was to play Vincent, who is described as the ‘alpha male’ of the group. Critics mostly agreed that the play had a lot of potential but was lacking in drama. Dominic Cavendish, writing for the
Daily Telegraph
, commented: ‘The play’s main event proves to be the leader Vincent’s psychological collapse, mirroring this hermetic sub-culture’s own implosion. But the crisis always feels more aridly theoretical than theatrically true-to-life.’

Once the short run of
The Modernists
came to an end, there was no rest for the reinvigorated young actor and, in the
autumn, he went on to consolidate his stage craft by appearing at the Royal Court Theatre in
Blood
, by Swedish playwright Lars Noren. Without wanting to give too much of the plot away,
Blood
is a modern reworking of the Oedipus story and Tom’s character, Luca, is a medical student who was orphaned as a child. His psychoanalyst, Eric (Nicholas Le Prevost), is also his lover and, through the course of the play, Eric’s wife (Francesca Annis) develops a sexual relationship with him as well.

The play itself didn’t fare well in terms of the critics’ reactions. Paul Taylor writing for the
Independent
found it so farcical that he felt the ‘most impressive feature of the evening is the heroic way Ms Annis and Mr Le Prevost manage to keep a straight face’. Other critics were less harsh: Michael Billington of the
Guardian
felt the play was flawed but found it ‘exquisitely gripping’. He described Tom as giving Luca ‘intemperate rage’ and Nicholas De Jongh of the
Evening
Standard
was even more enthusiastic, stating: ‘Superlative Tom Hardy invests Luca with raw energy and suppressed desperation.’

It seemed that Tom had staunch support from the
Evening Standard
camp so it was perhaps unsurprising when his name was amongst the nominations for that newspaper’s theatre awards for 2003. The category in which he found himself nominated was ‘Outstanding Newcomer’ and his shortlisted rivals were Lisa Dillon for her role as Hilda in Ibsen’s
The Master Builder
and Amanda Drew for
Eastward Ho
.

The lavish awards ceremony was held at the Savoy Hotel in November 2003. The great and the good of London’s theatreland were present and the proceedings were presided
over by Rory Bremner. The award for Outstanding
Newcomer
was presented by Nicholas Hytner, then the newly appointed director of the National Theatre. As a prelude to presenting the award, Hytner gave a light-hearted speech in which he congratulated all three of the shortlisted nominees and quipped that he hoped they would only do enough ‘dodgy television’ to finance their loft conversions.

The award, of course, went to Tom for his performances in both
In Arabia We’d All Be Kings
and
Blood
. He admitted he was very nervous as he collected his statuette and amongst his obligatory thanks were the Hampstead Theatre and those involved in getting the production off the ground there, as well as his parents, his girlfriend, his agent, Lindy King and all his friends and family, who he referred to as his ‘support unit’. And not to be forgotten was his dog, Max, who he said would be very grumpy if he was left off the list. Finally, he expressed his gratitude to the
Evening Standard
, Nick De Jongh and everyone who had voted for him.

To further boost Tom’s credibility, his performance in
In Arabia We’d All be Kings
also garnered him a nomination at the 2004 Laurence Olivier Theatre Awards, again in the category of Most Promising Newcomer in an Affiliate Theatre. Sadly he didn’t win the double this time and the award went to playwright Debbie Tucker for
Born Bad
, also staged at the Hampstead Theatre.

It is gratifying to observe just how successfully Tom had managed to turn his life around in the space of a year. As 2003 drew to a close, he was sadly without his marriage – but there were so many positives on which he could draw as 2004 dawned. He had conquered his drug and drink addictions
and, although recovering from such dependencies are battles that are never truly won, he was in a new frame of mind and could see that his new-found sobriety was bearing fruit on the work front. He had achieved recognition for his acting and was determined to capitalise on this. It was starting to look as though Tom’s time might yet come.

I
t was no surprise that, towards the end of 2003, the name Tom Hardy started to appear in the obligatory end-of-year round-ups heralding British stars of the future. The
Evening Standard
included Tom in their list of
Bright Young Things
, alongside fellow actors Rosamund Pike, Sienna Miller and Orlando Bloom; and
W
magazine numbered him among their collection of fresh talent that was, apparently, ‘filling up casting directors' wish lists on both sides of the Atlantic.' His new-found dedication to his craft had started to pay dividends and, thanks to the canny agent he had in Lindy King, offers of work were piling up. ‘I've played a range of different screen and stage characters and it's all because of Lindy,' he told
The Stage
. ‘I'm 100 per cent committed to her.'

In March 2004, the play
Festen
opened at the Almeida Theatre in London's Islington. Adapted from the 1998 Danish art-house film of the same name, it deals with the traumatic
subject of sexual abuse within a family. In its filmic form,
Festen
had been the first work of the Dogme movement, a group of Scandinavian film-makers whose desire was to produce films in a far more pared-down style than their Hollywood contemporaries. Writer David Eldridge adapted the film for an English stage production, to be directed by Rufus Norris. The simplicity of the film's production and direction allowed for a smooth transfer from the screen to the more intimate environment of a theatrical production.

The action of the play unfolds over the course of two days of festivities as a family gather for the 60th birthday celebrations of its patriarch, Helge. Three of his children are present: Christian, Michael and Mette (Christian's twin, Linda, having recently committed suicide for reasons that later become apparent). During the party, Christian reveals that Helge sexually abused both him and Linda when they were children and, from this shocking disclosure, the tension of the play builds.

In this production, Christian, Michael and Mette were played by Jonny Lee Miller, Tom Hardy and Claire Rushbrook respectively. The production as a whole received unanimous critical acclaim: the writing, the sound staging, the set design, the direction and the acting were all deemed to be outstanding and it was agreed that an intense and powerful drama had been created and executed perfectly. ‘This
Festen
is an embodiment of what theatre should be,' proclaimed Paul Taylor in the
Independent
.

Tom's character, Michael, is an aggressive brute of a man who is shown to be a racist and a bully. Once more, the actor's job involved getting to grips with the dark underbelly
of human nature and, true to form, Tom gave a captivating and nuanced performance. Michael Coveney of the
Daily Mail
referred to him as ‘electrifying' while Tom's long-time supporter Nicholas De Jongh said he turned in a ‘remarkable, quicksilver performance'.

Speaking about the succession of troubled characters he had brought to life for the stage, Tom commented: ‘I do feel alive when I play these characters, like I owe them something. There's no such thing as a coincidence.' His experiences of the bleaker side of life were still feeding into his work and illuminating his characters with an authenticity that was continuing to attract a lot of positive attention. While Tom's own experiences helped him to have an affinity with some of the disturbed characters he played, he was always aware that it was not within his remit to impose his own opinions or personality on them.

Having finished his stint at the Almeida, Tom journeyed across the River Thames to south London, where he undertook another fringe play,
Roger and Vanessa
, this time at Theatre 503, a small performance space above the Latchmere pub in Clapham. The decision to stage the play had come about when Tom happened to meet the play's American writer, Brett C Leonard. This fortuitous encounter occurred at RADA, where a rehearsed reading of the play was taking place as part of a showcase of American writers' work. Coincidentally, at this reading, the part of Roger was taken by none other than Stephen Adly Guirgis, the writer of
In Arabia We'd All Be Kings
, the play that had been responsible for launching Tom's career.

Tom felt a connection with both the playwright and his
work and, in his typically energetic fashion, decided he wanted to stage the play himself as soon as possible. Getting
Roger and Vanessa
off the ground was a frenetic experience for all involved. The ethos behind the enterprise was for the play to be brought together at lightning speed, and for the professionals involved to fit it in around their usual work commitments. Tom, who would play Roger, had just finished his run in
Festen
and was tied up with filming the TV drama
Colditz
. Linda Park, the American actress who was to play Vanessa, was flown in from LA during a gap in her schedule. Robert Delamere, with whom Tom had worked on
In Arabia We'd All Be Kings
, was enlisted to direct and had a production opening at the Almeida just 24 hours after
Roger and Vanessa
was due to open! No mean feat, but as Tom put it, ‘We were all busy but we just jammed the work together. It was a workshop vibe, for the love of the work.'

‘It's crisis directing,' Delamere told the
Guardian
at the time. He also noted the contrast between the cheek by jowl nature of the Latchmere production and the rather more sophisticated one he was working on at the Almeida. Although chaotic, it was an exciting experience and he appreciated what was being achieved with
Roger and Vanessa
. ‘It's great having such a little space and without all that pressure you get in bigger theatres. This is about the personalities in the room, and that's it.' He also pointed out that the nature of the material Tom had chosen suited the approach to staging it.

The production was billed as ‘shotgun' theatre and was ‘a crazy idea to put on a show in no time at all'. There were just four performances in all and tickets were free as the company
deemed it to be a workshop rather than a polished theatre production. That's not to say that those involved didn't take what they were doing seriously – the aim, according to Tom, was to provide the same enjoyment from a night out as a conventional theatre trip would.

It was in this production that the seeds were sown for the formation of Tom and Robert Delamere's theatre company – named, aptly, Shotgun. Following
Roger and Vanessa
, the Latchmere offered Tom a residency in their performance space and he snapped up the opportunity. In fact, what he created was less of a formal theatre company and more of an actors' co-operative – or as he put it, a ‘splinter cell group'. He wanted to establish an informal and safe space where actors, writers and performers of any level could get together, explore their ideas and unleash their creative talent. ‘There should be no pressure, no commitment, just talent and immediate response to the material that walks in the door,' he declared, when announcing the formation of the group. From a personal perspective, Tom also felt that, within the confines of pressured production schedules of film and television, actors didn't have enough time to really dig deep into the characters they were to play, and wanted Shotgun to provide them with the chance to share the development of their work with other, like-minded people. There was to be ‘no fear, no ego, just good hard clean fun'. The venture did have a whiff of
Fight Club
mentality about it, though – attendance at the Shotgun workshops was by invitation only, ‘to keep it safe'.

The project was indeed worthy and showed that Tom was keen both to invest something in the community and to continue learning new ways of keeping his beloved craft fresh
and organic. On a more practical level, he also claimed that Shotgun stopped him and his fellow actors from ‘getting upset when the phone doesn't ring during our downtime'.

Although Tom's relationship with his parents had been put under enormous strain during his years of addiction, he had always remained close to them and, once he was clean and sober, his relationship with his father took on a new lease of life. They were both intelligent and creative souls and given that Chips had written plays in the past, it was only a matter of time until he became involved in the creative ventures of Shotgun. Along with Chips and other members of the Shotgun team, Tom undertook a project named, interestingly, the Octoplot Revolution – which sounds rather more radical than it actually was. In fact, it was simply a guide giving instructions on how to write a play (or screenplay) in eight stages. ‘It's a simple format and it becomes a way of expressing yourself. Anyone can follow it,' Tom explained to Baz Bamigboye of the
Daily Mail
in August 2006.

The Octoplot Revolution was an idea that extended beyond the confines of Shotgun. Tom, Chips and some of the other Shotgun members were aiming to integrate the Octoplot Revolution into an educational outreach programme for 14 to 16 year olds, which would stretch across 32 London boroughs.

It wasn't long, however, before Tom's working relationship with educational establishments came to an abrupt halt. In November 2006, he and other members of Shotgun were due to go and speak to pupils from 10 schools about their work – and also about Tom's own life and career. The talk was part of a project called London Schools Masterclass funded by the Department for Education and Skills (DfES). Just a couple of
weeks before the event, Tom gave an in-depth interview to the
Evening Standard
in which he laid bare the problems of his youth, his brushes with the law and his addictions. Within two days of the interview appearing, Tom was informed that the DfES was anxious about the reaction to the revelations in the interview and had therefore decided to postpone the masterclass.

The decision of the DfES could be construed as hasty and reactionary – and its ramifications would certainly be disappointing for the young people who would have benefited from the talk. Granted, Tom had not lived a model life but he was a fine example of someone who had, through hard work and determination, pushed himself firmly back on track. Plus he had made no secret of his past – surely better than covering it up and being exposed further down the line? Speaking to the
Telegraph
at the time, he expressed his frustration at the cancellation, describing the decision as ‘quite bureaucratic and quite puritan. All we are interested in is giving something back to the community.' He added: ‘We wanted the kids to feel the pleasure and fulfilment we feel as professional performers. If we can help any child leave school with a sense of purpose and usefulness, then that has to be a good thing.' After all, Tom knew better than anyone how disheartening it could be to leave school with no aspirations, goals or direction.

Dispiriting though this was, the endeavours of Shotgun continued apace. Next up was their first production, a play called
Blue on Blue
, written by Chips. The play tells the story of a wheelchair-bound war veteran living with his nephew. The younger character is damaged and forced to confront his problems. The playwright described his play as ‘a hard-arsed
look at compulsion and co-dependency but… first and foremost, a darkly funny play about people.'

Speaking to the
Evening Standard
(in the very interview at which the DfES took such great umbrage) Chips explained that he had drawn on parts of his relationship with Tom when writing
Blue on Blue
. Speaking about his son, Chips said: ‘We've had our ups and downs over the years, but Tom wouldn't be such a good actor if he didn't have those things in him.'

The play was staged at the Latchmere during November 2006 and was directed by Tom. Simon Rhodes, Gideon Turner and Danielle Urbas filled the roles of uncle, nephew and Marta the home help respectively. It was only on for a few nights but its run was a sell-out and the
Daily Mail
review stated that the play ‘astutely raises difficult social problems without being preachy'. Being under Tom Hardy's directorship, it would have seemed odd if it had been any other way.

Shotgun followed up
Blue on Blue
with a play called
Two Storm
Wood by Edward Bennett-Coles, staged in February 2007. Perhaps inevitably, though, the indie theatre company didn't stay together for much longer. Work commitments must have eaten up the amount of time that Tom was able to devote to his project, but looking back on the Shotgun days in an interview with
Time Out
in 2009 he recalled: ‘Everybody joined up and it was all dope, then everyone went solo and it wasn't as good. I've gotta bring it back for the reunion. Even if it is just a karaoke night.'

Whatever his best intentions were with offshoot projects like Shotgun, with his career now taking off in ways he probably never imagined possible, it seems unlikely that Tom will have
the time to revisit his theatre company. Perhaps there lies a project for when the credits have rolled on his last movie.

At the same time as charging around trying to pull together his first ‘shotgun' production, Tom had been busy fulfilling professional commitments. His schedule dictated that work on
Roger and Vanessa
had to be fitted in around filming for the television drama
Colditz
, in which he had a principal role.

The two-part ITV drama took its inspiration from Henry Chancellor's book of the same name. The source material for the book was interviews with allied soldiers who had been held in the German high-security prison during the Second World War. The television adaptation centres on the fates of three fictional characters who initially escape from a prisoner of war camp during the war. Two of them are captured and taken to Colditz (Jack Rose, played by Tom, and Tom Willis, played by Laurence Fox) while the third (Nick McGrade, played by Damian Lewis) makes it back to England where he falls in love with Lizzie (Sophia Myles), who happens to be the sweetheart of Jack. The adaptation also boasted a sprinkle of Hollywood stardust in the form of Jason Priestley (star of teen drama
Beverly Hills 90210
) who played Canadian soldier Rhett Barker, also an inmate of the prison. Shooting took place over the summer of 2004, in London and on location in the Czech Republic. ‘Colditz' was in fact a medieval monastery in Kutna Hora, a town located about 70km east of Prague.