Okay, let's, uh, let's untack this. When you
picture a, you know, a media mogul today, there's
this one image that just looms large, doesn't
it? Oh, yeah. The voice, the sheer presence.
Logan Roy. Exactly. And Brian Cox, the actor
who just embodied that terrifying patriarch in
succession, he became this global icon, like
almost overnight, it felt, late in his career.
It really did feel that way to a lot of people.
But here's the thing. If that HBO show is kind
of the beginning and end of what you know about
Brian Cox, well, you're missing out. Oh, absolutely.
You're missing, what, 50 years? 50 years of just
sheer foundational mastery. And a really complex
history, too. Yeah, stretching all the way from
working class streets in Dundee right up to the
gilded stages of the Royal Shakespeare Company.
That's exactly right. And that's really our mission
today, isn't it? To move... far beyond Waystar
Royco. Right. We're doing a deep dive here into
the, I mean, sprawling, complex, incredibly prolific
career of this amazing Scottish actor. We really
want to uncover that foundational stage work,
you know? And some surprising early film roles,
almost contradictory ones sometimes. Yeah, and
the other stuff too, his deep academic commitments,
his political life as well, all the things that
truly define Brian Cox as, well, more than just
an actor. A polymath, maybe. A master craftsman.
Definitely. And just to sort of set the stage
for the sheer depth we're talking about, let's
do a quick, like, stats check. Because it's impressive.
It really is. We're not just talking Hollywood
blockbusters here. His career is defined by accolades
that celebrate the absolute highest level of
acting craft. OK, like what? Yeah. Lay it on
us. OK, so two Laurence Olivier awards. That's
the absolute peak of British theater. Falcle,
yeah. Then there's a Primetime Emmy award. And
get this, for playing Herman Guring. Wow, okay.
A Golden Globe award, that one's for Logan Roy,
which people might know. Right. And on top of
all that, he was appointed a Commander of the
Order of the British Empire, a CBE, back in 2003.
Okay, so that list right there. Yeah. I mean,
spanning stage, screen, national honors. It tells
you immediately, doesn't it? He's not just some
TV star who lucked into a great role. Oh, way.
He's a genuine master of the craft. He's got
that stage discipline, the textual rigor, you
know? Yeah. And the sheer professional longevity.
He's a giant. Absolutely. And to really understand
that grit, that authority he just exudes on screen,
we have to go right back to the beginning. We
have to start where he did his hometown. Dundee.
Okay, so let's jump right back. Dundee, Scotland.
The formative years, because this really is where
that relentless engine, that work ethic seems
to have started. Yeah. Brian Dennis Cox. Born
in Dundee, 1946, youngest of five kids. And from
a working -class background, right? Catholic
family, Irish and Scottish descent. Exactly.
And the source material, it's pretty clear, his
childhood was marked by some really sudden, profound
hardship. Yeah, it sounds like a deeply challenging
start. His father, he'd been a police officer,
then became a shopkeeper. That's right. Tragically
died of pancreatic cancer when Brian Cox was
only eight years old. Eight? I mean, imagine
that. That's a foundational trauma right there,
isn't it? losing the patriarch, the whole family
dynamic shifting overnight. You really can't
underestimate how that might shape an artist,
especially one who later becomes obsessed with
themes of power, decline, family tragedy, like
Logan Roy. And the difficulties didn't stop there,
did they? They sort of compounded quickly after
that. No, his mother. The sources say she suffered
several nervous breakdowns during his childhood.
Which must have been incredibly difficult, and
it meant that the practical job of raising him
mostly fell to his three older sisters. Right,
so you've got this early independence forced
upon him, resilience, having to navigate all
that emotional instability. You can definitely
see how that might inform the kind of gravitas,
the weight he brings to the screen later on.
It definitely seemed to have provided a necessary
drive, wouldn't you say? I mean, he left formal
school in St. Michael's Junior Secondary School
at 15, which is startlingly young. 15. But he
didn't just drift, did he? That ambition, it
was immediately channeled straight into the craft.
Immediately. Started training right away, working
as a stagehand and then acting at the Dundee
Repertory Theater, a really venerable institution.
So that was his first taste of professional theater
life. Yeah, and then followed pretty quickly
by formal training at the prestigious London
Academy of Music and Dramatic Art, LMDA. Right.
LMDA graduated in 1965. But just put that in
perspective. He was already acting professionally
at the Dundee Rep from the age of 14. 1961. 14.
He was basically living the life of a working
actor before he'd even technically left secondary
school. And that kind of early baptism by fire.
you know, in repertory theater. Where you're
doing, what, five different roles and five different
plays in a week sometimes? Exactly. It demands
incredible technical skill, huge memory, just
grit. And that foundational work back in the
60s and 70s, it was absolutely critical for where
he went next, wasn't it? Totally critical. And
it wasn't just about, you know, getting experience
for himself. He was actually involved in building
institutions. Oh, really? How so? Well, he was
one of the founding members of the Royal Lyceum
Theater in Edinburgh. Wow, okay. Yeah, he performed
in its very first show, The Servant Otoine Maesters,
back in October 65, the same year he graduated
from LM &DA. So there's this dedication right
from the start, establishing quality regional
theater. And that work quickly propelled him
onto the national stage. Which brings us to London,
his West End debut, 1967, playing Orlando in
As You Like It. Yep. And there you see that classic
British actor's trajectory, right? Regional foundation.
Yeah. London debut. Check. Then getting absorbed
into the big classical companies. Exactly. And
that debut, it really set the stage for the next
huge period for him. The Shakespearean apex,
you could call it. The 80s and 90s? Yeah. Spending
seasons working with the absolute titans of British
theater. The Royal Shakespeare Company, the Royal
National Theatre. This is where he properly cemented
his status then as a classical giant. Absolutely.
Gaining that deep, textual rigor, that understanding
of the classics, that allowed him to pivot later
into, well, pretty much any genre he wanted.
And the awards started coming, too. The big ones.
They did. 1984, first Laurence Olivier Award.
Best actor in a new play for playing Inspector
Nelson in Rat in the Skull. And that's interesting,
isn't it? Because it highlights his versatility
right away. It wasn't just for dusting off Shakespeare.
It was for new, contemporary, hard -hitting drama.
Spot on. And he even took that role off Broadway
later that year. But the real height of his stage
power arguably came a few years later. Ah, yes.
Four years later. Second Olivier Award. This
time, Best Actor in a Revival. And the role.
the terrifying title character in Titus Andronicus.
In 1988? Titus Andronicus, wow. And what's really
fascinating here is that Cox himself, he's later
cited his performance in Titus as the greatest
he's ever given on stage. That is a huge claim.
I mean, considering the sheer volume of work
he's done since. But Titus, I mean, that's not
exactly lightfare, is it? Not remotely. It's
probably Shakespeare's bloodiest, most relentlessly
tragic play, full of just... horror. So... What
does it tell us that he picks that role, that
performance, as his peak? What does that say
about his artistic commitment? Well, I think
it tells us his artistic heartbeats for that
kind of intensity, you know, emotional and physical
intensity, for roles that demand the actor stares
right into the abyss of human cruelty, of madness.
That commitment, that intensity, it seems to
run deep. It really does. And it's highlighted
even more by the fact that he actually returned
from spending years teaching and directing over
at the Moscow Arts Theatre School. which is incredibly
prestigious itself. Right. He came back specifically
to tour globally as the title role in King Lear.
That was between 1990 and 1991. King Lear. Okay,
that's known as like the Everest for actors,
isn't it? Absolutely. Physically draining, emotionally
devastating. Requires absolute mastery of the
verse, the psychology, everything. So how did
he handle that, that pressure cooker of a role?
Well... The toll, the physical and psychological
toll was apparently so profound that the whole
experience actually inspired his first book,
The Lear Diaries, published in 95. He wrote a
book about playing Lear. Yeah. And it meticulously
detailed, according to the source, the emotional
and physical difficulties that came with playing
such an all consuming role. Wow. So it wasn't
just like anecdotes from the tour bus. No, no.
It sounds like it was more like an academic.
accounting of the process, the sheer work involved.
Can you elaborate a bit on what those difficulties
actually looked like? Because that level of self
-reflection, it feels quite rare for an actor
who's maintaining such a busy schedule. Sure.
From what the sources suggest, the Lear Diaries
gives this unique insight into the day -to -day
grind, the pressure. He talked about battling
physical fatigue. the struggle just to keep his
voice healthy night after night, month after
month on tour. And the emotional toll, obviously,
of having to conjure up that level of grief,
that rage, eight times a week. Yeah, I can't
even imagine. He also wrote about the pressure,
you know, of stepping into a role that had been
defined by giants before him, Olivier, Gilgud,
Schofield. And the intellectual work needed to
find something new, something relevant in this
enigmatic figure of Lear. So this documented
commitment, it really proves that for Cox, acting
isn't just about hitting your marks or saying
the lines. And not at all, it's an intellectual
odyssey, you know? A quest for truth within the
text, and that becomes the foundational bedrock
for every single character he's ever played on
screen. Doesn't matter how small or how commercial
the project might seem. Okay, so those deep,
often... exhausting classical foundations you
mentioned. They're exactly what allowed him to
make that pivot then successfully into film and
TV. Right. And starting with some pretty heavy
kind of surprising early appearances that really
show off his media gravitas. Like his very first
film role, which came relatively early, 1971.
He played Leon Trotsky in Nicholas and Alexandra.
Trotsky? I mean, that's a figure of immense political
historical weight, isn't it? Totally. So how
does a young actor, you know, relatively fresh
out of Lambda, still finding his feet, how does
he approach playing a revolutionary icon like
that without decades of experience to draw on?
Well, it seems he approached it with that same
textual rigor, that intellectual commitment we
talked about. That's the stage actor's hallmark.
OK. He played Trotsky with this sort of quiet
intensity, relying on presence, not histrionics.
But even before that film role, he was already
busy on British television. His first TV appearance
was way back in 1965. 65. Same year he graduated
LMDA. Yep. An episode of the Wednesday Play,
which, you know, for people who remember, was
a really crucial outlet for serious, often quite
politically charged British drama back then.
Right. So he was a steady fixture in those kinds
of serious British dramas through the 70s and
80s. I saw he played King Henry II in a BBC serial,
The Devil's Crown. Yeah. 1978. Yeah. And starred
opposite Alan Rickman, actually in a BBC adaptation
of Therese Rock in 81. Okay. But the really eye
-opening, almost kind of surreal film role comes
in 1986. And this one's pretty crucial for cinema
history, actually. Ah, yes. The role people often
forget about. The original Hannibal Lecter. That's
the one. In 1986, he portrayed Hannibal Lecter,
although it was spelled L -E -C -K -T -O -R back
then. Right. In Michael Mann's Manhunter. In
Michael Mann's Manhunter. And this marks the
character's absolute debut on film. predating
Anthony Hopkins in Silence of the Lambs by five
whole years. It's a critical point, isn't it?
Because when you think lecture now, you almost
exclusively picture Hopkins, right? Yeah. That's
slightly more... bombastic theatrical performance.
Totally. So what did Cox's stage discipline bring
to that character, to Lecter, that was maybe
different, unique? Well Cox's version is far
more understated, much colder, more intellectual.
He uses that stage discipline for this terrifying
restraint. Okay. There's very little flashiness.
The evil is conveyed through this menacing stillness
and really carefully modulated language. It's
a quiet, calculating villain. all psychological
weight. Which is kind of the perfect use of classical
training in a cinematic context, right? Exactly.
It established this precedent that the character's
power really lay in his mind, his composure,
not necessarily in spectacle. So after proving
he could anchor these major historical figures
and these quietly terrifying villains... The
1990s, that's when his career really breaks through,
puts him on Hollywood's map properly. The source
even calls it his super stardom period. Yeah,
the mid 90s were definitely a turning point.
You got a BAFTA TV Award nomination in 93 Best
Actor for a really powerful role as Owen Benjamin,
this closeted father dealing with a personal
crisis in the lost language of cranes. Right,
1991 that was. Showed his capacity for that deep
character driven drama on TV. But the film side
just exploded in 1995. It's pretty remarkable.
Actually, he was a key antagonist in two massive
Scottish historical epics that came out the very
same year. Oh, yeah. He played the Ruthless Killern
in Rob Roy. Yep. Got a Bow to Scotland nomination
for that. And Argyle Wallace and Mel Gibson's
Braveheart, the Oscar winner. The sheer versatility
in just that achievement playing two dramatically
distinct. yet historically grounded Scottish
figures in these huge high profile films back
-to -back. He must have signaled something to
Hollywood, right? Oh, definitely. Signaled that
he was this reliable source of authenticity,
a commanding presence, the go -to guy for gravitas.
And that decade just kept showcasing his range.
Later on, he was in that neo -noir thriller Kiss
the Girls. 97. Yeah, with Morgan Freeman. And
played an IRA member, Joe Hamill, in the boxer
with Daniel Day -Lewis, also 97, just effortlessly
moving between genres, complex political settings.
And then you can't skip the real sort of turn
of the century surprise. His role in Wes Anderson's
unique world. Ah, Rushmore. Rushmore, yeah. 1998,
playing the headmaster, Dr. Nelson Guggenheim,
opposite Bill Murray. And Rushmore ended up being
preserved by the Library of Congress, didn't
it, for its cultural significance? It did. which
is key, I think. It just shows his ability to
move completely seamlessly between, you know,
gritty historical epics, serious political thrillers,
and then this highly stylized, culturally significant
indie cinema. He could be the tough guy, the
villain. or the gentle, slightly bewildered headmaster.
Absolutely. He wasn't just the actor you hired
for, like, Fury Gravidas anymore. He was the
actor who could elevate any project with his
intellectual depth, adapting that core stage
discipline to the very specific demands of a
director like Wes Anderson. Okay, so the 2000s
arrive, and this really solidifies his role,
doesn't it, as this indispensable Hollywood character
actor, the guy you bring in to deliver intense
performances, whether he's anchoring a prestige
historical drama or just adding that necessary
to a big blockbuster franchise. Yeah, and the
awards really started stacking up almost immediately
in that decade. He won the Primetime Emmy Best
Supporting Actor in a limited series for his
really powerful portrayal of Herman Guring in
that TV film, Nuremberg. That was 2001. Guring,
again, playing one of the most infamous figures
of the 20th century. You can see how he'd need
that classical technique, right? The ability
to hold the stage, command attention, to ground
such an extreme historical villain. Absolutely.
And then in a tonal shift that just perfectly
shows off his versatility, he proved he could
handle high -level sitcom comedy, too. Oh, yeah.
Got a second Emmy nomination in 2002. for guest
starring as Harry Moon Daphne's dad in two episodes
of Frasier. No way. From Herman Guring to Frasier.
That's a massive, almost impossible artistic
swing, isn't it? It's incredible range, delivering
the weight of history one minute and the lightness
of witty, neurotic comedy the next. with equal
precision. He was also a fixture in some highly
regarded HBO series around then, too, wasn't
he? Yeah, he portrayed Jack Langridge in the
Western Deadwood. But the real complexity of
his career paths around this time, that sort
of financial and artistic duality, is maybe best
shown by two radically different films he did
around 2001, 2002. OK, right. Here's where it
gets really interesting, I think, and where you
have to sort of analyze the... I don't know,
artistic compromise or maybe it's artistic expansion.
How does someone pivot from doing a raw, emotionally
draining, low -budget indie film like L .I .E.?
That was a tough one. To immediately becoming
this fixture in massive Hollywood franchises
like The Bourne Identity and X -Men. Was that
just, you know, pragmatic? paying the bills?
Well, that pivot is absolutely key to understanding
his modern career strategy, I think. So 2001,
he gets immense critical acclaim for starring
as Big John Harrigan in the independent film
LAE. Right, the character who was a paedophile.
Yeah. Extremely challenging role. Hugely challenging,
morally ambiguous, emotionally heavy. He won
a satellite award for best actor for that, got
an independent Spirit Award nomination. This
was high stakes, artistically demanding work,
required immense sensitivity, dramatic weight.
It sounds like the kind of role that could really
burn an actor out, demands total emotional investment.
It does. And yet, almost simultaneously, he's
embedding himself deep into major, popular, highly
commercial Hollywood cinema. OK, so what's happening
there? So 2002, he delivers this kind of dual
brilliance. On one hand, he shares a Screen Actors
Guild Award nomination as part of the amazing
ensemble cast of Spike Jonze's adaptation. Oh,
adaptation, where he played Robert McKee, the
screenwriting guru. Exactly. playing the real
life teacher, delivering those iconic lectures,
which showed his intellectual engagement with
the craft itself right there on screen. And then
the action blockbuster. Precisely. The exact
same year, 2002, he stars as the corrupt CIA
official Ward Abbott in the first Bourne movie,
The Bourne Identity. Right. A role he came back
to in The Bourne Supremacy a couple of years
later. So within this really short span, he's
navigating the demanding world of morally dark
indie. film, LIE, intellectual metafiction adaptation,
and the high octane global espionage franchise
world, born. So what does that transition actually
demand of him as an actor? It feels like it's
almost a different technical language between
those projects. Well, I think it demands the
ability to switch the application of his core
training. Does that make sense? Yeah, explain.
OK, so in LIE, that stage discipline is used
for internalizing conveying quiet menace, moral
decay, all that heavy stuff. In Bourne, that
same stage discipline, the command of space,
the clarity of diction, the economy of movement,
it's applied differently. It's used to make Ward
Abbott, who's mostly just sitting behind a desk,
right? To make him feel like the most powerful,
most dangerous man in the room. His presence
grounds all the spectacle. It lends credibility
to the whole action plot. And the blockbuster
money, presumably. Well... One Suspects, yeah.
That probably allowed him the freedom to keep
pursuing the more esoteric, challenging stage
work in those smaller films. It's a smart balance.
His presence definitely became synonymous with
that kind of commanding, often villainous power
in those mid -2000s franchises. He was the main
villain, William Straker, in X2, X -Men United
in 2003. Yep. And he played that alternate sort
of villainous version of King Agamemnon in Wolfgang
Petersen's big epic Troy in 2004. Even in those
huge CGI -heavy epics, you can still kind of
sense the textual rigor, can't you? That Shakespearean
training informing the choices he's making. Definitely.
And the roles he took weren't just like generic
villains. They were figures of immense authority,
often struggling with destiny or control. Think
about his work in that 2005 BBC film, Blue Orange,
exploring race and mental illness. Right. Or...
playing the patriarch in Woody Allen's match
point. He constantly maintains this duality,
doesn't he? High -minded, socially relevant art
right alongside necessary, high -profile commercial
work. And just before he landed the role that
would redefine his later career... Logan Roy?
Yeah, before Logan, he took on another massive
historical figure, Winston Churchill, in that
2017 film Churchill. Critically acclaimed historical
war drama, yeah. A huge role to take on. But
by then, you know, commanding figures, kings,
generals, tyrants, patriarchs, they were... absolutely
squarely in his repertoire. The foundation was
well and truly laid for what was coming next.
And that, of course, brings us right to it. The
ultimate, maybe, realization of the classical
patriarch on the modern screen, Logan Roy. Yeah.
From 2018 to 2023, Brian Cox starred as the billionaire
founder, the patriarch of Waystar Royco on HBO's
Succession. In this role, it brought him truly
global mainstream recognition. Probably unlike
anything else in his whole career up to that
point. The performance was just lauded, wasn't
it? Precisely because of that immense gravitas
he brought to a character who is often, you know,
physically quite immobile sitting at the head
of a table maybe, yet just radiating this toxic
power. He won the Golden Globe for Best Actor
in a Drama Series in 2019. And got three Primetime
Emmy nominations for the role over the show's
run. Logan Roy feels like the ultimate synthesis,
doesn't he? of all those decades of work. I think
that's exactly right. He used that stage discipline,
the stuff honed, playing King Lear and Titus
Andronic as a control, the vocal precision, the
ability to just dominate a scene with minimal
movement. Yeah. And he applied all of that to
the world of corporate America. He treated the
boardroom, the family estate, like his modern
kingdom, beset by treacherous scheming courtiers
who just happened to be his own children. And
that famous use of certain profanity. The F -bomb,
yeah. It wasn't just swearing, was it? It felt
like the roar of this wounded, frustrated king
who's losing control of his own succession plan.
Absolutely. But what's really remarkable, I think,
is how he managed to keep up this versatile working
pace even while he was dominating one of the
biggest prestige dramas on television. He didn't
just become Logan Roy and stop everything else.
No, he kept that character actor engine running.
almost like he needed these, I don't know, artistic
palette cleansers or something. He certainly
seemed to. Back in 2018, when Succession was
just kicking off, he reprised his role as Captain
John O 'Hagan in the comedy sequel, Super Troopers
2. Super Troopers 2. That's hilarious. And he
openly joked about it. Said his condition for
coming back to that pretty farcical comedy was
that he had to get a big action scene with rockets
and explosions. That willingness, though, to
just jump back into these lighthearted fan favorite
roles? It says a lot, doesn't it, about his lack
of professional sort of pretense, despite the
classical background, the intellectual weight.
Yeah, he seems genuinely comfortable moving between
high tragedy and outright slapstick. And his
more recent film projects, they continue to show
that diversity too. Still committed to independent,
thoughtful cinema. Yeah, he starred in that 2022
political thriller, The Independent. But look
closer at his work in another 2022 film, the
American drama Mending the Line. He was also
an executive producer on that one. Oh, right.
What was that about? He played a Vietnam veteran
who teaches a young, injured soldier how to fly
fish, basically as a way to cope with his physical
and emotional trauma. Wow. That role, mentoring
someone through trauma like that requires immense
tenderness, doesn't it? Patience, gravitas, worlds
away from Logan Roy, shouting at his kids or
playing corporate chess. Totally. It's a quiet,
supportive performance, relies on that subtle
humanity he can access when he needs to. And
even more compellingly, maybe, his commitment
to the stage just hasn't stopped. Despite his
age, despite a massive success and global fame
from succession, He went back to the theater
in 2023. He did. Played the lead role, Johann
Sebastian Bach, in a play called The Score, first
at the Theatre Royal in Bath, and then it transferred
to the Theatre Royal Haymarket in London this
year, 2025. Playing Bach. Another intensely demanding,
intellectual, historical figure. It just shows,
doesn't it? The stage isn't just a memory for
him. It's still his primary artistic anchor.
And that commitment loops right back to his origins.
In 2025, he's set to perform at a new James Graham
play, Make It Happen, in Edinburgh. Plain who?
Adam Smith. Wow. The father of modern economics.
Wow. And this marks his first return to performing
on a Scottish stage in a decade. It just confirms,
again, that for Cox, theater remains this continuous
vital part of his working life and a way for
him to keep engaging with big intellectual and
historical ideas. Okay, so if the immense body
of stage and screen work wasn't already enough
to secure his legacy, we have to talk about his
third career almost, which is the audio landscape,
using that iconic authoritative voice. Oh yeah,
that voice is instantly recognizable, isn't it?
Yeah. And he's leveraged it incredibly well across
films, video games, audiobooks, you name it.
It's that voice honed on the RSC stage, articulating
Shakespeare's verse. Exactly. And it found this
whole new, probably quite lucrative kingdom in
the audio world. He's had huge success voicing
the ruthless Emperor Scholar Vizari in the Killzone
video game trilogy. Right. Starting back in 2004.
Yeah. And he was the main antagonist, Lionel
Starkweather, in that infamous, controversial
game, Manhunt, in 2003. He brings that genuine,
serious, almost Shakespearean villain energy
to those digital characters. He gives them a
complexity that maybe goes beyond typical video
game baddies. It's a perfect marriage, really.
Classical tone, modern commercial use. And his
voice work in film and TV is just as vast. He
was the ood elder in that Doctor Who Christmas
special, The End of Time. Provided the deep resonating
voice of Death Capital D in the Good Omens adaptation
in 2019. narrated Terry Pratchett's The Color
of Magic. And looking ahead, he's voicing Helm
Hammerhand in the animated Lord of the Rings
film The War of the Rohirrim later this year.
And beyond the character voice roles, he's a
significant audiobook narrator, too. He did the
underbridge Dracula. Bram Stoker's novel way
back in 97, capturing all that Gothic dread.
Narrated Tolkien's epic poem, The Legend of Sigurd
and Gudrun in 2010. And of course, he provided
that rich, reflective narration for his own autobiography,
Putting the Rabbit in the Hat, just a few years
ago in 2021. Now, we do need to address something
the source material highlights here regarding
his audio work. It mentions he narrated a documentary
called The Revelation of the Pyramids in 2010.
Ah, yes. And the source notes that this particular
documentary has been criticized for supporting
anti -Semitic and negationist conspiracy theories.
Right. So that's an uncomfortable element in
his otherwise pretty stellar body of work that
we just have to acknowledge. It shows that even
really prolific respected artists can sometimes
lend their talents, perhaps unwittingly, to projects
with problematic foundations. It's important
to note, yeah. Okay, moving on from the voice
work, let's get into his personal commitments.
His political life, his philosophical views,
they seem almost as complex and robust as his
theatrical history. He's described himself as
a democratic socialist and also a Scottish Republican,
but his actual political journey, it shows more
intellectual independence maybe than just rigid
party loyalty. Yeah, his political path has been
really fascinating, precisely because of those
deep convictions. He was an active, committed
labors of honor for nearly 50 years, since 1967,
right up until 2015. The 50 years, that's lifelong
commitment for most people. What changed? Well,
he became deeply disillusioned, apparently, by
Tony Blair's decision on the Iraq War. He saw
it as a profound betrayal of traditional labor,
traditional socialist principles. It caused a
major ideological break for him. And that disillusionment,
it led him to shift his allegiance pretty dramatically,
didn't it? It did. In 2015, he joined the Scottish
National Party, the SMP, started supporting Scottish
independence, although he actually couldn't vote
in the 2014 referendum because he was living
in the U .S. at the time. Right. But still, that
pivot from lifetime labor supporter to joining
the Nationalist Party, that's a huge political
statement. It is. But the nuance, as you said,
it doesn't stop there. By 2022, he'd shifted
his public position again, stated he didn't really
consider himself a Scottish nationalist anymore.
Oh, really? So what was his position then? He
said he preferred to move towards federalism.
He described his ideal as something like independent
states, but we come together as a united federation.
So it shows a commitment more to constitutional
ideas, maybe, political reform, rather than just
simple party membership or narrow national identity,
like a preference for broad union combined with
self -determination. That seems fair, yeah. And
he's also been a dedicated activist on specific
international issues, particularly the Israel
-Palestine crisis. Right. He signed multiple
letters calling for a ceasefire during the crisis,
both in 2021 and 2023. Yeah, and notably, he
recorded that poem, If I Must Die, by the Palestinian
writer Rafat Al -Arir, who was tragically killed
during the war later on. His activism seems ongoing
too. More recently, in 2025, the source says
he signed an open pledge not to work with Israeli
film institutions that he views as being implicated
in genocide and apartheid. So it shows he really
uses his platform for outspoken activism and
extending way beyond just UK domestic politics.
And then there are his public views on other
things, recreational drugs. Ah, yes. He openly
supported the recreational use of cannabis, famously
stated, quote, It's absolutely great. And I recommend
it to everyone. Get stoned. Which is well, it's
a typically provocative Brian Cox statement,
isn't it? But it had real immediate professional
consequences. It did. That statement made back
in 2020 led directly to his removal from the
patronage of the Midland Daycare Center in Dundee.
It's a center for the elderly. Wow. So it demonstrates
that conflict, doesn't it, between his sort of
free thinking, rebellious nature and the expectations
that come with celebrity patronage, especially
perhaps in his more conservative hometown. Exactly.
OK, finally, we should definitely touch on his
deep academic and charitable commitments, because
they prove his investment in the future of the
arts is really tangible. Right. He held the elected
position of rector of the University of Dundee
for six years. 2010 to 2016, re -elected in 2013.
And the role of rector in Scotland, it's more
than just like a ceremonial thing. It involves
actively representing the student body's interests
to the university's governing body. It's a serious
commitment to higher education governance. And
he's also a patron of the Scottish Youth Theatre.
Yeah, where the theatre in Glasgow was actually
named the Brian Cox Studio Theatre in his honor.
Nice. And a patron of the British American Drama
Academy as well, BADA. Since 2020. Yeah. And
he holds regular master classes there too. So
he doesn't just, you know, lend his name or donate
money. He actively teaches. He guides the next
generation, making sure that classical tradition
he mastered himself actually continues. Hashtag
tag tag outro. OK, so let's try and synthesize
this whole remarkable decades long journey. We
kind of kicked off with that Logan Roy image,
didn't we? But the reality is just so much richer.
So much richer. We've gone from a working class
kid in Dundee to a self -proclaimed democratic
socialist and political independent, a two time
Olivier Award winner. the original Hannibal Lecter
on film. Right. A hugely versatile character
actor who grounds these massive Hollywood franchises
and also this deep contributor to academia, to
the world of audio arts. It feels like every
single screen performance doesn't matter if it's
a CIA official or a satirical billionaire. It's
absolutely informed by that relentless dedication
to the classical stage, a textual rigor. And
we connect it to the bigger picture, those three
books he's written, Salem and Moscow, The Lear
diaries, his autobiography, putting the rabbit
in the hat. They really demonstrate that his
professional commitment isn't just to the performance
itself. It's also to documenting, reflecting
on the process of acting, the emotional pressure,
the intellectual journey involved. He treats
his entire career like this ongoing documented
artistic exploration. It's a truly staggering
legacy, isn't it, of intellectual and artistic
commitment, which kind of brings us back full
circle, back to the role that really defined
his late career. Logan Roy. Yeah. So considering
his early portrayal of that calculating Hannibal
Lecter and his decades mastering the complex
psychology of classical stage roles like King
Lear, what deep classical foundation do you think
he drew upon to bring that ruthless yet somehow
vulnerable complexity of Logan Roy to life? Well,
it raises an important question, I think, for
you, the listener, to consider. Is Logan Roy
perhaps the ultimate modern Shakespearean king?
Hmm. Say more. Well, think about it. A man of
absolute tyrannical power. constantly surrounded
by schemers, by flawed successors, fighting bitterly
for his own legacy, ultimately tormented by the
weight of his own succession, his own mortality
maybe. His entire career, rooted so deeply in
classical tragedy, suggests that Cox treated
that way to our Royco boardroom not just as a
commercial set, but as the crumbling kingdom
of a tragic, powerful, deeply flawed modern monarch.
And that, I think, is the genius of Brian Cox.