Welcome to the Deep Dive. Hi there. Today we
are, well, attempting quite a task really. Charting
the career of someone who's just a true modern
master. Yeah. A creative force whose CV, honestly,
it reads less like a career path and more like,
I don't know, a whole history of contemporary
drama. Absolutely. We are diving into the world
of Sir Kenneth Branagh. And it's almost overwhelming
when you start because you look at his work and
Branagh is the ultimate multi -hyphenate. You
know, he doesn't just act. No. He directs, he
produces, he writes, and he's managed to succeed
everywhere. Classical theater, prestige television,
really intimate personal drama, and then these
massive, massive superhero blockbusters. He just,
he refuses to be put in a box. And that refusal,
that refusal to be categorized, it's kind of
codified, isn't it? Yeah. In one of the most,
well, astonishing records in modern. Hollywood
history. We're talking about a man who holds
the unique distinction of being the first person
ever nominated for an Academy Award in seven
different categories. Seven and seven. I mean,
just think about the names he surpassed to get
that record. Walt Disney, George Clooney, Alfonso
Cuaron. These are giants of versatility, right?
All nominated in six categories. But Branagh.
hit seven he achieved mastery across well the
entire creative spectrum performing directing
writing producing and spanning formats from short
film All the way up to Best Picture. That kind
of breadth is just, it's unprecedented. It really
is. Yeah. So our mission today then is to try
and track that extraordinary path. How did the
boy from working class Belfast rise up to become,
you know, the definitive modern Shakespearean
actor. Then somehow command the Marvel Universe
and then circle back to write an Oscar winning
memoir about his own childhood. It's quite a
story arc. It is. We need to uncover the key
artistic shifts, I think. And also maybe some
of the moments of. profound personal costs that
must have defined this, well, decades long journey.
Yeah, there were definitely those two. OK, let's
let's unpack this. Right. So to understand the
drive that versatile, you really have to start
with his foundational identity, his roots. Kenneth
Charles Brona. Born 10 December 1960 in the Tigers
Bay area of Belfast. And his background was decidedly
working class Protestant. His father, William,
was a plumber and a joiner. He specialized in
fitting partitions, suspended ceilings, that
kind of thing. Right. Proper tradesman. Exactly.
And Ken was the middle child. His early life
was rooted in a very specific place, a very specific
culture. But that world, it fractured pretty
dramatically, didn't it, in early 1970? It did.
He was nine years old. Why have you been there?
adopted an RP accent, received pronunciation.
Right. The standard English accent. The standard
English accent. Exactly. At school anyway. But
despite that, you know, that necessity for self
-protection, he has always consistently maintained,
quote, I feel Irish. I don't think you can take
Belfast out of the boy. That's powerful. And
it's kind of the origin of the performer, isn't
it? That need to put on a mask or a voice just
for survival. Precisely. And that early theatrical
instinct, it led him through amateur groups like
the Progress Theater and then straight into,
well, the crucible of British acting talent,
the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art. Arrata. Arrata.
Was absolutely crucial. He was an intense student,
apparently, in a really vibrant era there, working
alongside people who had become huge stars. Right.
And there's this incredible little story from
1980 when he was still a student that shows how
quickly he was marked out as special. Oh, yeah.
The principal asked the 19 -year -old Brana to
perform a soliloquy from Hamlet for Queen Elizabeth
II during a royal visit. Wow. 19 years old. Performing
Hamlet for the Queen. Before his professional
career had even properly begun, he was already
doing the bard for royalty. That early confidence,
it must have just translated immediately into
professional acclaim, right? It did. Pretty much
straight out of rando, he won the very prestigious
1982 Sweat Award. That's the precursor to the
Olivier Award for Best Newcomer. That was for
his role as the socialist pupil, Judd, in another
country. OK, so he hits the ground running. Absolutely.
That win basically confirmed he was the one to
watch. But here's the thing. Instead of just
settling into the establishment, you know, taking
roles at the National or the RSC. Right. Branagh
chose a much more, well, revolutionary path.
In 1987, alongside David Parfit, he co -founded
the Renaissance Theater Company. OK, Renaissance.
Why was that revolutionary? Well, it wasn't just
a side project. It was a deliberate, almost disruptive
move against what they saw as the maybe the stuffiness
and the hierarchy of the existing big theatrical
institutions. Right. Taking on the giants. Exactly.
It felt like an attempt to kind of democratize
high level classical theater. You know, they
wanted to bring it to a wider audience, give
young talent a proper chance. They had some early.
success on the london fringe but it was their
1988 renaissance shakespeare on the road season
that really really exploded their status shakespeare
on the road what did that involve well that season
really demonstrated branna's eye for talent and
also his collaborative spirit it wasn't just
about him performing yeah it was about bringing
in the absolute best That season featured the
directing debuts of Judi Dench, who directed
a fantastic much -do -about -nothing, apparently,
and Geraldine McEwen, who directed As You Like
It. Incredible. And another Titan, Derek Jacoby,
directed Branagh himself in the title role of
Hamlet. Talk about walking among giants indeed.
Yeah. And that stage production of Hamlet, that
was the one, wasn't it, that cemented his reputation
as the great classical hope? That was the one.
The critical response was, well, overwhelming,
particularly the comparisons that started. flying
around to the legend himself, Sir Lawrence Olivier?
Ah, the Olivier comparison. That must have been
intense. Almost paralyzing, you'd imagine. The
critic Milton Shulman famously wrote that Branagh
had, quote, the vitality of Olivier, the passion
of Gielgud, the assurance of Guinness. Good grief.
That's like... That's like calling a rookie quarterback
the love child of Joe Montana and Tom Brady,
like you said. Exactly. It immediately set this
almost impossible standard, a really high stakes
comparison that would, frankly, both haunt and
drive his career for decades. But did the critique
offer any note? Of caution? Because those comparisons,
they're almost always double -edged, aren't they?
They were, yeah. Shulman balanced the praise.
He noted that Branagh maybe lacked the sheer
animal magnetism of Olivier, the flawless, mellifluous
voice of Gilgud. He was brilliant, yes, but the
shadow of a master's was incredibly long. So
the challenge placed upon Branagh from that moment
was crystal clear. Can you transition this stage
of success to cinema? And can you live up to
the name, the next Olivier? A massive weight
to carry into the next phase. And he didn't wait
long to take on that challenge, did he? 1989,
just a year after that Renaissance success, he
adapts his stage, Henry V, for The Scream, his
feature directorial debut. Yep. And this film,
it felt like more than just a film. It felt like
a cultural statement. It really was. And strategically,
it was brilliant. You have to remember, Olivier
had directed his own seminal, Henry V, back in
1944. Right, the wartime propaganda version.
Exactly, to boost morale. Branagh, directing
his version just a few years after the Falklands
War. Ah, interesting context. He presented a
decidedly grittier, bloodier, much more realistic
take on kingship and battle. He wasn't just copying
Olivier. He was offering this kind of post -imperial,
maybe post -Vietnam interpretation of the text.
One that really resonated with a modern audience,
maybe more wary of jingoism. And the Academy
responded instantly. Dual Oscar nominations.
Best actor and best director. Incredible achievement
for a debut. Right. That immediately placed him
in the, you know, the highest echelon of filmmaking
talent. Plus, he won the BAFTA for his direction.
It was a huge breakthrough. Signaled he was here
to stay. And during this whole period, his public
life became completely intertwined with his professional
life through his marriage to the actress Emma
Thompson. Right. 1989. They became the absolute
golden couple of British cinema, didn't they?
Yeah. Embodying that sort of classical talent
and sophisticated charm. They really did. And
their collaborations were incredibly extensive.
They pretty much defined the early 90s. So they
did the stage and TV versions of Look Back in
Anger. Yep. And then they moved into original
cinema together. Twisty Neo -Noir, Dead Again
in 91. Which premiered at the Berlin Film Festival,
got great reviews. Right. And Dead Again was
important, wasn't it? Because it proved Branagh
could succeed outside Shakespeare. Absolutely.
He injected that high stakes dramatic style into
a really slick contemporary Hollywood genre.
It worked. They followed that up with the ensemble
comedy drama Peter's Friends in 1992. Oh, yeah.
I remember that. Often called the British Big
Chill, right? That's the one. Very fondly remembered.
And then came, well, probably the ultimate collaboration,
Much Ado About Nothing in 1993. Ah, yes. The
Sunshine movie. Totally. This felt like the absolute
pinnacle of their partnership, a sun -drenched,
just exuberant adaptation. And it had this Hollywood
-friendly cast, too. Denzel Washington, a young...
Keanu Reeves. That cast was amazing. And Vincent
Camby at the New York Times, he captured the
critical feeling perfectly. He praised Brenna's
direction for taking this romantic comedy that
often turns to, I think he said, mush on the
screen and making it triumphantly romantic, comic,
and emotionally alive. It really felt like they
could do no wrong at that point. They seemed
untouchable. But as often happens, doesn't it,
when an artist hits that kind of pinnacle. The
pressure or maybe just the ambition, it leads
to a misstep. Yeah. And the mid -90s brought
both a big commercial failure and a massive,
very public, personal drama. The artistic misstep,
that was Mary Shelley's Frankenstein in 1994.
Branagh tried to direct this lavish, epic horror
film. starring himself robert de niro as the
creature names huge ambition but it just sort
of spiraled into this overly ambitious kind of
uneven spectacle and the reviews were quite sharp
weren't they i remember reading critiques about
a lack of technical control they were Janet Maslin,
for instance, criticized Branagh's lack of technical
finesse. She said the film often sacrificed emotional
depth for just pure, screaming melodrama. Ouch.
Yeah. It was a clear sign that, you know, theatrical
gravitas doesn't automatically translate into
seamless blockbuster directing. It's a different
skill set. Definitely. And then almost cruelly,
the production of that film became the catalyst
for the public fracturing of The Golden Couple.
That's right. It was during the filming of Frankenstein
that Branagh Branagh began a relationship with
his co -star, Helena Bonham Carter. He and Emma
Thompson divorced in 1995. And his subsequent,
very highly publicized partnership with Bonham
Carter lasted until 1999. It's hard to overstate
how much of a tabloid and media event that whole
transition was. Oh, it was huge. The image of
the, you know, the impeccable classical theater
darling was suddenly replaced by this much more
complex, messy, well... human narrative as his
commercial directing was kind of faltering. It
was a massive disruption to that carefully constructed
public image he'd built. But the remarkable thing
about Branagh, and you see this throughout his
career, is that even during this really intense
personal upheaval, his acting continued to ascend.
Right. Despite the Frankenstein reviews, he went
straight into starring as Iago in Oliver Parker's
Othello. That was 1995 opposite Lawrence Fishburne.
And his Iago was hailed as pretty much definitive,
wasn't it? Absolutely superb. Critics called
it mesmerizing, manipulative. He just captured
that subtle, despicable villainy perfectly, earned
him a screen. Actors Guild Award nomination.
So even if he couldn't quite control the budget
or the technical side of a studio epic, his power
as a performer was absolute, undeniable. And
then, as if to prove the scale of his artistic
ambition once and for all, he returned to the
director's chair for his most monumental Shakespearean
effort yet. The epic Four Hour Hamlet. 1996.
Four hours. Four hours. And shot entirely in
70mm film stock. That's the same format reserved
for these grand spectacles like Lawrence of Arabia.
Exactly. This wasn't just another film adaptation.
It was a defiant artistic statement, a gauntlet
thrown down after the disappointment of Frankenstein.
So what did that 70 millimeter choice really
signify to the audience? What was he saying?
I think he was saying reverence, scale, a demand
for seriousness. 70 millimeter film gives you
this incredible resolution, this depth of field,
visual majesty that's just unsurpassed. Right.
By choosing it, Branagh was saying, look, this
story is epic and I demand you view it with the
same attention you'd give the grandest cinema
ever made. It was a deliberate throwback, a nod
to the golden age. And artistically, it paid
off. Yeah. Four Academy Award nominations, including
Best Adapted Screenplay for Branagh himself.
Yeah, and Roger Ebert, who saw, you know, thousands
of films. Millions, probably. He praised it for
making him feel, quote, at home in that doomed
royal court. He highlighted its emotional accessibility,
even with that daunting four -hour runtime. It
really felt like the definitive capstone, didn't
it, to his whole decade of Shakespearean dominance
on screen? It did. But interestingly... Following
that achievement and then the financial failure
of his next project, it actually signaled a brief
pivot away from directing features. It forced
him, in a way, to reinvent himself again for
the new millennium. Right. So that shift came
early in the 2000s. Branagh decided to take another
big dramatic swing, didn't he, with Love's Labors
Lost in 2000. He did, turning Shakespeare into
a 1930s musical comedy. Old move. Very bold.
Innovative, definitely. But ultimately, it failed,
both commercially and critically. And the source
material suggests this failure really did put
a brief pause on his feature film directing career.
So what did he do during that pause? Well, strategically,
it was probably beneficial. It forced him to
explore other avenues where his gravitas could
shine, but maybe without the immense pressure
of a huge directing budget. Makes sense. He transitioned
into more voice work. He was the voice of the
charming rogue Miguel in DreamWorks animated
film The Road to El Dorado. That was stupid.
Oh, yeah. I remember him in that. And he also
became this sort of go -to voice for historical
context, narrating acclaimed documentaries like
Cold War, Walking with Dinosaurs, World War I
in Color. His voice just lends itself to that
kind of authority. Absolutely. But the real genius
move of this era, I think, was his embrace of
high -stakes historical prestige television.
Yes. That allowed him to really deep dive into
these complex characters, and it earned him immense
industry recognition. That's exactly where we
get the, frankly, chillingly effective conspiracy
in 2001 for HBO. Right. Playing Reinhardt Hadrit.
portraying SS Obergruppenführer Reinhard Heydrich,
the principal architect of the Holocaust, during
this single -location drama depicting the Wannsee
Conference. It's basically just men talking in
a room. Utterly terrifying. Utterly. It was a
chamber piece, pure acting. And he was just phenomenal.
He stripped away all the theatrical flair you
might expect and presented this pure, chilling,
bureaucratic evil. And that role won him the
Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Lead Actor.
It really demonstrated that his power wasn't
reliant on epic 70 millimeter landscapes. It
was internal, deeply internal. And what's fascinating
here is the sheer range he displayed almost immediately
afterward. If Hadrick was the historical villain.
Yeah. Just four years later, 2005, he plays the
iconic American hero, U .S. President Franklin
D. Roosevelt in the HBO film Warm Springs. Wow.
From hatred to FDR. Exactly. Earning another
Emmy nomination for that. Moving seamlessly from
the architect of mass murder to a beloved American
icon. I mean, that is acting range defined, isn't
it? It absolutely is. This era also included
another really significant, long -running television
commitment for him. Wallander. Ah, yes. Wallander.
Starting in 2008, ran until 2016. He starred
as Inspector Kurt Wallander, the brilliant but
deeply, deeply troubled Swedish detective from
Henning Mankel's best -selling crime novels.
Such a great series. It was a masterpiece of
that scanning war atmosphere. Branagh was also
an executive producer on it, helped shape that
distinct, moody tone. And the series was lauded
for its cinematic quality. It won the BAFTA TV
Award for Best Drama Series. Right. And his performance
as Wallander really cemented him as a television
powerhouse in the UK. Earned him another prestigious
Emmy nomination. Broadcasting Press Guild Award
for Best Actor. It was huge for him. But amidst
conquering television, he did dip his toes back
into directing features, didn't he? Though maybe
a bit less successfully than before. He did.
He directed a film version of Shakespeare's As
You Like It in 2006, which was, you know, fine.
More interestingly, perhaps, he took on the difficult
task of remaking Anthony Schaffer's play Sleuth
in 2007. Oh, the one with Jude Law and Michael
Caine. Yeah. Taking over the Olivier role. Exactly.
Michael Caine playing the older role this time.
That remake was notable for its extreme darkness.
The original 72 film was quite witty, almost
playful in its games. Yeah. Branagh's interpretation.
pushed it into a much more psychologically twisted,
almost grim thriller space. It kind of signaled
his comfort with that intense, high -stakes material,
that psychological sparring, which would actually
define some of his later villain roles. Interesting
connection. And we shouldn't overlook his simultaneous
commitment to the stage during this time either.
He wasn't just doing TV and film. No, absolutely
not. In 2008, he returned to the West End to
take on the demanding title role in Chekhov's
Ivanov. How was that received? It was a critical
sensation. It reminded everyone that the man
who is now starring in Scandi Noir adaptations
was still fundamentally a master of theatrical
timing and profound emotional depth. Right. Still
got the stage chops. Absolutely. He won the Critics
Circle Theater Award for Best Male Performance
for Ivanov. It confirmed that his classical foundation
was fully intact, even as he was, perhaps unknowingly,
preparing for a completely new and pretty unexpected
chapter. So by 2010, the next Olivier had successfully
expanded his domain. Shakespeare, sure, but also
HBO historical drama, Scandi Noir. He'd covered
a lot of ground. But yeah. No one could have
predicted the sheer scale of the shift that was
about to come next. Okay, this is where the story
takes a really interesting, almost surreal turn.
2011, Branagh makes this pivot to massive budget
directing by helming Marvel's Thor. Right, Thor.
The question everyone asked at the time was,
why him? Why the Shakespearean maestro for a
cosmic comic book movie about a guy with a magic
hammer? Exactly. It seemed like such an odd fit
on the surface. But the answer, I think, became
pretty clear in the film's execution. It was
about the family drama, wasn't it? That's the
key. Phase one of the MCU, they needed Thor to
establish the emotional core of Asgardian royalty.
The father -son stuff, the brother rivalry. Right,
they didn't just need spectacle. They needed
a director who understood kings and usurpers
and brotherhood and tragedy. Who better? Precisely.
Branagh apparently saw the dynamic between Thor
and Loki not just as a superhero brawl, but as
this almost Shakespearean conflict between two
brothers, you know, Edmund versus Edgar and Lear,
or maybe a more subtle take on Iago's manipulations
with Othello. Ah, interesting parallels. His
background gave the film this necessary gravitas,
this almost operatic scale that actually grounded
the fantastical elements, made them feel weighty.
And it worked. It was a critical and financial
success, launched a huge part of it. It really
did. And then in this fascinating moment of dual
identity in that exact same year, 2011. While
he's directing Norse gods. Yeah. He's starring
as the defining figure of his own career lineage.
Sir Lawrence Olivier himself in My Week with
Marilyn. Incredible timing. Talk about facing
the comparison head on. It was the ultimate challenge,
wasn't it? To embody the very man to whom he
had been compared relentlessly for decades. And
the performance was just meticulous. He captured
Olivier's theatricality, his exasperation, his
charm. It earned Branagh his fifth career Academy
Award. Award nomination, this time for Best Supporting
Actor. And Peter Branshaw's review at the time
really nailed it, didn't he? He said Branagh
revived Olivier with wit, intelligence, and charm.
It felt like he succeeded in stepping out of
Olivier's shadow by simply becoming him on screen.
A real meta moment in his career. Maybe it allowed
him to finally accept those comparisons without
the burden. I think that's a great reading of
it. Yeah. And post -Store, Bernard suddenly became
this trusted name for big -budget family spectacles.
He'd shown he could handle enormous visual effects
budgets but still bring artistic integrity. Right.
Which led to Disney choosing him for the live
-action Cinderella in 2015. Yep. And that film
was widely praised for its balance. It wasn't
cynical. It wasn't overly modernized like some
other adaptations. No, it felt quite classical.
Exactly. Critics praised him for, quote, reverently
reimagining Charles Perrault's fairy tale. It
was another huge financial success and also a
critical affirmation that he could handle these
classic narratives, whether they were written
by Shakespeare or Perrault. And this period also
saw the birth of his own major commercial franchise,
where he took on both roles. Director and star.
Ah, yes. The Poirot series. The Hercule Poirot
series. Kicking off with Murder on the Orient
Express in 2017. And then he followed that with
Death on the Nile in 2022. And A Haunting in
Venice just recently in 2023. Sporting quite
the magnificent mustache. Quite the mustache.
Let's circle back to that technical detail we
mentioned earlier. For Orient Express, he went
back to the old ways, didn't he? Opting to shoot
using those massive 65mm film cameras again.
He did. Why? Why continue to choose that expensive,
difficult format, especially for what's essentially
a period whodunit? Well, I think for Brenna,
it's become a signature artistic statement. For
a film like Orient Express, 65mm gives the locations,
the massive train interiors, those snow -swept
mountains outside, this palpable, epic texture
and scope. It uses cinema history, that visual
language, to evoke a sense of sweeping nostalgia,
maybe grandeur, importance. That makes sense.
And simultaneously, while he's building his Poirot
franchise, he begins this incredibly successful
collaboration with director Christopher Nolan.
Yeah. Which shows that Hollywood's most ambitious
directors still valued him purely as an actor.
He's become almost a fixture in Nolan's recent
work. He really has. Three Nolan films now. He
was the Royal Navy commander in the epic Dunkirk
back in 2017. Stoic performance. Very. Then the
deeply unsettling Russian villain Andrei Sator
in the time -bending spy thriller Tenet in 2020.
Terrifying in that. Truly. And most recently,
the Danish physicist Niels Bohr in Oppenheimer
in 2023. So what does that collaboration tell
us about his stature now, working so consistently
with someone like Nolan? I think it speaks volumes.
Nolan is famous for demanding actors who can
handle really dense exposition. Yeah, Tennant
especially. Exactly. And intense dramatic pressure,
but without losing the human core of the character.
Brunner, with that Shakespearean training, he
can deliver pages of technical dialogue or complex
exposition like he did so brilliantly and chillingly
in Tenet while still grounding the performance
in something genuinely terrifying or empathetic
or whatever the role requires. He offers reliable
precision in really high stakes filmmaking. Nolan
clearly trusts him implicitly. Yet amidst all
the gods and villains and physicists and Poirot.
his career took what felt like its most emotional
and ultimately most critically successful turn
in 2021. With Belfast. Belfast. Yeah. Belfast
was his deeply personal project, a semi -autobiographical
film that finally directly addressed that fractured
identity we talked about way back at the beginning.
Right, the Belfast roots. Exploring his own childhood
in Northern Ireland during the outbreak of the
Troubles, it was him returning home both visually
and emotionally. And the stylistic choices really
underscored that personal connection, didn't
they? Yeah. Shot primarily in that stark, beautiful
black and white. With only those brief flickers
of color images reserved for moments of pure
escape, like the cinema or memory. It gave it
this tender, almost elegiac quality that audiences
just instantly connected with. The reception
was immediate. And overwhelming. It won the People's
Choice Award at the Toronto International Film
Festival, which is often a bellwether for the
Oscars. Right. And it won the BAFTA Award for
Outstanding British Film. It felt like the film
that transcended a lot of his previous work because
it was simply his story, unburdened by the expectations
of the Bard or Marvel or Agatha Christie. And
critically, Belfast achieved the capstone. the
thing that completed his unique Academy Award
record. That's right. The film received seven
total nominations, including Best Picture, Best
Director for him. Huge nods. And then finally,
after all those years, all those nominations
in different fields, he won his first competitive
Oscar, the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay.
Original Screenplay, not adapted. His own words.
His own words, his own story. That win felt like
the synthesis of his entire career. The actor,
the director, the writer finally recognized for
bringing his own truth, his own experience to
the screen. It affirmed him not just as a brilliant
interpreter, but as an original voice. It's quite
a peak, but his career continues to defy any
kind of predictability, doesn't it? Absolutely.
He recently directed and starred in a highly
acclaimed stage adaptation of King Lear that
was 2023 into 2024, taking on another of the
monumental Shakespearean figures. Of course he
did. And he's also busy writing and directing
a psychological thriller called The Last Disturbance
of Madeline Hind. Okay, intriguing. And then
in a wonderful piece of... I guess, metacasting,
confirming his ability to balance high art with
high comedy. He is apparently scheduled to appear
as Miranda Priestly's husband in The Devil Wears
Prada 2. expected in 2026. No way. From King
Lear to Mr. Priestley. That's Branagh. He can
pivot from the heights of tragedy to a high fashion
supporting player without missing a beat. The
range remains astonishing. We really must dedicate
some time to officially laying out that extraordinary
statistic again. The one that just defines his
sheer versatility. Kenneth Branagh. The first
and only individual to be nominated for an Academy
Award in seven different categories. It's worth
listing them. Let's list these creative disciplines
because they really do tell the story of a man
who seems to have mastered every single job on
a film set. It is a stunning demonstration of
range. Okay, let's start with the directing and
performance side. Maybe the more expected ones
first. Right. One, best director. Nominated twice.
First, right out of the gate for his debut, Henry
V. And then decades later for his deeply personal
film, Belfast. Okay. Director, check. Two. Best
actor. Nominated for his starring role as the
titular king in that same film, Henry V. Active
check. Three. Best supporting actor. Nominated
for that meta role we discussed, playing Sir
Lawrence Olivier in My Week with Marilyn. Supporting
actor check. So that's the entire acting and
directing spectrum covered right there. Pretty
much. Now let's look at the writing and producing
roles, which show his commitment to the kind
of the entire scope of the project, not just
performing or directing. Okay. Right. Four. Best
adapted screenplay. Nominated for adapting that
four -hour, 70 -millimeter epic Hamlet back in
1996, demonstrating his command of the classical
text and how to translate it effectively to the
screen. Adapted screenplay. Got it. Five. Best
original screenplay. And this is the category
he actually won for his intensely personal memoir
film, Belfast. Original screenplay. The big win.
Check. Six. Best Picture, nominated as a producer
for Belfast, acknowledging his role in actually
shepherding the entire project through production,
getting it made. Best Picture, producer, check.
That's six. What's the seventh? The one that
really shows the breadth. The seventh is the
one that truly demonstrates the range, the commitment
to filmmaking, regardless of size or budget.
Seven, Best Live Action Short Film. A short film.
Nominated for Swan Song. Way back in 1992, just
think about that range for a second, from the
highly niche, often deeply challenging world
of the live -action short film, often a space
for up -and -coming talent, all the way up to
the blockbuster weight and prestige of Best Picture.
It confirms that his ambition wasn't just focused
on the biggest budgets or the starriest roles,
it was always across the board. That's incredible.
And beyond that Oscar record, his honors... really
confirm his status within the British establishment,
don't they? Despite that complex Northern Irish
background. Absolutely. In 2012, he was formally
recognized with the highest non -hereditary honor
the UK offers. He was appointed a Knight Bachelor,
Sir Kenneth Branagh, for services to drama and
also significantly for services to the community
in Northern Ireland. Oh, acknowledging the roots
again. Explicitly. Receiving the accolade at
Buckingham Palace was this clear marker of his
acceptance, his position as a key figure in British
culture. He said at the time he felt humble,
elated, and incredibly lucky. It recognized both
the art and the civic contribution. And his devotion
to fostering the next generation of actors, that
seems evident too, right? Through his long association
with Rodier, where he trained. Very much so.
He served as president of the Royal Academy of
Dramatic Art from 2015 right up until early 2024,
maintaining that crucial link between the classical
tradition he embodies and contemporary performance,
giving back to where he started. That's great.
And he's also been celebrated by, you know, his
roots and also by the symbolic heart of English
theater. He received the Freedom of the City
of Belfast in 2018. Wow, that must have meant
a lot. A really powerful nod, you'd think, to
the city he left. Clearly never forgot. And then
also the freedom of the town of Stratford upon
Avon, Shakespeare's home in 2022. So acknowledged
by both Belfast and Stratford. That's quite the
double honor. And we should probably remember
his status as a British Triple Crown winner,
too. We should. He achieved that back in 2009.
That's for winning a BAFTA, an Emmy and an Olivier
Award during his career. It places him among
a very select, highly esteemed group of performers
who've really conquered stage, television and
film at the highest level. Amazing. And finally,
just to close the loop on his personal life,
after that highly scrutinized relationship with
Helena Bonham Carter. Yes. He did find stability,
didn't he? He did. In 2003, he married Lindsay
Brinnick, who's a film art director. They met
during the filming of the television epic Shackleton
back in 2002. And they're still together. So
that brings his story somewhat full circle, doesn't
it? Oh, yeah. That identity tension we talked
about created by leaving Belfast at nine. The
boy who learned to speak RP to survive. He becomes
this global artist who eventually uses all that
mastery, all that technique to tell his own Northern
Irish story in Belfast and wins an Oscar for
it. It's an incredible trajectory defined by
both this deep classical excellence and this
relentless commercial ambition, always seemingly
seeking that balance between the two. The constant
theme, I think, is the burden, but also the benefit
of tradition. He accepted that challenge, the
Olivier comparison. He mastered the craft in
literally every capacity. And then he applied
that mastery to every genre imaginable. From
a four -hour Hamlet to the CGI spectacle of Thor,
his career is just proof, really, that deep classical
knowledge can absolutely fuel boundless modern
relevance. Hashtag Outrag Outro. So what does
all this mean for you, the listener? We've covered
this incredible sweep of professional achievements,
but let's just circle back for a moment to that
little anecdote about his preparation for playing
Olivier. Right, the Bible reading. Exactly. Bryn
revealed that while he was studying Olivier,
he listened every single morning to Olivier's
dramatic reading of the Bible. just immersing
himself in the voice. And through that repeated
listening, he found himself unexpectedly becoming
much more religious. It's such a fascinating
moment of unexpected depth, isn't it? He wasn't
aiming for faith. He wasn't seeking spiritual
enlightenment. He was aiming for authenticity
in a performance. He wanted to capture Olivier.
But the pursuit of understanding one artist's
creative process somehow led him to this genuine
internal spiritual transformation. He was seeking
the theatrical voice. found something much, much
deeper. Which I think raises a really interesting
question for you to consider. How often, maybe
in your own life, in the dedicated pursuit of
studying art, whether that's trying to replicate
a complex recipe or understand a historical document
or master a piece of music, do you find that
that intense focus, that deep dive into the subject,
leads to an unexpected... maybe profound personal
transformation that actually has very little
to do with the original subject matter itself.
That unexpected personal resonance. Maybe that's
the ultimate reward of any deep dive, isn't it?
Beyond just the knowledge gained. Could be. We
chart his blockbusters and his awards, his nominations.
But it's those quiet internal shifts, the things
that happen when you're focused elsewhere that
perhaps define the true character of the artist.
Or maybe any of us. Definitely some food for
thought on your next deep dive. Thanks for joining
us today. Thanks for having me.