WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.419 Welcome to the Deep Dive, the place where we 00:00:02.419 --> 00:00:04.860 take the essential sources, articles, and research 00:00:04.860 --> 00:00:07.400 on a subject and distill them into the core knowledge 00:00:07.400 --> 00:00:11.199 you need to be truly informed. And today, we 00:00:11.199 --> 00:00:13.679 are attempting something truly challenging. I'll 00:00:13.679 --> 00:00:16.600 say. We're charting the seven -decade, shape 00:00:16.600 --> 00:00:19.899 -shifting career of a true artistic monolith 00:00:19.899 --> 00:00:22.980 Dame Judi Dench. It is a monumental task, and 00:00:22.980 --> 00:00:24.800 you're right, monumental is the word, because 00:00:24.800 --> 00:00:27.160 her career isn't just long. I mean, it's deep, 00:00:27.219 --> 00:00:30.420 it's wide, and it's full of these wonderful contradictions. 00:00:30.579 --> 00:00:32.299 So what's our mission here? What are we trying 00:00:32.299 --> 00:00:34.700 to get at? Well, our mission today is to go far 00:00:34.700 --> 00:00:37.359 beyond just listing achievements. We want to 00:00:37.359 --> 00:00:40.140 understand the mechanisms of her success. How 00:00:40.140 --> 00:00:42.679 she pulled it all off. Exactly. How did she achieve 00:00:42.679 --> 00:00:45.780 this massive, consistent success across classical 00:00:45.780 --> 00:00:48.840 theater, a beloved television, and then pivot 00:00:48.840 --> 00:00:53.500 to late career global? Film superstardom. And 00:00:53.500 --> 00:00:55.780 often at the same time. At the same time. And 00:00:55.780 --> 00:00:57.560 crucially, how does she maintain that relentless 00:00:57.560 --> 00:01:00.500 output and that integrity while facing some really 00:01:00.500 --> 00:01:03.320 significant personal losses and profound health 00:01:03.320 --> 00:01:05.599 challenges? OK, let's unpack this immediately, 00:01:05.700 --> 00:01:09.060 because the sources we've looked at paint a picture. 00:01:09.680 --> 00:01:12.980 Not just of a great actress, but of a specific 00:01:12.980 --> 00:01:15.659 kind of resilience. Yes. You just can't talk 00:01:15.659 --> 00:01:17.719 about Judi Dench without talking about the sheer 00:01:17.719 --> 00:01:20.299 weight of her achievement. No, you can't. I mean, 00:01:20.299 --> 00:01:22.760 we're talking about a person widely considered 00:01:22.760 --> 00:01:25.420 one of Britain's greatest actresses. And ever. 00:01:25.540 --> 00:01:27.620 But let's look at the ledger. Let's do it. You've 00:01:27.620 --> 00:01:29.659 got an Academy Award, a Tony Award, two Golden 00:01:29.659 --> 00:01:32.019 Globes, four British Academy Television Awards. 00:01:32.239 --> 00:01:35.620 Six British Academy Film Awards. And seven Olivier 00:01:35.620 --> 00:01:39.549 Awards for performance. Seven. That's a world 00:01:39.549 --> 00:01:41.909 record for competitive performance, Olivier's. 00:01:41.969 --> 00:01:44.390 Yeah, it's just astounding. But here's the thing 00:01:44.390 --> 00:01:47.230 that really underlines her early dominance. She 00:01:47.230 --> 00:01:49.810 completed the British Triple Crown. That means 00:01:49.810 --> 00:01:53.730 winning competitive awards from BAFTA, the Olivier's, 00:01:53.750 --> 00:01:56.689 and the Evening Standard Awards remarkably early. 00:01:56.849 --> 00:01:59.590 How early are we talking? Between 1966 and 1977. 00:01:59.709 --> 00:02:01.950 So this wasn't an actor just hoping for a break. 00:02:02.129 --> 00:02:04.650 She was already a colossus of the British stage 00:02:04.650 --> 00:02:07.370 and small screen decades before. before Hollywood 00:02:07.370 --> 00:02:09.930 even thought to cast her. Yeah. That distinction 00:02:09.930 --> 00:02:13.110 is so key. She didn't need Hollywood to validate 00:02:13.110 --> 00:02:16.150 her. Hollywood needed her gravitas to validate 00:02:16.150 --> 00:02:18.430 their projects. That's exactly. And if we need 00:02:18.430 --> 00:02:21.310 a single immediate hook nugget to prove this 00:02:21.310 --> 00:02:25.840 theme of. disproportionate, unforgettable impact. 00:02:26.199 --> 00:02:27.860 I think I know where you're going. It has to 00:02:27.860 --> 00:02:30.840 be the 1998 Oscar win. For Shakespeare in Love, 00:02:31.120 --> 00:02:33.460 she won the Academy Award for Best Supporting 00:02:33.460 --> 00:02:36.080 Actress playing Queen Elizabeth I. After appearing 00:02:36.080 --> 00:02:39.479 on screen for a grand total of eight minutes. 00:02:39.659 --> 00:02:42.240 Eight minutes. It's the definitive Dench story, 00:02:42.400 --> 00:02:44.900 isn't it? It really is. And as we explore the 00:02:44.900 --> 00:02:46.620 rest of her career, you should keep that in mind. 00:02:46.699 --> 00:02:49.939 She has this almost unique ability to walk onto 00:02:49.939 --> 00:02:53.289 a set. own the entire space and just imprint 00:02:53.289 --> 00:02:55.050 her performance on your memory, no matter how 00:02:55.050 --> 00:02:56.990 short the scene is. It's like every moment is 00:02:56.990 --> 00:03:00.009 just optimized for impact. Perfectly put. It 00:03:00.009 --> 00:03:01.550 tells you everything you need to know about her 00:03:01.550 --> 00:03:04.069 craft. To really understand the power of that 00:03:04.069 --> 00:03:06.590 eight minute performance in 1998, we absolutely 00:03:06.590 --> 00:03:09.449 have to go back to the beginning. Way back. Because 00:03:09.449 --> 00:03:11.629 she was steeped in the theater world from birth. 00:03:11.710 --> 00:03:14.530 They're not necessarily as, you know, an aspiring 00:03:14.530 --> 00:03:18.159 starlet. That's right. Judy Dench, born Judith 00:03:18.159 --> 00:03:22.080 Olivia Dench, on December 9, 1934, in Heesworth, 00:03:22.219 --> 00:03:24.620 York. She came from a background of stability 00:03:24.620 --> 00:03:27.360 and professional service. Not a typical artsy 00:03:27.360 --> 00:03:29.520 family, then. Not at all, and I think that grounding 00:03:29.520 --> 00:03:33.159 really helped her long career. Her father, Reginald 00:03:33.159 --> 00:03:36.120 Arthur Dench, was an English doctor and a decorated 00:03:36.120 --> 00:03:40.340 WWI veteran. Her mother, Eleanor Olave, was Irish. 00:03:40.699 --> 00:03:43.840 They met at Trinity College, Dublin. So you have 00:03:43.840 --> 00:03:46.259 this blend of solid professionalism, the doctor, 00:03:46.340 --> 00:03:48.840 the veteran, and this immediate hands -on connection 00:03:48.840 --> 00:03:51.479 to the arts. Precisely. Because her father served 00:03:51.479 --> 00:03:54.340 as the GP for the York Theatre Royal. The local 00:03:54.340 --> 00:03:56.800 doctor for the theatre. And her mother was, perhaps 00:03:56.800 --> 00:03:59.080 even more relevantly, the theatre's wardrobe 00:03:59.080 --> 00:04:01.800 mistress. Wow. So just imagine growing up in 00:04:01.800 --> 00:04:04.020 that house. Right. The theatre wasn't this glamorous, 00:04:04.099 --> 00:04:06.180 distant place. It was her parents' workplace. 00:04:06.620 --> 00:04:08.659 The actors were literally houseguests. They were 00:04:08.659 --> 00:04:10.469 always staying at the Dench household. So she 00:04:10.469 --> 00:04:12.750 saw the reality of it, the effort, the process, 00:04:12.870 --> 00:04:15.770 the chaos. She even got her first taste of performance 00:04:15.770 --> 00:04:18.430 playing the Virgin Mary in the amateur York mystery 00:04:18.430 --> 00:04:21.670 plays in 1957. Speaks to that deep community 00:04:21.670 --> 00:04:25.550 connection. Now for a purely fun, deep dive historical 00:04:25.550 --> 00:04:28.769 nugget that makes her seem even more, I don't 00:04:28.769 --> 00:04:31.189 know, impossibly storied. Oh, I love this one. 00:04:31.269 --> 00:04:34.170 The sources reveal some pretty surprising ancestry 00:04:34.170 --> 00:04:36.709 that was uncovered on the BBC program Who Do 00:04:36.709 --> 00:04:39.949 You Think You Are in 2021. Yes. This is where 00:04:39.949 --> 00:04:42.750 it gets really dramatic. It turns out she's descended 00:04:42.750 --> 00:04:45.629 from the Bill family of Danish aristocrats. Okay. 00:04:46.350 --> 00:04:48.949 And this family includes a man named Claus Bill. 00:04:49.129 --> 00:04:51.790 Now, why is that relevant? Because Claus Bill 00:04:51.790 --> 00:04:54.189 was the grandfather of the famous 16th century 00:04:54.189 --> 00:04:56.389 astronomer Tycho Brahe. Get out of here, Tycho 00:04:56.389 --> 00:04:59.079 Brahe. The very same. It's a completely irrelevant 00:04:59.079 --> 00:05:02.519 but just wonderfully dramatic historical footnote 00:05:02.519 --> 00:05:05.540 that links her not just to the stage, but to 00:05:05.540 --> 00:05:08.500 nobility and, you know, the study of the stars 00:05:08.500 --> 00:05:10.819 centuries ago. It definitely adds to the mythology. 00:05:11.079 --> 00:05:13.540 But maybe the biggest real world influence on 00:05:13.540 --> 00:05:15.740 her core values was her education and her faith. 00:05:16.060 --> 00:05:18.699 Absolutely central. She attended the Mount School, 00:05:18.920 --> 00:05:21.019 which is a Quaker independent secondary school 00:05:21.019 --> 00:05:24.180 in York, and she became a Quaker herself. And 00:05:24.180 --> 00:05:26.430 she's been quoted on this, hasn't she? Yes, in 00:05:26.430 --> 00:05:29.350 a 2013 interview, she said, the faith informs 00:05:29.350 --> 00:05:32.449 everything I do. And that Quaker influence, it 00:05:32.449 --> 00:05:35.009 seems so central to understanding her public 00:05:35.009 --> 00:05:39.189 persona. I think so. Quakerism emphasizes simplicity, 00:05:39.569 --> 00:05:43.230 truth, community service, that quiet moral center, 00:05:43.370 --> 00:05:47.209 that insistence on integrity over flash. That 00:05:47.209 --> 00:05:48.910 seems to be what allows her to take on these 00:05:48.910 --> 00:05:51.769 vastly different roles, a queen, a villain. And 00:05:51.769 --> 00:05:54.129 imbue them all with a level of seriousness and 00:05:54.129 --> 00:05:56.879 honesty. But I wonder, how does someone steeped 00:05:56.879 --> 00:05:59.300 in that quiet integrity suddenly decide to embrace 00:05:59.300 --> 00:06:01.860 the life of an actress, which is, you know, often 00:06:01.860 --> 00:06:04.060 inherently loud and attention -seeking? Well, 00:06:04.079 --> 00:06:06.139 what's so fascinating is that she didn't, not 00:06:06.139 --> 00:06:08.300 at first. What do you mean? She initially trained 00:06:08.300 --> 00:06:10.779 as a set designer. She was interested in the 00:06:10.779 --> 00:06:13.379 craft of the theater, the creation of the world, 00:06:13.500 --> 00:06:15.639 not necessarily standing in the middle of it. 00:06:15.740 --> 00:06:17.620 So she understood the whole production. Which 00:06:17.620 --> 00:06:19.740 I think informs her respect for every technical 00:06:19.740 --> 00:06:22.410 aspect of acting. So the pivot, what was the 00:06:22.410 --> 00:06:25.209 moment? The pivot was intensely personal and 00:06:25.209 --> 00:06:28.550 based on pure inspiration. She said that seeing 00:06:28.550 --> 00:06:31.589 Peggy Ashcroft play Cleopatra on stage changed 00:06:31.589 --> 00:06:34.050 my life. Wow. It was a moment of recognition, 00:06:34.310 --> 00:06:36.810 you know, realizing the transformative power 00:06:36.810 --> 00:06:39.269 of performance. And it just channeled her focus 00:06:39.269 --> 00:06:42.370 entirely. She applied to the Royal Central School 00:06:42.370 --> 00:06:44.810 of Speech and Drama in London. And she didn't 00:06:44.810 --> 00:06:48.360 just attend, did she? She dominated. She did. 00:06:48.439 --> 00:06:51.060 She graduated with immediate acclaim. She was 00:06:51.060 --> 00:06:53.420 a classmate of Vanessa Redgrave. And she won 00:06:53.420 --> 00:06:55.939 four acting prizes, including the gold medal 00:06:55.939 --> 00:06:57.839 as Outstanding Student. So right out of the gate, 00:06:57.899 --> 00:07:00.180 she was recognized as exceptional. Which meant 00:07:00.180 --> 00:07:01.939 her professional journey began with the best 00:07:01.939 --> 00:07:04.430 pedigree possible. She made her debut in September 00:07:04.430 --> 00:07:08.730 1957 as Ophelia in Hamlet with the Old Vic Company. 00:07:08.930 --> 00:07:10.889 And the Old Vic at that time was the launching 00:07:10.889 --> 00:07:13.129 pad for classical actors in Britain. She spent 00:07:13.129 --> 00:07:15.610 four formative seasons there just building this 00:07:15.610 --> 00:07:18.589 incredible classical resume. Key early Shakespearean 00:07:18.589 --> 00:07:21.009 roles included Catherine and Henry V in 1958. 00:07:21.350 --> 00:07:23.850 That was her New York City debut. And Juliet 00:07:23.850 --> 00:07:26.709 and Romeo and Juliet in 1960. And that was directed 00:07:26.709 --> 00:07:28.730 by Franco Zeffirelli, right? Who later became 00:07:28.730 --> 00:07:31.410 a giant of film and opera direction. The very 00:07:31.410 --> 00:07:33.689 same. She was setting a trajectory toward the 00:07:33.689 --> 00:07:36.050 highest echelons of classical performance from 00:07:36.050 --> 00:07:38.829 day one. But the truly impressive part of this 00:07:38.829 --> 00:07:41.029 early phase is how quickly she branched out. 00:07:41.189 --> 00:07:44.170 Oh, yeah. By the mid -60s, she was already balancing 00:07:44.170 --> 00:07:47.579 stage work with significant screen roles. This 00:07:47.579 --> 00:07:50.019 is critical because most of her generation stayed 00:07:50.019 --> 00:07:52.879 strictly theatrical for much, much longer. She 00:07:52.879 --> 00:07:56.759 won the 1966 BAFTA Award for Most Promising Newcomer 00:07:56.759 --> 00:07:59.519 for Four in the Morning and then that same year. 00:08:00.029 --> 00:08:02.449 The very same year, she clinched the BAFTA for 00:08:02.449 --> 00:08:05.009 Best Actress for her performance in the intense 00:08:05.009 --> 00:08:08.050 four -part TV series, Talking to a Stranger. 00:08:08.170 --> 00:08:10.490 So this immediate mastery of the British film 00:08:10.490 --> 00:08:13.089 and TV landscape, in parallel with her stage 00:08:13.089 --> 00:08:15.870 work, that's what started defining her versatility 00:08:15.870 --> 00:08:18.709 so early on. It's proof that she possessed that 00:08:18.709 --> 00:08:21.430 rare quality, the ability to scale her performance 00:08:21.430 --> 00:08:23.750 up for the stage and then scale it right down 00:08:23.750 --> 00:08:25.689 for the camera, all while maintaining authenticity. 00:08:26.480 --> 00:08:28.759 By her early 30s, she was already operating at 00:08:28.759 --> 00:08:30.800 a level that garnered the highest domestic awards 00:08:30.800 --> 00:08:33.419 across all three mediums. Now here's where it 00:08:33.419 --> 00:08:37.019 gets really interesting. In the 1960s, the move 00:08:37.019 --> 00:08:40.779 to musical theater. In 1968, she takes on the 00:08:40.779 --> 00:08:43.080 role of Sally Bowles in the musical Cabaret. 00:08:43.799 --> 00:08:46.779 That seems like a complete artistic detour from 00:08:46.779 --> 00:08:49.840 Ophelia and Juliet. It absolutely was. And according 00:08:49.840 --> 00:08:51.879 to the sources, it was a terrifying experience 00:08:51.879 --> 00:08:54.759 for her. She was deeply reluctant to sing in 00:08:54.759 --> 00:08:56.899 public. I've heard the story about the audition. 00:08:57.299 --> 00:09:00.000 It's wonderful, isn't it? She was so frightened 00:09:00.000 --> 00:09:01.740 that she performed the songs from the wings, 00:09:01.940 --> 00:09:05.100 leaving the pianists alone on stage. She was 00:09:05.100 --> 00:09:07.379 essentially hiding from the casting directors. 00:09:07.639 --> 00:09:10.519 Wait, she auditioned while literally hiding from 00:09:10.519 --> 00:09:13.100 them, and she still got the part? She did, and 00:09:13.100 --> 00:09:15.360 she drew excellent reviews for that run at the 00:09:15.360 --> 00:09:18.460 Palace Theatre. One critic specifically praised 00:09:18.460 --> 00:09:20.919 her singing, noting that the title song is projected 00:09:20.919 --> 00:09:23.210 with great feeling. So what does that tell you 00:09:23.210 --> 00:09:25.450 about her? It shows this crucial element of her 00:09:25.450 --> 00:09:27.909 professional makeup, a willingness to accept 00:09:27.909 --> 00:09:30.490 challenges, even when they trigger profound personal 00:09:30.490 --> 00:09:33.850 fear if the material demands it. This early period 00:09:33.850 --> 00:09:35.950 established that the Quaker girl who trained 00:09:35.950 --> 00:09:38.149 in set design was in fact an absolute theatrical 00:09:38.149 --> 00:09:41.730 chameleon. That fear combined with that praise 00:09:41.730 --> 00:09:44.570 just perfectly underscores that this versatility 00:09:44.570 --> 00:09:46.950 wasn't always comfortable, but it was always 00:09:46.950 --> 00:09:49.330 critically rewarded. And that set the stage for 00:09:49.330 --> 00:09:51.450 the next two decades of her dominance in Britain. 00:09:51.950 --> 00:09:55.110 Moving into the 70s and 80s, the focus shifts 00:09:55.110 --> 00:09:57.950 overwhelmingly to the stage, specifically her 00:09:57.950 --> 00:09:59.909 long tenure with the Royal Shakespeare Company, 00:10:00.049 --> 00:10:02.450 the RSC. This is where she goes from being a 00:10:02.450 --> 00:10:05.669 star to becoming a theatrical institution. Absolutely. 00:10:06.169 --> 00:10:08.409 She spent nearly two decades as a core member, 00:10:08.629 --> 00:10:10.950 and that became the main engine for her critical 00:10:10.950 --> 00:10:13.230 success. It's where she racked up the majority 00:10:13.230 --> 00:10:15.809 of her Best Actress awards. She'd already proved 00:10:15.809 --> 00:10:18.350 her technical skill, but how do you take that 00:10:18.350 --> 00:10:20.730 raw talent and turn it into the kind of stage 00:10:20.730 --> 00:10:23.309 authority that defines a generation? That's what 00:10:23.309 --> 00:10:25.750 the RSC gave her, isn't it? The chance to dig 00:10:25.750 --> 00:10:28.330 into the most complex roles over and over again. 00:10:28.549 --> 00:10:30.789 Precisely. This period wasn't about quick hits. 00:10:30.850 --> 00:10:33.370 It was about immersive study. She took on roles 00:10:33.370 --> 00:10:35.490 like the Duchess and John Webster's daughter. 00:10:35.500 --> 00:10:37.899 dark and dense tragedy, The Duchess of Malfi 00:10:37.899 --> 00:10:41.100 in 1971. That's grueling stuff. Complex verse 00:10:41.100 --> 00:10:43.700 drama demands immense vocal control, emotional 00:10:43.700 --> 00:10:46.879 stamina. And she mastered it. But the landmark 00:10:46.879 --> 00:10:49.679 achievement of this entire era, the one that 00:10:49.679 --> 00:10:52.179 critics still talk about with reverence, was 00:10:52.179 --> 00:10:55.000 Her Lady Macbeth. Right, in Trevor Nunn's acclaimed 00:10:55.000 --> 00:10:59.139 1976 production. Why was this Macbeth so defining? 00:10:59.460 --> 00:11:01.860 The production itself was revolutionary. It was 00:11:01.860 --> 00:11:03.820 performed at the Other Place Theater in Stratford. 00:11:04.350 --> 00:11:07.549 A tiny, intimate space with a minimalist design. 00:11:07.769 --> 00:11:10.590 Small, round stage. So it stripped away all the 00:11:10.590 --> 00:11:12.970 spectacle? Completely. It forced the audience 00:11:12.970 --> 00:11:15.370 to focus intensely on the psychological dynamics, 00:11:15.730 --> 00:11:17.889 particularly the relationship between Macbeth 00:11:17.889 --> 00:11:19.909 and his wife. That sounds like a pressure cooker 00:11:19.909 --> 00:11:23.090 for an actor. It was. And Dench delivered a performance 00:11:23.090 --> 00:11:25.470 that elevated the role from a mere villainous 00:11:25.470 --> 00:11:28.149 to a study in inner turmoil and raw ambition. 00:11:28.529 --> 00:11:30.870 The reviews were ecstatic, weren't they? The 00:11:30.870 --> 00:11:32.779 sources quote them. Michael Billington in The 00:11:32.779 --> 00:11:34.899 Guardian wrote, If this is not great acting, 00:11:35.000 --> 00:11:37.980 I don't know what is. And J .C. Truman, a very 00:11:37.980 --> 00:11:40.580 respected traditional critic, said he would be 00:11:40.580 --> 00:11:43.340 astonished if the performances matched by any 00:11:43.340 --> 00:11:45.899 in this actress's generation. And that's the 00:11:45.899 --> 00:11:48.220 role that won her the Sweat Best Actress Award 00:11:48.220 --> 00:11:51.639 in 1977. It is. We should probably pause on that 00:11:51.639 --> 00:11:54.539 for a second, because the Sweat Award might sound 00:11:54.539 --> 00:11:57.000 like an unfamiliar acronym to some. Good point. 00:11:57.080 --> 00:11:59.460 It's a critical piece of British theatrical history. 00:11:59.659 --> 00:12:02.019 It is. The Sweat Awards were established by the 00:12:02.019 --> 00:12:04.320 Society of West End Theatre, and they were the 00:12:04.320 --> 00:12:06.919 precursors to what we now know as the Olivier 00:12:06.919 --> 00:12:09.179 Awards. Which were named after Laurence Olivier 00:12:09.179 --> 00:12:13.240 in 1984. So when she won the Sweat for Lady Macbeth, 00:12:13.320 --> 00:12:15.720 she was winning the highest theatrical honor 00:12:15.720 --> 00:12:17.820 available in Britain. It was essentially her 00:12:17.820 --> 00:12:20.570 first Olivier. That performance cemented her 00:12:20.570 --> 00:12:23.070 mastery of tragedy. But what makes her so unique 00:12:23.070 --> 00:12:25.649 is that she immediately pivoted. Right back to 00:12:25.649 --> 00:12:28.309 comedy. Demonstrating what critics called consummate 00:12:28.309 --> 00:12:31.049 skill as a comic actress. She partnered with 00:12:31.049 --> 00:12:33.590 Donald Sinden in a revival of Much Ado About 00:12:33.590 --> 00:12:36.850 Nothing as Beatrice and Benedict. And this duality 00:12:36.850 --> 00:12:40.049 is the core of her theatrical legacy. To move 00:12:40.049 --> 00:12:42.470 from the harrowing intensity of a murderous Lady 00:12:42.470 --> 00:12:46.090 Macbeth to the sparkling, quick -witted, romantic 00:12:46.090 --> 00:12:49.399 sparring of Beatrice. sometimes in the same year, 00:12:49.559 --> 00:12:52.440 is just an astonishing demonstration of range. 00:12:52.759 --> 00:12:54.580 There was one critic who summed it up perfectly. 00:12:54.940 --> 00:12:58.259 Bernard Levin of the Sunday Times. He declared 00:12:58.259 --> 00:13:01.059 her perhaps the very best we have as a comic 00:13:01.059 --> 00:13:04.000 actress. She could handle the heavy verse and 00:13:04.000 --> 00:13:06.940 the dark emotion of tragedy, but she could equally 00:13:06.940 --> 00:13:10.399 deliver flawless comic rhythm and timing. It's 00:13:10.399 --> 00:13:13.259 proof that she was never boxed in, even by her 00:13:13.259 --> 00:13:15.559 own colossal success. She kept seeking out the 00:13:15.559 --> 00:13:18.120 opposite extreme. And we also see her start to 00:13:18.120 --> 00:13:20.059 move into a mentoring role around this time. 00:13:20.259 --> 00:13:22.639 That's right. She transitions behind the scenes 00:13:22.639 --> 00:13:25.259 and makes her debut as a director in 1988 with 00:13:25.259 --> 00:13:27.159 the Renaissance Theatre Company's touring season. 00:13:27.299 --> 00:13:30.659 And the play she chose to direct. Much Ado, about 00:13:30.659 --> 00:13:33.539 nothing, of course. A piece she clearly adored 00:13:33.539 --> 00:13:36.059 and understood intimately. And the cast she directed 00:13:36.059 --> 00:13:38.519 was foundational for the next generation. It 00:13:38.519 --> 00:13:42.259 was Kenneth Branagh and Emma Thompson. Wow. Directing 00:13:42.259 --> 00:13:44.399 your peers and directing stars who are rapidly 00:13:44.399 --> 00:13:46.960 rising, that's a serious responsibility. It shows 00:13:46.960 --> 00:13:49.379 she was not just performing, but actively influencing 00:13:49.379 --> 00:13:52.259 the future of the classical stage. She was passing 00:13:52.259 --> 00:13:54.379 on the knowledge she had amassed over two decades 00:13:54.379 --> 00:13:57.820 at the RSC. But at the same time, she was making 00:13:57.820 --> 00:13:59.960 herself a household name in a much more intimate 00:13:59.960 --> 00:14:02.980 and accessible way. Through television. This 00:14:02.980 --> 00:14:05.019 is where she becomes the national treasure figure 00:14:05.019 --> 00:14:08.500 we know. Which brings us to A Fine Romance. It 00:14:08.500 --> 00:14:12.539 aired on ITV from 1981 to 1984. This romantic 00:14:12.539 --> 00:14:14.759 comedy was incredibly popular, and critically, 00:14:14.960 --> 00:14:17.179 she starred in it alongside her husband, Michael 00:14:17.179 --> 00:14:19.600 Williams. And this was a brilliant move. I mean, 00:14:19.600 --> 00:14:22.159 perhaps unintentional. But it cemented her public 00:14:22.159 --> 00:14:25.289 identity as accessible and charming. The real 00:14:25.289 --> 00:14:27.309 -life partnership gave the on -screen chemistry 00:14:27.309 --> 00:14:29.950 a tangible intimacy that just resonated deeply 00:14:29.950 --> 00:14:32.190 with the British public. The show won a BAFTA 00:14:32.190 --> 00:14:34.809 award. It did. And for millions who never set 00:14:34.809 --> 00:14:38.129 foot in the RSC, this was their Judi Dench, a 00:14:38.129 --> 00:14:40.769 lovely, slightly exasperated woman navigating 00:14:40.769 --> 00:14:43.389 life and love. This television success is such 00:14:43.389 --> 00:14:45.970 a fascinating counterpoint to her rigorous classical 00:14:45.970 --> 00:14:48.289 life. She later had similar success with The 00:14:48.289 --> 00:14:51.389 Antinality. As time goes by, by starting in 1992, 00:14:51.649 --> 00:14:54.460 another beloved rom -com. These long -running 00:14:54.460 --> 00:14:57.360 TV roles provided the necessary balance. It prevented 00:14:57.360 --> 00:14:59.639 her from being perceived as purely an austere, 00:14:59.679 --> 00:15:02.299 distant classical performer. She showed she could 00:15:02.299 --> 00:15:04.379 embody Lady Macbeth and the relatable frustration 00:15:04.379 --> 00:15:07.039 of a woman in a sitcom. During the 80s, her film 00:15:07.039 --> 00:15:09.899 roles remained supportive but prestigious. Very 00:15:09.899 --> 00:15:12.480 much so. She appeared in James Ivory's beautiful 00:15:12.480 --> 00:15:16.820 period piece, A Room with a View in 1985, and 00:15:16.820 --> 00:15:19.279 in the cherished 84 Charing Crossroad in 1987 00:15:19.279 --> 00:15:22.509 with Anne Bancroft and Anthony Hopkins. These 00:15:22.509 --> 00:15:25.350 weren't blockbuster leading roles. No, but they 00:15:25.350 --> 00:15:27.669 were high quality, respected ensemble pieces. 00:15:27.950 --> 00:15:30.710 Her selections show a priority for good writing 00:15:30.710 --> 00:15:33.789 and strong casts, not headline billing. She was 00:15:33.789 --> 00:15:35.769 clearly driven by the quality of the project. 00:15:36.169 --> 00:15:38.389 And we mentioned earlier that she embodies the 00:15:38.389 --> 00:15:40.330 entire spectrum of British culture, so we cannot 00:15:40.330 --> 00:15:43.070 skip the niche but utterly beloved fact that 00:15:43.070 --> 00:15:45.769 she participated in one of the great British 00:15:45.769 --> 00:15:48.710 institutions. Ah, yes, the radio soap opera. 00:15:48.789 --> 00:15:51.830 The Archers. She was cast as Prue Forrest, the 00:15:51.830 --> 00:15:54.730 longtime silent wife of Tom Forrest, on its 10 00:15:54.730 --> 00:15:58.289 ,000th edition in 1989. So she went from Lady 00:15:58.289 --> 00:16:01.289 Macbeth and directing Kenneth Branagh to playing 00:16:01.289 --> 00:16:03.590 a woman famous for never speaking. What does 00:16:03.590 --> 00:16:05.570 that tell us? It tells us she doesn't take herself 00:16:05.570 --> 00:16:08.009 too seriously, and she appreciates the cultural 00:16:08.009 --> 00:16:10.830 importance of these deeply ingrained British 00:16:10.830 --> 00:16:13.250 traditions. It's a small detail, but it shows 00:16:13.250 --> 00:16:15.149 her willingness to participate in mainstream 00:16:15.149 --> 00:16:17.889 culture at every level. And this immense breadth, 00:16:18.149 --> 00:16:21.230 this status as a celebrated theatrical colossus 00:16:21.230 --> 00:16:23.990 who was also a TV darling, is what prepared her 00:16:23.990 --> 00:16:26.549 for the truly global pivot of the 1990s. The 00:16:26.549 --> 00:16:29.350 1990s. This marked the great external pivot. 00:16:29.669 --> 00:16:32.649 She transitioned almost overnight from a revered 00:16:32.679 --> 00:16:35.620 British institution to a global movie star. And 00:16:35.620 --> 00:16:38.379 that shift started, perhaps surprisingly, by 00:16:38.379 --> 00:16:40.799 taking on the role of a bureaucratic spymaster. 00:16:40.960 --> 00:16:44.240 We begin with the M era. Starting in 1995 with 00:16:44.240 --> 00:16:47.159 Goldeneye. The Bond franchise was rebooting after 00:16:47.159 --> 00:16:49.840 a long hiatus. They brought in Pierce Brosnan, 00:16:49.940 --> 00:16:53.139 and the decision to cast Dench as M, James Bond's 00:16:53.139 --> 00:16:56.100 boss, was... well, it was nothing short of genius. 00:16:56.360 --> 00:16:58.320 This wasn't just recasting a character, was it? 00:16:58.759 --> 00:17:01.159 It was a profound statement about modernizing 00:17:01.159 --> 00:17:03.460 the franchise. She became the first woman to 00:17:03.460 --> 00:17:05.880 portray M. It instantly signaled that the Cold 00:17:05.880 --> 00:17:08.579 War era of Bond was over. The intelligence world 00:17:08.579 --> 00:17:10.339 was changing. And the sources confirmed this 00:17:10.339 --> 00:17:12.720 was a deliberate choice. The character of M was 00:17:12.720 --> 00:17:14.740 reportedly modeled on Dame Stella Remington, 00:17:14.960 --> 00:17:17.200 who had served as the real -life head of MI5 00:17:17.200 --> 00:17:20.920 between 1992 and 1996. So by casting Dench, they 00:17:20.920 --> 00:17:23.200 were embedding the character with this genuine 00:17:23.200 --> 00:17:26.319 gravitas and authority of a serious high -ranking 00:17:26.319 --> 00:17:29.220 official who could and would dress down James 00:17:29.220 --> 00:17:32.299 Bond. And she does. Her M wasn't just a facilitator. 00:17:32.339 --> 00:17:34.680 She was an intellectual challenge to Bond's old 00:17:34.680 --> 00:17:38.819 -school machismo. She famously calls him a misogynistic 00:17:38.819 --> 00:17:42.109 dinosaur in her very first scene. Her M had teeth 00:17:42.109 --> 00:17:44.809 and moral authority drawn directly from Dench's 00:17:44.809 --> 00:17:47.109 stage presence. And she went on to play M in 00:17:47.109 --> 00:17:49.730 eight James Bond films, including a really significant 00:17:49.730 --> 00:17:52.410 plot -driving role in The World is Not Enough 00:17:52.410 --> 00:17:55.569 in 1999, where the villain targets M personally. 00:17:55.769 --> 00:17:57.930 She was deeply integrated into the narrative. 00:17:58.190 --> 00:18:00.589 The climax of her role came in Skyfall in 2012, 00:18:00.930 --> 00:18:03.450 her seventh appearance. That performance was 00:18:03.450 --> 00:18:06.230 praised by critics as compellingly luminous. 00:18:06.329 --> 00:18:08.490 It was the ultimate payoff. It gave her M a full 00:18:08.490 --> 00:18:11.000 emotional arc in a tragic... dramatic conclusion, 00:18:11.279 --> 00:18:13.700 though she did return for a poignant cameo in 00:18:13.700 --> 00:18:16.319 Spectre in 2015. Her presence provided the necessary 00:18:16.319 --> 00:18:18.660 weight for Daniel Craig's grittier, more grounded 00:18:18.660 --> 00:18:21.259 Bond. She was his emotional anchor. So at the 00:18:21.259 --> 00:18:23.359 same time she's becoming internationally famous 00:18:23.359 --> 00:18:27.000 as this stern spymaster, Hollywood finally realizes 00:18:27.000 --> 00:18:29.980 she isn't just a supporting player, she can anchor 00:18:29.980 --> 00:18:32.700 a serious drama. And this pivot was incredibly 00:18:32.700 --> 00:18:34.799 rapid and effective. Her Hollywood breakthrough 00:18:34.799 --> 00:18:37.680 came as Queen Victoria in Mrs. Brown in 1997. 00:18:38.430 --> 00:18:40.269 And that film was originally intended for British 00:18:40.269 --> 00:18:43.390 television, right? It was. But its success, upon 00:18:43.390 --> 00:18:47.609 release earning over $13 million worldwide, catapulted 00:18:47.609 --> 00:18:50.630 her into the Oscar conversation. It secured her 00:18:50.630 --> 00:18:53.150 first Academy Award nomination for Best Actress. 00:18:53.250 --> 00:18:56.519 She was 63 years old. Imagine that. Achieving 00:18:56.519 --> 00:18:58.680 your first Oscar nomination as a lead actress 00:18:58.680 --> 00:19:00.799 in your mid -60s, it's nearly unprecedented. 00:19:01.240 --> 00:19:04.180 And she had a fantastic, highly quotable anecdote 00:19:04.180 --> 00:19:06.700 about the film's acquisition. Yes. While accepting 00:19:06.700 --> 00:19:09.660 a BFI award in 2011, she joked the film launched 00:19:09.660 --> 00:19:12.460 her career and that she got a fake tattoo of 00:19:12.460 --> 00:19:14.500 Harvey Weinstein's name on her backside. Which 00:19:14.500 --> 00:19:17.180 was a joke, to be clear. Yes, a joke about his 00:19:17.180 --> 00:19:19.339 successful acquisition and distribution of the 00:19:19.339 --> 00:19:22.700 movie. But that story perfectly illustrates the 00:19:22.700 --> 00:19:25.559 sudden, powerful acceleration of her visibility 00:19:25.559 --> 00:19:29.420 in the late 90s. She was finally engaging with 00:19:29.420 --> 00:19:31.559 the American film industry at its highest level. 00:19:31.740 --> 00:19:34.460 And then, just one year later, comes the second 00:19:34.460 --> 00:19:36.519 breakthrough that cemented her global status. 00:19:37.130 --> 00:19:39.190 Shakespeare in Love. Back to the eight minute 00:19:39.190 --> 00:19:41.910 win. We have to return to it. But I wonder, was 00:19:41.910 --> 00:19:44.690 it purely eight minutes of brilliance? Or was 00:19:44.690 --> 00:19:47.650 that win also a recognition of the 40 years of 00:19:47.650 --> 00:19:50.190 unrewarded stage work that preceded it? That 00:19:50.190 --> 00:19:52.970 is the essential deep dive question. While the 00:19:52.970 --> 00:19:55.289 performance itself, full of regal authority and 00:19:55.289 --> 00:19:58.109 wit, was brilliant, it's highly likely the Oscar 00:19:58.109 --> 00:20:01.170 was partially a cumulative recognition. Hollywood 00:20:01.170 --> 00:20:04.250 rarely celebrates theater stars adequately until 00:20:04.250 --> 00:20:06.349 they do something utterly undeniable. The New 00:20:06.349 --> 00:20:08.349 York Times called her Elizabeth I, one of the 00:20:08.349 --> 00:20:10.849 film's utmost treats. She was just dominant in 00:20:10.849 --> 00:20:13.490 those brief moments. And she delivered that legendary, 00:20:13.690 --> 00:20:16.250 perfectly timed acceptance joke, saying on stage, 00:20:16.589 --> 00:20:19.390 I feel for eight minutes on the screen, I should 00:20:19.390 --> 00:20:22.420 only get a little bit of him. That witty self 00:20:22.420 --> 00:20:24.799 -deprecation combined with her immense authority 00:20:24.799 --> 00:20:27.960 is her perfect professional signature. And we 00:20:27.960 --> 00:20:29.940 should note that she didn't abandon the stage 00:20:29.940 --> 00:20:33.200 during this film explosion. Not at all. She maintained 00:20:33.200 --> 00:20:35.440 her theatrical roots by winning the Tony Award 00:20:35.440 --> 00:20:39.420 in 1999 for her Broadway performance in Sir David 00:20:39.420 --> 00:20:42.700 Hare's Amy's View. Within three years, she conquered 00:20:42.700 --> 00:20:45.660 British film, American film, and Broadway theater. 00:20:45.900 --> 00:20:48.079 The new millennium, however, brought immense 00:20:48.079 --> 00:20:50.930 personal tragedy. Her husband, Michael Williams. 00:20:51.170 --> 00:20:53.769 Her co -star from A Fine Romance. Died of lung 00:20:53.769 --> 00:20:56.910 cancer in January 2001 after 30 years of marriage. 00:20:57.150 --> 00:20:59.009 This is where that resilience thesis we mentioned 00:20:59.009 --> 00:21:01.769 really finds its application. She spoke about 00:21:01.769 --> 00:21:04.390 this time with surprising candor. She took on 00:21:04.390 --> 00:21:06.410 the filming of the shipping news in Newfoundland 00:21:06.410 --> 00:21:09.430 almost immediately after the funeral. She credited 00:21:09.430 --> 00:21:11.910 that relentless work as her rescue. She did. 00:21:11.970 --> 00:21:14.309 She said, grief supplies you with an enormous 00:21:14.309 --> 00:21:16.690 amount of energy. I needed to use that up. The 00:21:16.690 --> 00:21:18.809 discipline of the craft became a vital emotional 00:21:18.809 --> 00:21:21.089 outlet for her. So instead of retreating, she 00:21:21.089 --> 00:21:23.769 dove deeper into work. And that dedication continued 00:21:23.769 --> 00:21:26.789 to pay off. It did. She earned her fourth Oscar 00:21:26.789 --> 00:21:30.230 nomination in just five years for portraying 00:21:30.230 --> 00:21:33.910 the novelist Iris Murdoch in Iris in 2001, sharing 00:21:33.910 --> 00:21:36.230 the role with Kate Winslet. Her output during 00:21:36.230 --> 00:21:38.849 the 2000s is just a testament to her eclectic 00:21:38.849 --> 00:21:41.369 taste. She was providing lovely voice work as 00:21:41.369 --> 00:21:44.509 Miss Lily in the children's series Angelina Ballerina. 00:21:44.569 --> 00:21:46.630 The sweet collaboration where her daughter, Fenty 00:21:46.630 --> 00:21:48.829 Williams, voiced Angelina. But then you have 00:21:48.829 --> 00:21:52.289 this bizarre juxtaposition. High art followed 00:21:52.289 --> 00:21:56.119 by... Well, utter sci -fi absurdity. You're talking 00:21:56.119 --> 00:21:58.599 about Riddick. She's playing Lady Bracknell in 00:21:58.599 --> 00:22:01.079 The Importance of Being Earnest in 2002, one 00:22:01.079 --> 00:22:03.180 of the most quotable roles in English literature. 00:22:03.380 --> 00:22:05.519 And then two years later, she appears in the 00:22:05.519 --> 00:22:08.259 sci -fi sequel The Chronicles of Riddick. The 00:22:08.259 --> 00:22:10.460 Riddick role is essential to understanding her 00:22:10.460 --> 00:22:12.900 personality. Vin Diesel specifically wanted to 00:22:12.900 --> 00:22:14.940 work with her, and writers tailored the character 00:22:14.940 --> 00:22:16.900 for her. And what did she say about it? The anecdote 00:22:16.900 --> 00:22:20.299 she shared is classic dinch. She called it tremendous 00:22:20.299 --> 00:22:23.839 fun. But admitted she had absolutely no idea 00:22:23.839 --> 00:22:26.319 what was going on in the plot. That is just incredible. 00:22:26.400 --> 00:22:28.400 She's a great actress, but she also seems to 00:22:28.400 --> 00:22:30.740 recognize that cinema is at times inherently 00:22:30.740 --> 00:22:33.839 ridiculous and she can just embrace that fun. 00:22:34.140 --> 00:22:36.559 And she immediately counterbalanced that with 00:22:36.559 --> 00:22:39.180 the acclaimed English drama Ladies in Lavender, 00:22:39.240 --> 00:22:41.799 starring alongside her friend and frequent collaborator 00:22:41.799 --> 00:22:44.920 Maggie Smith. She's constantly balancing the 00:22:44.920 --> 00:22:48.049 highbrow with the slightly bizarre. and the deeply 00:22:48.049 --> 00:22:51.049 sentimental. Then came the ultimate period role 00:22:51.049 --> 00:22:54.430 challenge. Lady Catherine de Bourgh in Joe Wright's 00:22:54.430 --> 00:22:56.849 hit adaptation of Pride and Prejudice. And we 00:22:56.849 --> 00:22:58.529 have another wonderful casting anecdote here. 00:22:58.950 --> 00:23:01.329 Wright was desperate for her, knowing she embodied 00:23:01.329 --> 00:23:04.289 that necessary aristocratic severity. He persuaded 00:23:04.289 --> 00:23:06.549 her by writing a playful note saying, I love 00:23:06.549 --> 00:23:08.250 it when you play a bitch. Please come and be 00:23:08.250 --> 00:23:10.390 a bitch for me. And her willingness to embrace 00:23:10.390 --> 00:23:12.769 that role, the difficult character, provided 00:23:12.769 --> 00:23:16.019 the film with its necessary menace. And she was 00:23:16.019 --> 00:23:18.720 only available for one week. The production had 00:23:18.720 --> 00:23:21.700 to prioritize her scenes, which is a huge testament 00:23:21.700 --> 00:23:24.759 to her star power. The film was a massive hit. 00:23:24.920 --> 00:23:27.200 She finished the decade with a powerful, intense 00:23:27.200 --> 00:23:30.819 drama, earning her sixth Oscar nomination for 00:23:30.819 --> 00:23:33.440 Notes on a Scandal. Opposite Cate Blanchett. 00:23:33.759 --> 00:23:36.859 She played Barbara Covett, a London teacher who 00:23:36.859 --> 00:23:39.859 becomes obsessed and manipulative, a truly dark, 00:23:40.000 --> 00:23:43.019 complex character. Dench stated that she was 00:23:43.019 --> 00:23:46.259 thrilled to be asked to play that woman, to try 00:23:46.259 --> 00:23:48.940 to find a humanity in that dreadful person. And 00:23:48.940 --> 00:23:51.240 that statement just encapsulates her core objective, 00:23:51.480 --> 00:23:53.720 doesn't it? Injecting humanity into even the 00:23:53.720 --> 00:23:55.920 most morally deficient character. It connects 00:23:55.920 --> 00:23:57.740 right back to the integrity developed during 00:23:57.740 --> 00:24:00.200 her Quaker -infused theatrical roots. And we 00:24:00.200 --> 00:24:02.099 should also briefly mention her work anchoring 00:24:02.099 --> 00:24:05.460 the acclaimed BBC series Cranford in 2007. Again, 00:24:05.539 --> 00:24:08.240 balancing these intense global film roles with 00:24:08.240 --> 00:24:10.700 beloved high -quality character -driven British 00:24:10.700 --> 00:24:12.849 television. It's that balance that defines her, 00:24:12.910 --> 00:24:16.029 always. As Dame Judi Dench entered her late 70s 00:24:16.029 --> 00:24:18.750 and 80s, her career trajectory, it didn't diminish 00:24:18.750 --> 00:24:21.630 at all. If anything, it intensified. Right. She 00:24:21.630 --> 00:24:23.890 solidified her position as an undeniable box 00:24:23.890 --> 00:24:26.990 office draw, especially for films targeting specialty 00:24:26.990 --> 00:24:29.789 audiences, while simultaneously returning to 00:24:29.789 --> 00:24:31.430 the deepest parts of her theatrical identity. 00:24:31.900 --> 00:24:34.680 The 2010s kicked off with this enormous, unexpected 00:24:34.680 --> 00:24:37.519 commercial success that confirmed her global 00:24:37.519 --> 00:24:40.519 bankability. The best exotic Marigold Hotel in 00:24:40.519 --> 00:24:44.079 2012 and its sequel in 2015. These films starred 00:24:44.079 --> 00:24:46.920 a who's who of legendary British actors Dench, 00:24:47.059 --> 00:24:49.660 Maggie Smith, Bill Nighy, and they became these 00:24:49.660 --> 00:24:52.619 surprise international box office hits. It proved 00:24:52.619 --> 00:24:55.380 that star power isn't exclusive to youth or action 00:24:55.380 --> 00:24:58.539 heroes. Critics called them sweet stories about 00:24:58.539 --> 00:25:02.059 the senior set and praised Dench as a resilient 00:25:02.059 --> 00:25:04.619 marvel. The success showed that the market would 00:25:04.619 --> 00:25:07.180 embrace sophisticated, character -driven comedy 00:25:07.180 --> 00:25:09.680 anchored by established talent. And at the same 00:25:09.680 --> 00:25:11.640 time she was conquering the global box office, 00:25:11.859 --> 00:25:14.200 she was returning to her true love, the stage, 00:25:14.319 --> 00:25:16.279 and breaking records. Her theatrical returns 00:25:16.279 --> 00:25:19.099 were phenomenal. In 2010, she played Titania 00:25:19.099 --> 00:25:21.859 in A Midsummer Night's Dream, nearly 50 years 00:25:21.859 --> 00:25:24.019 after her first performance in that role. And 00:25:24.019 --> 00:25:26.220 in 2016, she won Best Supporting Actress for 00:25:26.220 --> 00:25:28.859 The Winter's Tale. And that was her eighth Olivier 00:25:28.859 --> 00:25:31.799 Award win as a performer. Breaking her own record. 00:25:32.119 --> 00:25:35.430 Eight competitive performance Oliviers. That 00:25:35.430 --> 00:25:38.130 record emphasizes maybe more than her Oscars, 00:25:38.130 --> 00:25:41.009 where her primary devotion and technical mastery 00:25:41.009 --> 00:25:43.450 reside. And that dedication to challenging material 00:25:43.450 --> 00:25:45.890 continued in film, particularly in her partnership 00:25:45.890 --> 00:25:48.170 with director Stephen Frears. Which led to her 00:25:48.170 --> 00:25:51.150 seventh Oscar nomination for the title role in 00:25:51.150 --> 00:25:54.069 Philomena in 2013. What's so fascinating about 00:25:54.069 --> 00:25:56.170 the critical reaction to Philomena is how it 00:25:56.170 --> 00:25:58.890 highlighted a change in her persona. Time magazine 00:25:58.890 --> 00:26:05.279 captured it beautifully, writing, behind her, 00:26:05.359 --> 00:26:08.279 often as queens and other frosty matriarchs. 00:26:08.299 --> 00:26:10.920 So the warmth under pressure she radiates here 00:26:10.920 --> 00:26:13.759 is nearly a surprise. And that warmth, that vulnerability 00:26:13.759 --> 00:26:16.579 was what made the performance so devastatingly 00:26:16.579 --> 00:26:19.440 effective. It showed her power to connect intimately 00:26:19.440 --> 00:26:21.980 with the audience through a quiet, searching 00:26:21.980 --> 00:26:24.619 character. She reprised the Queen Victoria role 00:26:24.619 --> 00:26:27.019 a second time in Victoria and Abdul in 2017, 00:26:27.480 --> 00:26:30.299 earning her 12th Golden Globe nomination and 00:26:30.299 --> 00:26:32.559 her collaboration with Kenneth Branagh, a director 00:26:32.559 --> 00:26:34.470 she first met. toward in the 80s, continued. 00:26:34.829 --> 00:26:37.009 She appeared in his Murder on the Orient Express, 00:26:37.329 --> 00:26:40.130 followed by a deeply personal project for Braina, 00:26:40.210 --> 00:26:43.029 All Is True, where she played Anne Hathaway, 00:26:43.130 --> 00:26:46.250 Shakespeare's wife. And most recently, she received 00:26:46.250 --> 00:26:48.950 her eighth Academy Award nomination for Belfast. 00:26:49.049 --> 00:26:52.339 Making her one of the oldest nominees ever. That 00:26:52.339 --> 00:26:54.900 eighth nomination, spanning five best actress 00:26:54.900 --> 00:26:57.680 and three best supporting nods, is just a remarkable 00:26:57.680 --> 00:27:00.720 measure of her consistent power. She truly is 00:27:00.720 --> 00:27:02.900 an anchor in whatever project she chooses. However, 00:27:03.099 --> 00:27:04.740 we have to acknowledge that not every choice 00:27:04.740 --> 00:27:07.259 is a triumph. Oh, yes. Even the greats take the 00:27:07.259 --> 00:27:09.900 occasional misstep. We are, of course, talking 00:27:09.900 --> 00:27:13.240 about the 2019 film adaptation of Cats. The notorious 00:27:13.240 --> 00:27:16.960 Cats bomb. Universally panned, criticized heavily 00:27:16.960 --> 00:27:20.299 for the Uncanny Valley CGI, a box office failure. 00:27:20.970 --> 00:27:23.029 She starred as old Deuteronomy. And while it 00:27:23.029 --> 00:27:25.890 was a spectacular failure, it does show a strategic 00:27:25.890 --> 00:27:28.569 openness to risk or perhaps a commitment to working 00:27:28.569 --> 00:27:30.990 with friends, even when the material is shaky. 00:27:31.150 --> 00:27:33.470 What does that willingness to accept utter sci 00:27:33.470 --> 00:27:36.410 -fi absurdity and Riddick or feline CGI disaster 00:27:36.410 --> 00:27:38.650 in Cats say about her? I think it suggests that 00:27:38.650 --> 00:27:41.150 the joy of the craft and the experience outweighs 00:27:41.150 --> 00:27:43.640 the fear of failure. That focus on the joy of 00:27:43.640 --> 00:27:46.000 the experience seems critical, especially when 00:27:46.000 --> 00:27:47.940 we look at her personal resilience during this 00:27:47.940 --> 00:27:51.240 late stage of her career. She has found a wonderful 00:27:51.240 --> 00:27:54.660 new partnership. Yes. Since 2010, she's been 00:27:54.660 --> 00:27:57.039 in a committed relationship with conservationist 00:27:57.039 --> 00:27:59.460 David Mills. And the origin story is charming. 00:27:59.680 --> 00:28:03.059 Oh, it's perfect. They met when she agreed to 00:28:03.059 --> 00:28:05.400 officiate at the opening of a new squirrel enclosure 00:28:05.400 --> 00:28:07.920 at the British Wildlife Center, where he's the 00:28:07.920 --> 00:28:10.359 founder. It sounds exactly like a plot point 00:28:10.359 --> 00:28:13.400 from a fine romance. But underneath that charm 00:28:13.400 --> 00:28:15.799 and professional energy, she's been dealing with 00:28:15.799 --> 00:28:19.039 profound health struggles. Most notably macular 00:28:19.039 --> 00:28:21.660 degeneration, which was diagnosed in 2012. And 00:28:21.660 --> 00:28:23.940 this condition directly impacts her ability to 00:28:23.940 --> 00:28:26.099 work in the way she once did. It does. It requires 00:28:26.099 --> 00:28:28.559 regular eye injections, and critically, it means 00:28:28.559 --> 00:28:30.400 she can no longer read scripts clearly herself. 00:28:30.900 --> 00:28:33.279 She relies on others, her daughter, friends, 00:28:33.619 --> 00:28:36.299 assistants, to read lines to her, which must 00:28:36.299 --> 00:28:39.069 require intense focus and memorization. That 00:28:39.069 --> 00:28:41.789 shift in process is massive. For a stage actor 00:28:41.789 --> 00:28:44.509 whose life is defined by learning complex classical 00:28:44.509 --> 00:28:47.190 verse, losing the ability to visually read a 00:28:47.190 --> 00:28:50.029 script is a fundamental challenge. And she has 00:28:50.029 --> 00:28:52.750 been incredibly candid about it. Reports from 00:28:52.750 --> 00:28:55.769 2024 suggested her eyesight had deteriorated 00:28:55.769 --> 00:28:57.250 to the point where she couldn't go out alone. 00:28:57.990 --> 00:29:00.789 An interview in late 2025 detailed the severity, 00:29:01.029 --> 00:29:03.369 stating she couldn't recognize people, watch 00:29:03.369 --> 00:29:06.200 television, or read. Yet despite these profound 00:29:06.200 --> 00:29:09.180 physical limitations, she has consistently maintained 00:29:09.180 --> 00:29:11.940 that she still wants to carry on working. That 00:29:11.940 --> 00:29:14.359 unwavering desire is the ultimate definition 00:29:14.359 --> 00:29:17.400 of her professional resilience. And this defiance 00:29:17.400 --> 00:29:20.400 also fuels her public advocacy against ageism. 00:29:20.519 --> 00:29:23.559 She has spoken out strongly saying, I don't want 00:29:23.559 --> 00:29:25.819 to be told I'm too old to try something. Age 00:29:25.819 --> 00:29:27.940 is a number. It drives me absolutely spare when 00:29:27.940 --> 00:29:30.559 people say, are you going to retire? Beyond the 00:29:30.559 --> 00:29:33.460 screen and stage, her influence just permeates 00:29:33.460 --> 00:29:35.539 pop culture, sometimes in the most unexpected 00:29:35.539 --> 00:29:37.819 ways. Absolutely. The full spectrum of British 00:29:37.819 --> 00:29:39.960 culture. She's a longtime supporter and honorary 00:29:39.960 --> 00:29:42.319 patron of Everton FC. And then there's the viral 00:29:42.319 --> 00:29:44.380 moment. Where she featured in a video rapping 00:29:44.380 --> 00:29:47.539 with UK grime MC Lethal Bizzle, promoting his 00:29:47.539 --> 00:29:50.779 clothing brand Stay Dench, using the slang term. 00:29:51.160 --> 00:29:53.960 Dench, which means excellent or cool. From the 00:29:53.960 --> 00:29:56.920 Duchess of Malfi to a grime MC, she does it all. 00:29:57.079 --> 00:29:59.980 And she's also been unafraid to use her authority 00:29:59.980 --> 00:30:03.059 to enter cultural and ethical debates. Most notably 00:30:03.059 --> 00:30:06.920 in 2022, when she publicly criticized the massive 00:30:06.920 --> 00:30:09.920 Netflix show The Crown. She accused it of crude 00:30:09.920 --> 00:30:13.440 sensationalism and being cruelly unjust. And 00:30:13.440 --> 00:30:16.200 crucially, she urged the show to add a fictional 00:30:16.200 --> 00:30:19.509 drama disclaimer. This highlights her insistence 00:30:19.509 --> 00:30:22.430 on theatrical integrity and factual honesty in 00:30:22.430 --> 00:30:25.089 public portrayals. That criticism rings particularly 00:30:25.089 --> 00:30:26.829 true coming from someone who has successfully 00:30:26.829 --> 00:30:29.349 portrayed two queens with such nuanced realism. 00:30:29.670 --> 00:30:31.950 And finally, her advocacy extends to breaking 00:30:31.950 --> 00:30:34.910 real world barriers. Even in 2024, she continues 00:30:34.910 --> 00:30:36.950 to make history, becoming one of the first female 00:30:36.950 --> 00:30:38.869 members of the Garrick Club. Which, for those 00:30:38.869 --> 00:30:41.329 unfamiliar, is a famously exclusive historic 00:30:41.329 --> 00:30:44.150 London club, which had maintained a male -only 00:30:44.150 --> 00:30:46.940 membership for nearly 200 years. To be breaking 00:30:46.940 --> 00:30:50.339 that specific historical barrier in her 90s just 00:30:50.339 --> 00:30:53.059 reinforces her status as a cultural giant who 00:30:53.059 --> 00:30:55.460 defies all limitations, both personal and societal. 00:30:56.200 --> 00:30:59.549 Hashtag hashtag outro. So to summarize the long, 00:30:59.549 --> 00:31:02.029 complex life of Dame Judi Dench, what we really 00:31:02.029 --> 00:31:04.230 see is a career built on astonishing versatility 00:31:04.230 --> 00:31:07.109 and constant artistic challenges. She mastered 00:31:07.109 --> 00:31:09.869 classical Shakespearean tragedy and comedy, became 00:31:09.869 --> 00:31:13.170 the face of modern espionage as M, and achieved 00:31:13.170 --> 00:31:15.670 massive late -career film success as a leading 00:31:15.670 --> 00:31:17.990 lady in dramas like Mrs. Brown and Philomena. 00:31:18.269 --> 00:31:20.069 And all of this was accomplished while maintaining 00:31:20.069 --> 00:31:22.349 this profound personal resilience in the face 00:31:22.349 --> 00:31:25.440 of immense grease and deteriorating health. Her 00:31:25.440 --> 00:31:28.079 success, as we've seen, is underpinned by undeniable 00:31:28.079 --> 00:31:30.579 talent, quantified perfectly by those eight total 00:31:30.579 --> 00:31:33.339 Academy Award nominations, five for Best Actress, 00:31:33.400 --> 00:31:35.740 three for Best Supporting Actress. And that distribution 00:31:35.740 --> 00:31:38.440 confirms her power both as a central anchor and 00:31:38.440 --> 00:31:41.119 as an immediate, impactful force player. She 00:31:41.119 --> 00:31:43.140 is truly an acting force driven by integrity, 00:31:43.400 --> 00:31:45.990 not just celebrity. Her stage work, her ability 00:31:45.990 --> 00:31:48.630 to make profound artistic statements in just 00:31:48.630 --> 00:31:51.690 minutes, and her continued history -making achievements 00:31:51.690 --> 00:31:54.410 like the Garrett Club membership all reinforce 00:31:54.410 --> 00:31:57.470 that status. Her enduring success, and here is 00:31:57.470 --> 00:31:59.230 the provocative thought for you, the listener, 00:31:59.410 --> 00:32:02.690 to carry away, it raises an important question 00:32:02.690 --> 00:32:04.529 about our current media landscape. What's that? 00:32:17.379 --> 00:32:27.420 Okay. even in her 90s, facing blindness reveal 00:32:27.420 --> 00:32:29.640 about the difference between acting excellence 00:32:29.640 --> 00:32:32.480 and celebrity longevity in modern media. That's 00:32:32.480 --> 00:32:34.400 a great question. It suggests that when the foundation 00:32:34.400 --> 00:32:36.839 is built on excellence, on taking risks for the 00:32:36.839 --> 00:32:39.660 craft, and on finding humanity in every role, 00:32:39.839 --> 00:32:41.940 the stardom, no matter how late it arrives, will 00:32:41.940 --> 00:32:44.640 be enduring and undeniable. She consistently 00:32:44.640 --> 00:32:47.859 chose subsist over superficiality. And that integrity 00:32:47.859 --> 00:32:50.559 is precisely what propelled her into becoming 00:32:50.559 --> 00:32:52.940 one of the most decorated and revered performers 00:32:52.940 --> 00:32:56.509 in history. An excellent thought to end on, connecting 00:32:56.509 --> 00:32:58.809 the classical foundations to the demands of the 00:32:58.809 --> 00:33:01.230 modern era. Thank you for joining us for this 00:33:01.230 --> 00:33:03.569 deep dive into the extraordinary life and career 00:33:03.569 --> 00:33:05.789 of Dame Judi Dench. We'll catch you next time.