This is pineapple juice!
says actor Tim Pigott-Smith with a laugh, when asked if he is enjoying a pre-show cocktail.
But the solemnity definitely doesnt last.
Credit: Jemal Countess/Getty Images
[Spoiler alert: This interview reveals details about the plot ofKing Charles III.]
TIM PIGOTT-SMITH:Well, thats weird isnt it?
But thats all Rupert Goold, my director.
Joan Marcus
His idea was that we mustnt impersonate.
So I do a lot of little things.
Charles talks out of the sides of his mouth.
He twists his ring on his finger.
And this allows the audience to place their image of Charles on me.
Its almost like Im his shadow.
You look at the shape but you get a sense of him.
A lot of Americans have affection for the royal family.
Thats funny, isnt it, how much people here care?
I think the plays particularly challenging for those people.
But Im glad it wasnt my first experience of Broadway, because it is overwhelming.
America is very generous but its also a bit wacky, you know.
And I had more stuff in my dressing room than I could imagine.
If I hadnt had the other two experiences on Broadway it mightve knocked me off center.
And it says November the 12th 1974.
Forty-one years ago, my God.
What are you memories from then?
We were at the Broadhurst Theatre.
I think Broadway was just at the end of that mythic age.
Our opening night party was at Sardis and Ethel Merman was there.
My wife was also in the company, which suited quite a lot of Americans.
We got asked out to dinner a lot.
And we did the city, really.
Most of the things I do now are things I did then.
Incredible, isnt it?
Thats a remarkable production.
But its a fantastic piece of work.
I cant remember sitting in a theater where the concentration and focus was so intense throughout.
Absolute stillness in the audience.
CertainlyKing Charles IIIhas a lot more laughs.
It is so funny.
That was the big shock to me.
Reading it, I knew there was fun in it.
Is the reaction different between London and New York?
No, very much the same.
We changed a few references; things that British audiences would get but generally arent part of American culture.
GPS is mentioned here, though it was Sat Nav in London.
Are there digs at the royal family that got a bigger reaction in London?
One of the press asked Charles if he loved her.
And he said, Oh, well, whatever love means.
Boy, it was a terrible answer.
And here it seems to be less so.
So there are those tiny areas, but the bulk of the response is identical.
What are your feelings towards him?
Well, the worst nickname I ever had was Tim Pig-ears-Smith.
I had big ears.
When I was younger it was more pronounced.
So I felt huge sympathy towards Prince Charles over that.
And I thought, Mike Bartlett could have written that line.
I know, absolutely.
Its like that marvelous line I have early on, My life has been a lingering for the throne.
We all know that being in the waiting room is worse than being on the operating table.
And because the queen is the longest serving monarch ever, hes necessarily the longest-serving heir apparent ever.
Oh, I think so, for sure.
It concerns letters that hes sent to government ministers.
He does lobby people in the government over issues he feels strongly about.
And it seems not right that the heir apparent should do so.
And hes been criticized for that, but, I mean, this is a sensitive, educated man.
Its never mentioned in the play, but isnt there the subtext of the Iraq War deep within it.
The Queen was opposed to Tony Blair supporting the U.S. invasion.Blair just apologized, sort of.
Thats to keep himself out of the Hague, isnt it?
I mean, I do have a line which refers to surprising shock and awe.
His mother came to the throne very suddenly.
The brilliance of the play has to do with another scandal in England.
Not the Iraq War but phone hacking.
It goes a very unexpected direction with that.
Of all people, Charles is defending the freedom of the press.
Thats what brings the audience on his side.
Do you agree with that?
Should there be any restrictions on speech?
I thought, What a phenomenal privilege that we can do this royal fantasy in this country.
Thats freedom of speech.
But freedom of speech is something that has to be used responsibly.
I mean,Salman Rushdiegot on the wrong side of freedom of speech.
In my view, he courted that disaster.
Hes a controversialist and he liked it.
Of course the Islamic world was upset by what he had written.
But the reaction to Rushie
The reaction was extreme, of course.
But nevertheless, freedom of speech is something that has to be exercised with responsibility.
You cant just say whatever you like.
And I dont think this play does.
It fantasizes about a situation, which feels plausible.
Mike Bartlett pulls so much from Shakespeare here.Hamlet,Henry IV,Macbeth,King Lear.
Like those plays, what do you think the play is saying about the human condition?
That in life, were absolutely victims of our own character.
In almost in an ancient Greek tragic way.
Ive heard that youre moved to tears during the final scenes.
Most nights, yeah.
I plead with my sons in the play and they reject me.
My own son is 39.
He came here to New York for the press night and hes just lovely.
So, yeah, I think about him as well, when my sons in the play reject me.
The ultimate validation for a British actor is to get a knighthood.
Do you think this play puts you in jeopardy of ever becoming Sir Tim?
A lot of it is about lobbying.
So would you reject a knighthood?
No, I wouldnt reject one.
I think Id be hugely proud of it.
But its like reading reviews.
I dont read them, especially when Im told that there are positive ones.
Because Ill go onstage that night and you know what Ill be thinking?
Oh, look at me.
Im rather good in this, arent I?
