When you were acting for Scorsese, did you realize how much voice-over there would be in the finished version of "The Age of Innocence"? I ask because I thought there was too much voice-over in that movie; was Scorsese perhaps insecure in this material and using it as a crutch?

You knew there would be voice-over, but you forget about the voice-over when you're acting. The script really is kind of a blueprint. Nobody can know in advance how much information is going to need to be added in the voice-over, or cut out. And scenes that you thought were absolutely crucial and essential to the narrative can be short-circuited in a look or a glance, because something has happened between actors on the set. Ten pages of dialogue can become redundant. All this finally underlines the point that it's the directors' medium; it's their decision as to how much you need.

I suppose [voice-over] is a very seductive tool if you're working with a book that's recognized as a classic of literature. If, as you identify it, there's a potential insecurity, then ballasting that by having the actual words of the author could be some kind of insurance -- but that's speculation.

You describe a hush on the set, and Scorsese, aside from one outburst, being extremely courtly.

The man came to work every day shaved, tailored, in an immaculate suit; it was hard to reconcile him with the scruffbox image he had during the making of "Taxi Driver." He looked as if he came out of the barbershop every day.

Joel Silver, the producer of "Hudson Hawk," turns out to be as unforgettable as any of these directors.

He's amazing, unique. How can you not respond to somebody who's that passionate about what he does? It's fantastic.

So in retrospect what went wrong with "Hudson Hawk"?

It was the dream project of the star of the movie, Bruce Willis, who had written the story. He was flying on "Die Hard" I and II, which had just conquered the planet in terms of box office, and, aside from the director (Michael Lehmann), he was working with a team of people he had worked with before. He wanted to make a send-up of Bond caper-type movies, and I think it just spiraled out of control. Maybe if Bruce had directed it himself and followed his idea of what it should have been all the way through, it might have been more coherent. As it turned out there were maybe too many hands spoiling for the soup ladle.

You've tended to work closer to home and to do more British TV work in recent years.

That's partly because there's been a resurgence of the film industry in England subsequent to "Four Weddings and a Funeral," five or six years ago. I can work here rather than go out with my colonial begging-bowl, asking, "Please give me a job in America." And the thing of actors in England, going back and forth between doing plays, radio, TV and movies -- that comes of economic necessity and the smallness of the market. If you say I will exclusively do only radio, TV, the stage or movies, you'd be hard-pressed to make a living.

And in this resurgent British industry, do you have any cheerful rivalries going with mates like Hugh Grant?

I don't think anything is ever cheerful about rivalry. It's always lethal -- lethal and polite. The pecking order about how people stand, and how they're doing, is an ongoing yo-yo. The consolation is that if you consider any two great screen icons -- say, Charlie Chaplin and Greta Garbo -- you see that nobody's career goes on a constant upward trajectory, every single one has had very identifiable bombs, troughs and lows, as well as highs.

And the speed with which this seems to be happening is so fast now. Get the last 10 covers of "Vanity Fair." Look at the picture of their newest, hottest, most highly paid, barely-20-year-old God's gift to whatever. Six months later you're hard-pressed, despite the eight movies they have coming out, to know who they are or whether they're going to survive that long.

Did you have any qualms about taking on the memory of Leslie Howard with "The Scarlet Pimpernel"?

No, only because most of the people who knew him are dead! He was so absolutely brilliant and definitive in it. I just had to up and run with it. Luckily, nobody's old enough and staying up late enough to remember him in it.

Recent Stories

Strangers in a strange land
Shot over 23 years, Ellen Kuras' haunting Oscar contender "The Betrayal" follows a Laotian immigrant family's agonizing American odyssey.
Bauer power
Insurgents! Hand grenades! Torture! Fox's two-hour special "24: Redemption" offers a quick fix of Jack to hold us until the show's January premiere.
"Bolt"
This 3-D animated tale about a canine superhero is clever and action-packed -- but is it too culturally savvy for its own good?
"Twilight"
Catherine Hardwicke's erotic vampire blockbuster finds the sweet spot where Gothic literature and the iPod meet.
The Sexiest Man Living 2008
He is a rogue, a gentleman and a brilliant actor. We loved him through good times and (very) bad, and we're so glad he's back.

Daily Newsletter

Get Salon in your mailbox!