All of Us Strangers star Andrew Scott, SAG snubs and surprises, and more in EW's The Awardist

Andrew Scott opens up about the 'intimate and raw' All of Us Strangers — and the 'physical bravery' required to make it

Interview by Gerrad Hall
Illustration by Sophia Lauren Franco

Andrew Scott is nearly done with a long day of interviews in a Los Angeles hotel, a day that started with news that he received a Golden Globe nomination for his work in the film All of Us Strangers. But upon being congratulated, it almost seems like the hours of talking to journalists have washed away any memory of the morning's excitement. One can't really blame him.

"Oh. Thank you very much," he says with a laugh after being reminded of the achievement.

It's the latest in a growing list for the Andrew Haigh film — seven British Independent Film Awards wins, five Golden Globe nominations, a Los Angeles Film Critics Association win, three Gotham Awards nominations, nine London Film Critics' Circle noms, three Spirit Awards noms, and several more — where the Fleabag and Sherlock actor plays Adam, a lonely writer living in a nearly vacant London highrise who's trying to come to terms with the tragic death of his parents (Claire Foy, Jamie Bell) decades earlier, when he was just 12, by visiting with their ghosts. In the process, he's able to reconnect in deeply poignant ways, sharing with them about his life, coming out to them — even getting another long-desired hug or climbing into their bed at night as a child would.

When he's not talking to spirits, he's striking up a romance with a neighbor, Harry, played by Paul Mescal. Another lost soul, the two connect in ways Adam maybe didn't even think possible for himself — intimate in ways both physically and emotionally.

Below, Scott shares his journey with the film — both his experience making it and with audience's reaction — how he simultaneously navigated grief and newfound love, why he finds it hard to watch the film, those sex scenes with Mescal, and more.

ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: Congrats on the Golden Globe nomination! How are you feeling about the reception to the film and all of these honors coming your way?

ANDREW SCOTT: I'm really thrilled about it, to be honest. all the accolades. It's nice. Everybody's been sort of honored in some way, the various different departments by various different bodies of people who make these decisions. So it's really thrilling because I really want people to see the film because I think to see the film is to love the film, and I think it makes people feel better. I think it's a cathartic film. There's so much hope in it, and certainly a few tears get shed in it, but I think people come out feeling a sense of, [deep breath] I'm glad I've been through that even though it was intense.

Indeed. Have you been able to sit back and watch and observe and take in the emotions as an audience member?

It's a difficult thing to do. It's a difficult thing to do because you know the plot and the first time you watch it, it's like being in a minor car altercation where you smash into something. You think, okay, what's just happened? Is everybody okay? Have I done serious damage? You have to look around and look at the bumper and you go, everything's okay. That's the first time you see it. You're scanning for noise a little bit and you know the story. So the second time you see it, you're able to watch it with a little bit more objectivity. But this one, I've got to say, I'm going to watch again. I don't love watching my own stuff, but this one I'm going to watch again at some point, maybe when all the cast are together again, because I'm so proud of it. There's so much of me in the character that it's important that I just face that. But I mean, the first time I spoke with an audience, I was very taken aback by how exposing the film is [laughs], how vulnerable I look, and how just intimate and raw it is.

And you're in, I think, pretty much every frame of the film. So there's that.

There's no escape.

Andrew Haigh had told me part of the reason that he really wanted you for this is because he felt you hadn't been given your due and deserved a lead role in a film. When he said that to me, I was like, wait...no, that was a supporting... I was like, this guy has definitely had a lead role, right? Did I dream that?

Well, I have. I've just been in films that not a lot of people have seen. [Laughs] And also, I don't really look at things that way. It's not like I've been going, "Oh my God, I just really desperately want to play a lead in a film." I play an awful lot of leads in the theater, and also I just spent a year playing Tom Ripley (for the upcoming Netflix series Ripley) where he's in so much of that story, and so I wasn't thinking, "Okay, now I've got to get myself a thing." But it is probably quite true because when we've been talking about the film, people have said that to me a lot — "It's your first time" — and I suppose that's true. That's just the way it's happened. There's no intentionality behind it. For example, I'll happily play a supporting part again.

A good role is a good role.

A good role is a good role, and this was certainly one of them.

I kind of joked about how you're in every frame of the film, but did you — in the midst of filming all of that — did you feel that added responsibility on your shoulders?

Just in relation to the stamina of it. I think that's what it is. You're just always there.

And emotional stamina for this one.

Yeah, emotional stamina. I think that's the thing. When you're doing those big set piece scenes with Jamie and Claire, or Jamie or Claire, your job is to just hold onto it as much as you can, the emotionality. It's like holding water a little bit. You've got to make sure that you get that right and you're hitting the right notes at the right time. That's what it's about. And keeping it fresh. Your imagination is interrupted quite a lot on set, just the workings of people going about their day, and you have to keep in a zone. But then also, it's really important for me that you can keep it light and then get access to those things immediately. It's a really weird thing. You just have to be very — particularly in this one — very in touch with how you're feeling. That's helped when you have a really, really good screenplay because you have got this foundation that you think, well, we can't really go wrong.

When Andrew came to you initially, what were your first conversations with him in terms of why he thought you were right for the character, whether you felt you were right for the character?

For me, it's about vulnerability, really. I do feel like that's what I would look for in every single character. I think our mental health is so dependent on how vulnerable we allow ourselves to be. Some of the most mentally ill people in the world project absolutely no vulnerability. I'm thinking about Donald Trump, if I'm honest. If you ask Donald Trump, "How do you feel about dying?" I don't think he would really admit that he might even die. Do you know what I mean? Making a mistake or someone saying, "I feel nervous," or "There's part of me that doesn't feel I'm good enough," that's not something he would ever push out. And that's why I think you can tell that there's something not right there. And so I love those kind of characters who present something which is in opposition to what they actually might be feeling. That makes for very dramatic watching, and I think it's something that audiences love to watch. They go, "He doesn't really mean that, he's saying that out of pride," or "He's saying that to disguise something else," and that's where the really great acting opportunities come, when you're sort of saying what you don't mean and you're meaning what you don't say. That was the real pleasure of this screenplay, and to be with these extraordinary actors.

Adam is a guy who is a bit lost. He's lonely. He's still traumatized by his parents' death decades earlier. And on top of that, he's a gay man and there's a lot of stuff that comes with that. Was all of that weighing on you at all times, or did you compartmentalize and just focus on what was relevant in each specific scene?

There's a well of sadness that he's carrying around that's quite significant, but what he's trying to do is to come out of the well of sadness. He's trying to look towards the light. When something is well written, you have that well of sadness, but what I think is moving about human beings is that they look to the light. I'm trying to get out of this. I'm so lonely. The premise of this movie is that he's so lonely that he's trying to remember his long-lost beloved parents, and he conjures them up through creativity. That's what he does for a living in order to understand himself. So he's got the excitement of seeing them again. So of course it's sad that's happened to them, but actually at the moment, the present-day feelings are ones of, I'm excited to see you, or Now that I have seen you, you're actually saying some pretty brutal, prejudice things to me.

He's just going back into the everyday feelings that he hasn't had the luxury of feeling: It's a luxury for your parents to be annoying you; it's your luxury for them to be smothering. And that's what he immerses himself in. It's a luxury to be able to touch your parents, to be able to hug them, to be able to get into their bed and to get back all that sensuality that he's missing so much. He lives in this apartment block, he's eating cookies on the couch, he's living in a comfort zone. And so by going into that world, telling them who he is, by having that difficult conversation, then he sees himself — and when he sees himself, he's able to go and let somebody else in and love somebody else.

There are such different and wonderful dynamics at play between Paul Mescal on one hand, and then Claire Foy and Jamie Bell on the other. There must be a different creative fulfillment for you on both sides?

Yeah. There were two sort of sections to the film for me and that I had to constantly be aware of — okay, I've just come back from that scene, and that affects this scene, and then this scene will affect that — so that they weren't too singular. It was a very physical part for me. Not necessarily physically demanding where I have to eat chicken and broccoli for three months, but to have that sense of the way we are with our parents as he gets to know them again, he kind of goes into his childhood. So the way he's able to be easy with them and to sort of take their physicality for granted and to get into their bed and to hug them, and what way he would position himself with them — all that stuff was really interesting to me in relation to where would he be in relation to them, because he's an adult, but he loves being with them so much because he's found them again. He kind of wants to be near them. And I find that all that really kind of interesting. We had two weeks, almost like a mini childhood, with Claire and Jamie. So we went through that, and then I had to say goodbye to them. We shot it for the most part chronologically. So saying goodbye to them was sad. And then we went to this section where it was about, in a sense, falling in love with somebody and the tenderness that unfolds between the two characters. So that bit was kind of more joyful and easier in some ways, but required a sort of physical bravery because we have to be naked emotionally and physically.

Yeah, indeed. I mean, sure, the title is All of Us Strangers, but you and Paul are not at this point.

We ain't no strangers.

Did you guys just tackle all of the intimate scenes in one day and get it done?

No, we didn't. With these things, they've got to be...There's the physically intimate scenes, but the real intimate scenes where they get to know each other, they're affectionate with each other, they're the ones that I think are — of course, there's the more sexual, sexy stuff — but I think the reason that people gravitate towards that relationship is the tenderness between them and the stuff that happens pre- and post-sex, which happens to so many of us, where you really connect with someone and you're asking each other questions and you're finding out about each other emotionally.

There's sex and there's intimacy.

Exactly. That intimacy requires coordination too. But the wonderful thing about having an intimacy coordinator is that everybody knows what their boundaries is. Everybody's listened to. So you know that if you're doing something and you feel uncomfortable with it, it's just not going to be in the movie. That's a wonderful feeling because I think for so many years, you go, "I didn't really agree to this, but I don't want to be difficult, and I want to give myself to the story," but then on the day it's hard to sort of say no. So once you know that you can give yourself to the story on the day, but know that that's all fine if you do it in actuality but that'll never be in the movie, allows you to be a bit more comfortable and a little more in the mood for recreating that kind of vibe.

I think that their first physical encounter is so special because they're not just ripping each other's clothes off and going for it. It is, like you said, it's tender, it's quiet, very sensitive. But then it gets a little awkward too because Adam's like, "I got to breathe" [as they kiss]. But was that all part of Andrew's script or those were things that you guys were kind of feeling out in the moment?

Yeah, literally feeling out. [Laughs] Yeah, it was mostly Andrew's script. But then, of course, there's things physically that you discover. And chemistry is all about listening. Chemistry is all about: What's that person doing now? Are they doing that? Or what are they doing there? It's awareness. So you can't write that in a script. That has to come from the bodies and the energy between the two performers... And then of course, me and Paul were just laughing the whole time, because it's 7 o'clock in the morning and you're completely naked in front of all these guys in cargo shorts.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Listen to more of our in-depth interview with Andrew Scott, including the time he turned down a role early in his career, that reveal at the end of All of Us Strangers, and a little tease about the Ripley series, in the podcast below.

Get the latest awards season analysis and hear from the actors, creators, and more who are contenders this season on EW's The Awardist podcast, hosted by Gerrad Hall. Be sure to listen/subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite podcasts, or via your own voice-controlled smart speaker (Alexa, Google Home).

SAG Nominations: Snubs & Surprises

It's inevitable with the announcement of any awards body's nominations: Some very deserving individual isn't going to make this cut. This year, those snubs might sting worse for many given the number of incredible film performances. And when someone doesn't get in, someone else — sometimes surprisingly — does. That is certainly the case with this year's SAG Awards nominations. Ahead, EW awards expert Joey Nolfi breaks down the biggest snubs and surprises from the actors' guild's list of nominees in the film categories.

SNUBS

Julianne Moore and Charles Melton — May December

The supporting stars of Todd Haynes' acting masterclass — which, in many ways, is about, uh, acting — were shut out of the SAG nominations in a major blow to their respective campaigns. They might’ve dominated the precursor circuit, but only in terms of voting bodies that don’t share members with industry groups. Perhaps the film’s meditation on performance (and the mirror it holds up to actors themselves) just rubbed real-life stars the wrong way.

Fantasia Barrino and Taraji P. Henson — The Color Purple

Despite a Golden Globe nomination for Fantasia Barrino, she and fellow Color Purple star Taraji P. Henson were left out of SAG’s individual categories — an odd development, given that Danielle Brooks and the entire ensemble were nominated for Best Supporting Actress and Motion Picture Cast.

Leonardo DiCaprio — Killers of the Flower Moon

Leonardo DiCaprio held on to a front-running slot on the latter part of 2023’s precursor trail, but he was shockingly omitted from SAG’s Best Actor lineup. Lily Gladstone, Robert De Niro, and the overall ensemble were recognized, making it even more head-scratchingly curious as to how DiCaprio — arguably the biggest star of the Killers cast — could be snubbed.

Poor Things ensemble

Emma Stone and Willem Dafoe earned individual nods for Yorgos Lanthimos’ Golden Globe-winning fantasy, but the ensemble cast — which also includes Mark Ruffalo, Ramy Youssef, Christopher Abbott, Kathryn Hunter, Margaret Qualley, and Jerrod Carmichael — apparently wasn’t enough as a collective to earn votes in SAG’s highest competitive category.

SURPRISES

Sterling K. Brown — American Fiction

He hovered around the periphery of the race at the start of the season, but an unexpected SAG nomination for American Fiction actor Sterling K. Brown significantly boosted his profile in the Oscars race at large — and proved that playing gay is still a major selling point for any actor’s bid for an Academy Award nod.

Penélope Cruz — Ferrari

Penélope Cruz is no stranger to sneaking into the Oscar race at the last minute (see: Parallel Mothers). SAG’s inclusion of her in its Best Supporting Actress bracket is either one of SAG’s typical oddball nominations (see: Sarah Silverman for I Smile Back, etc.) or the first major sign of the Cruz train preparing to crash into the Academy’s station on Jan. 23.

Heat Index | Contender or Pretender?

Forget everything you thought was a sure thing for the 2024 Oscars — the Golden Globes winners and SAG nominations just did a number on some contenders who had a lot of growing momentum. So who's now up and down in the race? Joey Nolfi breaks that down below. And be sure to check out his latest nomination predictions here.

Who’s up:

• PICTURE: With five wins at the Golden Globes, Oppenheimer’s dominance at the first major televised awards ceremony of the season might not mean much in terms of voter crossover (the Globes share no membership with actual industry voting bases), but steamrolling a mainstream network’s broadcast offers a huge boost in visibility at a key period, just before the Academy votes for Oscar nominees.
• SUPPORTING ACTRESS: The Holdovers breakout Da’Vine Joy Randolph continued her sweep of the season with another victory at the Golden Globes, cementing her status as the one to beat in this crowded category.
• ACTRESS: Similarly, Killers of the Flower Moon star Lily Gladstone checked off another major accomplishment in the run-up to her inevitable Oscars victory at the Golden Globes, delivering a powerful speech in the Blackfeet language that made all-important headlines that complimented the message of the film.
• SUPPORTING ACTOR: Sterling K. Brown’s American Fiction performance hovered around the periphery of the race in recent weeks, but his SAG nod confirmed his stance as a major contender in the race — and also solidified the notion that actors playing gay is always an undeniable shortcut to awards glory.

Who’s down:

• SUPPORTING ACTOR: In a shocking turn of events, May December — particularly supporting actor Charles Melton — became the latest victim of the awards hype machine, after dominating the non-industry-inclusive critics precursors but failing to receive a single nod for its ensemble cast or any of its individual performers from SAG, which shares heavy crossover with the Academy’s largest and most influential branch that determines nominees for all acting categories and Best Picture.
• ACTOR: Leonardo DiCaprio was also widely thought to be a front-running contender in the Best Actor race, though he, too, sat out of the SAG nominations for his leading role in Killers of the Flower Moon. Securing the SAG/Golden Globes/Critics Choice trifecta before Oscar nominations is no longer the ironclad statistic it used to be (look at Jennifer Lopez for Hustlers, Lady Gaga for House of Gucci, etc.), so DiCaprio is still alive in the hunt for Oscars gold in the wake of this significant blow to his bid.
• SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Unfortunately, as deserving as she is of a Best Supporting Actress nomination, Taraji P. Henson’s campaign for recognition in The Color Purple was delivered a final blow by SAG, which failed to nominate her deserving work in the musical film — though she’ll still compete for the guild’s top honor as part of the movie’s overall ensemble, meaning the project is still in the running for a Best Picture nod at the Oscars.

On the horizon:

• It all comes down to this. With the three most influential industry guilds re-routing the course of the race all in the span of one week, all eyes are now on the Jan. 23 Oscars nominations.

Emmy winner predictions

Delayed four months because of Hollywood's dual strikes, the 2023 Emmys are finally being handed out...in 2024. Final voting took place as scheduled, in August, so we're doing a little time traveling to predict who Academy voters marked on their ballots. Ahead, check out EW critic Kristen Baldwin's predictions in a few key categories, and check out more here.

Outstanding Drama Series

Andor
Better Call Saul
The Crown
House of the Dragon
The Last of Us
Succession (Should/will win)
The White Lotus
Yellowjackets

Let's ease into these predictions with the biggest forgone conclusion of the night: HBO's ridiculously satisfying family saga, which took home five Golden Globes on Jan. 7, will also win a lot of Emmys, including the top drama prize. Would it be nice to see Better Call Saul finally take home the gold after six unparalleled seasons? Sure — but we're holding out hope that Albuquerque's flashiest lawyer won't go home empty-handed...

Outstanding Comedy Series

Abbott Elementary (Should win)
Barry
The Bear (Will win)
Jury Duty
The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel
Only Murders in the Building
Ted Lasso
Wednesday

It's going to be a tight race between Abbott Elementary and The Bear — which dropped its stellar second season just two months before Emmy voting closed — but ongoing love for Quinta Brunson's breakout hit (and the fact that it should have won over Ted Lasso in 2022) could give it a boost. There is a chance, of course, that voters will give Lasso a knee-jerk threepeat despite its not-universally-beloved third season, but I choose to believe they can and will do better.

Outstanding Limited or Anthology Series

Beef (Should/will win)
Dahmer — Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story
Daisy Jones & the Six
Fleishman Is in Trouble
Obi-Wan Kenobi

Beef is exactly the type of series this category should be honoring: Thoughtful, completely original, with a point of view that brings something new — and in this case, underrepresented — to the TV landscape. After winning big at the Globes, producers will need to clear more space on their shelves come Jan. 15.

Emmys Flashback

Check out more from EW's The Awardist, featuring exclusive interviews, analysis, and our podcast diving into all the highlights from the year's best in TV.

Related content:

• See top 2024 Oscars contenders for Best Picture, Actor, Actress, and more
• Awards season calendar 2024: See key show dates for Oscars, Emmys, Golden Globes
• The biggest snubs and surprises from the 2023 Emmy nominations
• Stars react to their 2023 Emmy nominations: 'I'm moved as f---'