Everyone who watches the hugely popular Netflix show Bridgerton knows that Edmund Bridgerton is dead. Rupert Evans, who plays the role in the second season of Shondaland’s major hit series, was also aware of the fact when he got the role. But at the same time, he knew that the character provided a very significant part of the narrative and was too good an opportunity to pass.

The British actor, whose career on the big screen started in 2004 playing FBI agent John Myers in Guillermo del Toro’s Hellboy adaptation, is a veteran of period drama and has appeared in shows such as the BBC’s Emma in 2009 and Fingersmith in 2005. He also portrayed Frank Frink on the Amazon series The Man in the High Castle and plays Harry Greenwood on the CW’s series Charmed.

We spoke to Rupert from Vermont, where he is currently shooting Charmed, working both in front of the camera as an actor, and behind it as an episodic director.

You have done a lot of TV and TV series before – both at home in the UK, where you have made several BBC series, and in the US too. How does Bridgerton stand out?

The showrunner Chris Van Dusen was very particular and very collaborative, which is not always the case, and I was very touched by the whole setup. Shondaland is very impressive. They were very interested in talking to me, wanted to know what I thought, and listened to the ideas that I had. So, it was very collaborative and great. It doesn’t always happen on a big show, but they always seemed to find the time for that on Bridgerton.

What do you think makes Bridgerton such a popular series?

I think the first season caught a moment for all of us. I think the pandemic and the fact that people were at home and watching television more than they would, and maybe they were looking for some kind of escape. I think it was a sort of love story that captured people’s hearts. I think the success of it caught everyone by surprise. So, to be asked to come around and do the second season was just great. It’s always nice to be part of something you have already seen, so it was really fun. It was really exciting.

But what do you think made Bridgerton in particular so special and made it such a huge success?

Storytelling – TV, film and theater – is within our DNA. It is something that we all innately understand. It is something that we are brought up with. Our parents are reading to us as babies, so I think stories are fundamental to us. There is something that happens sometimes along the way with shows where everything fits – the timing, the actors, the script, the topic. Invariably, it is about love, because I think people are drawn to that like no other topic. That is why people go and see Romeo and Juliet in the theatre and why people will go and watch Pretty Woman for the hundredth time on TV or in the cinema because there is something they want to relive and something they identify with. I think that with Bridgerton, it was the acting and the excitement of a love story: will they or will they not? The love story in Season One caught people by surprise, and they became drawn in and involved in a way that they might not normally be in other shows. I think everything clicked into place and that happens with some shows. We all search for that in every job we have. We try to create that magic in every job, which nobody can really explain to you. Bridgerton has that. If I knew the answer, I would definitely bottle it and be creating other shows with it.

Talk about the role you play in the show as the deceased patriarch, Edmund Bridgerton. Why was this was an interesting part for you?

First of all, I knew he was dead, but he underpinned the first season, and everybody talked about him: the family and the children talked about him, and the wife, Violet, talked about him a lot. So, it was lovely to bring that person to life having witnessed people talking about him, and what kind of person he was, and particularly his marriage as the bedrock. It was fun for me to try to capture that in the moments that I have.

Did you watch the first season before you got the role, or did you have to go and do research afterward?

I had not watched it all, but I had certainly watched one or two episodes. I think I resisted in the beginning, but then I absolutely loved it by the end. I ended up watching them all actually – I sat down with my wife and watched them over a week. I watched it twice, actually. The first time, I watched it as a viewer, and the second time I was taking notes.

Did the show appeal to you? Did you have conversations with your wife about it?

I am a Brit and I have done a lot of period drama, BBC period drama mainly, and the wonderful thing with Bridgerton is that it takes a license. It is set in this Regency period, but there are flairs of color that probably would not be there if truth be told in that era. I think that for a moment that took me a while to get used to. I was not ready for it, so I did not know what to expect, and I think for people like me, who have researched a lot and done a lot of period drama, it can be full-on and quite sort of loud and dramatic, but as you go through each episode, you cannot help to be drawn in. All is forgiven because at its core, it is a love story and that’s what we all care about. It just comes down to that, ultimately. It took me by surprise when I watched it, because it has a uniqueness that is very Bridgerton. It has its own brand in a way, which is not necessarily what that period was, but people forgive that because it is just trying to be itself. It made people happy.

You have been in the business for a while. Your first major film role was in Guillermo del Toro’s Hellboy in 2004, in which you played FBI agent John Myers. This was a pretty good way to start a film career – what did you take from this film and how important was this film to your future career?

It was enormously important. I had just left drama school, and I was working with Guillermo del Toro and his DP, Guillermo Navarro, who later went on to win an Oscar with him. And I became friends with the actors John Hurt and Ron Perlman. I was so young, and naïf and I was terrified half the time. I couldn’t believe that I was there. It was kind of a shock. It was a crazy learning curve. I am grateful for the experience because it did inform me later on. Now that I am also a director, I look back at my jobs, and in particular Hellboy, and know what kind of a huge undertaking it is to direct such a film.

Did you grow more confident after that?

Definitely. It took years to stop worrying. I know actors in their 80s who still worry. But I worry less the older I get.

As you mentioned, you are also a director now. What can actors bring to the table in their role as directors?

I think broadly, there are two types of actors. There is the actor who very much focuses on his or her part and is consumed by that, and then there are other actors, who are more nosy and ask questions about their surroundings like, “What does that do?” about a camera or other technical things. I’m just one of the very nosy ones, and I started asking those questions, and there were times when I thought, “This is awful, I can do it better.” So, I was just very nosy. So, I think they just let me direct to shut me up.

Is there going to be more directing in your future?

Yes, I am hoping to direct a feature at some point. I think actors have a language with other actors that I think some directors struggle with. Some directors are terrified of actors, and I think it helps if you have been an actor yourself. In many ways, directing is an extension of acting. It is slightly more creative, as you have creative input that you do not have as an actor. You make creative decisions months and months before you even start shooting, which is really enjoyable. That is partly why I became a director as well – I wanted more creative input, and as an actor, you don’t necessarily always get that.