Bullz-Eye: To start with the inevitable, how did you find your way into “Vikings“ in the first place? Presumably it didn’t hurt that you’d already worked with the creators.

Clive Standen: It was a long process for me. I was fighting them, kicking and screaming, to try and get seen for this. [Laughs.] I was filming with one of the producers of Vikings, Morgan O’Sullivan, when I did “Camelot,” and I remember him and Michael Hirst talking about it quite a lot then as a new, exciting project they’d been working on for ages. Michael had been invested in the Viking saga for a long time. Right from the beginning, I think they were looking for big names, and they had their kind of wish list, with people like Viggo Mortensen and…well, it was a completely different breed. And I was stuck in “Camelot,” and I was just so jealous. When “Camelot” was finished, I was writing letters and, as I say, kicking and screaming, saying, “Can I get seen for it?” And they wanted to see me for Rollo, which is the part that I played, but for some reason I went on this whole journey of doing screen tests and things for the part of Ragnar. At the very end, though, they offered me Rollo, which was the part that I wanted in the first place, so I must say it made me very happy.

BE: So how much knowledge of the Vikings did you have before coming onto the project?

CS: Well, I’m one of those kids that was brought up by… My parents in England used to take me to every castle and thing imaginable. I was climbing around the countryside, climbing around castles with my older brother from an early age. So I’d kind of been brought up on a lot of the history and things, so I’ve always been mad about Vikings. Or anything from the Medieval era, really. But just like I think a lot of the general public will be before they see “Vikings,” I thought I kind of had it all worked out. It’s only since working with Michael Hirst on “Vikings” that you realize that there’s so much more to the Scandinavian saga and their way of life than you’ve ever imagined. Most of the things we think we know about Vikings has all been written down by the Christians, and it was the Victorians that kind of created this whole Vikings with big-horned helmets thing. There’s a lot of things written down, descriptions of these frightening Norsemen who came from the sea, with horned helmets sent from the devil himself… [Laughs.] It’s this very one-dimensional view of this massive civilization of people. But Michael Hirst, what he’s done is, he’s gone and looked at it from the inside out and really invested the time, actually going to Scandinavia and researching all the sagas and the history behind it. This’ll be the first time ever, I think, where the Vikings will be the heroes. They did do the plundering, they did do the ransacking and the colonizing, but when you look at it from their point of view and the reasons why they did that, the gods they believed in and the society they lived in, you’ll have a completely different vision of the Vikings than you think you know today.

BE: Is there any particular factoid that you learned during the course of production that really surprised you?

CS: Oh, don’t start me! I can tell you everything about how they used to get moss from the volcanic mountains in Iceland, and they would get the steel out of that, and they’d put it into kilns and get the steel to create the swords that they used. Seriously, I could go on and on and on. I can get really boring when I get talking and start going on about Vikings! [Laughs.] But there’s all sorts of stuff. They were very clean, and they used to…it was when they came over that the Saxons would actually adopt a lot of their intricate hairstyles and haircuts and things. We kind of believe that Vikings were these dirty scumbags that used to never wash and fart and spit, but it was quite the opposite. The Vikings, the Scandinavians, were responsible for bringing a lot of the fashion and the style that the Saxons ended up adopting.

BE: Hairstyles, fashion…maybe this is less of a “guy’s show” that one might think.

CS: [Laughs.] Oh, no, no, no. But I could go on and on and on with factoids about these people. The thing about Vikings, they were scientists and explorers, and they unfortunately didn’t write a lot of things down, but…they were astronomers as well, they learned how to read the stars, they learned how to read the weather, and to navigate across the open oceans. There were things that made them the Leonardo da Vincis of their day. There’s lots of things. They were a very civilized society. They were a very simple people, and they had a big rule system. You’ll see in Episode 1 that we go to the Althing, which is kind of where the word “thing” comes from. It was kind of an all-encompassing courtroom where they would sort out their problems from different tribes and different neighborhoods from all around Scandinavia. You’ll see in Episode 1 where we have someone who’s stolen someone and there’s a quarrel between people, and if they’d walked past the third house without reporting it, then it’s suddenly a misdemeanor. There was a big civilized society behind all this.

BE: Some viewers may be surprised that Katheryn Winnick’s character is a formidable fighter in her own right.

CS: She is, yeah! Yeah, me and Katheryn had a lot to do, ‘cause I used to be an international Thai boxer, and Katheryn did lots of taekwondo, so we had a lot to talk about…and we got to spar a bit between takes! [Laughs.]

BE: Your scenes were predominantly with Travis Fimmel, though, correct?

CS: Yeah. Travis is a formidable actor to work with. He’s really organic, which is a lot of fun. He’s also a massive practical joker as well. He keeps it in check, but then he keeps us all entertained as well.

BE:How much interaction did you have with Gabriel Byrne?

CS: Ah, Gabriel’s great. I have a lot of scenes with Gabriel. Gabriel is a very, very giving actor, and it’s very nice to have him on set and be that sort of stalwart that he is. Because he’s very good at calming everyone’s nerves down. He makes it easy for you to come up on set and act with him. He doesn’t hold any bravado at all. He’s a very, very lovely man. And a great actor. He plays Haraldson right down to a tee.

BE: You’re obviously no stranger to period pieces, but what was the Viking attire like for you?

CS: Ah, the Viking attire… Well, we’ve got this brilliant costume designer, Joan Bergin, and she’ll design what you have to wear, and she’ll do it with you as well, so you have a nice input into it. When it comes to the fighting styles and what you need to do with your character, the costume…you have to have a quite collaborative say in what you wear and how it can help you every day in life as a Viking, as Rollo. But the costumes are fantastic. They would just constantly be making new costumes, and we’d have this massive array of different stuff, from leathers to cotton to whatever fabric. It was just phenomenal. The costume department, they often don’t get enough recognition. A lot of the costumes that get recognition are the beautiful, elegant costumes like you see in “The Tudors” and “The Borgias“ and things, but there’s a lot of work that actually goes down into beating down and aging some of these costumes to make them look authentic. Some of the costumes that we have…they’re really phenomenal.

BE: In regards to one of those other period pieces I mentioned, what was the experience of “Camelot” like for you?

CS: “Camelot” was…well, see, “Camelot” was great, but it’s a very different story. Because, y’know, the story of King Arthur, it’s been done to death, and I think everybody thinks that they know who King Arthur and Guinevere and Lancelot are. But “Camelot“ was a completely different…it was more just pure escapism TV. It was grand in scale, but it didn’t really delve into the historical accuracies that “Vikings” goes into. Michael comes from this background where I think that History is the perfect channel to have “Vikings” on. They’ve been at it for a long time, building an audience that are interested in the documentaries that they make, and what they’ve been able to do is…there’s now room for the scripted genre, where they creative this massive visceral, epic landscape and epic story while also kind of keeping it very much immersed in the historical accuracy that its viewers are used to. They’ve created a niche in the market.

BE: Had there been any talk of where the series would have gone if it had gotten a second season?

(Writer’s note: As you are about to see, due to a dodgy connection on the line, Standen misunderstood this question—I was actually still talking about “Camelot”—and thought I was asking about the future of “Vikings.”)

CS: Well, Michael has a massive, massive vision for “Vikings.” I mean, I was lucky enough…me and Travis got to read what he calls the “Viking” Bible, in which he’s planned out many seasons. Really, Season 1 is just the tip of the iceberg of what we can offer. There are so many great characters in some of these sagas, y’know? There’s so much more to come. Even Alfred the Great himself, who kind of defeated the Vikings in the end in England. But they go to Iceland, and there’s Leif Erikson, who travels across the Atlantic. There’s so much more to come, and Michael…if you sit down and talk to Michael, he can go on and on and on about all the ideas he’s got. There’s just a plethora of stories we can tell. It’s just the tip of the iceberg in Series One. But everyone’s based on real historical figures. Ragnar Lothbrok was the original true Viking who you see rise to fame. He was called Hairy Trousers. [Laughs.] There’s lots of tales about him. But Rollo, the character I play, is actually the great, great, great, great, great grandfather of William the Conqueror, the Duke of Normandy, and he was responsible for sacking Normandy and going to France.

BE: I know we need to start wrapping up, but I wonder if you could speak briefly about your experiences on “Doctor Who.”

CS: On “Doctor Who”? I loved “Doctor Who”! [Laughs.] It’s very, very close to my heart. They were very good to me, the guys on “Doctor Who,” and…I’m a bit of a geek at heart. I love a bit of sci-fi. And it was great to be a part of “Doctor Who,” ’cause in Britain, anyway, but I’m sure in other countries as well, it’s one of the more cherished crown jewels in the sci-fi TV world. Yeah, I had a lot of fun doing “Doctor Who.” And I got to work with David Tennant, who I think is my favorite Doctor.

BE: Were you surprised when you got the callback to do the episode “Turn Left” later in Season Four?

CS: Yeah! But it was great to have that scene, particularly to announce that the Doctor was dead. Even though it was really only just that one scene in “Turn Left,” there was a lot of weight on my shoulders to get that scene right. Russell T. Davies was actually going, “Uh, yeah, this is quite an important scene, so you’ve got to get it.” But it was a lot of fun. Russell was really good to me.

BE: Lastly, have you got anything to say about working on your first film, “Heroes and Villains”?

CS:  “Heroes and Villains.” That was, uh… [Nervous laugh.] That was an experience. I think when you come out of drama school, you take jobs and you do stuff. I only had a very small part in “Heroes and Villains,” but…y’know how you have some things that you’re proud of, some things that you’re glad you did, and everything happens for a reason, but it’s, uh, not one of the crowning moments in my career, that one!

BE: Well, we won’t leave it on that, then. I’ll just close by saying that I’ll keep my fingers crossed that “Vikings” does as well for History Channel as “Hatfields and McCoys” did.

CS: Oh, I hope so. I mean, the one endorsement I can give it is that it’s one of the first things I’ve done in a very long time where, regardless of if I was in it or not, I’d still just love to watch it. It’s something I’m very proud of, and it’s something I think has never been done before, so I’m hoping it finds a place in the marketplace. I mean, it’s a show that’s must-watch event TV. It really is.

Indeed, I’ve found their presences so uniformly enjoyable that I’ve even followed them over to their various solo exploits. For instance, if you’ve never seen “James May’s Toy Stories,” head over to Hulu and check it out post haste…but, hang on, before doing that, perhaps you’d better watch “Richard Hammond’s Crash Course,” which actually makes its debut this evening on BBC America. I was fortunate enough to be able to chat with Mr. Hammond during this summer TCA press tour, and we chatted about this new series as well as the one which made him a household name amongst automobile enthusiasts, not to mention various and sundry other topics.

Bullz-Eye: You’re all but ubiquitous on UK television nowadays, but how did you find your way onto TV in the first place?

Richard Hammond: I started as a radio host 24 years ago, in 1988. Local radio, a small station in the UK. I stuck with that for the better part of 10 years and eventually started doing TV. Car-related TV, because that was always my passion. And that opened into other types of TV, but I stuck with the cars as well, and then eventually auditioned for and got “Top Gear” when they re-launched it.

BE: Being a re-launch, I guess it was both a proven commodity as well as an unproven one, since it was all new.

RH: Yeah, it’d become quite old-fashioned and, as happened, it was taken off air because viewers had dwindled, but then it came back as an entirely new thing.

BE: Presumably you were pleasantly surprised when it took off as well as it did.

RH: Weren’t we, though? [Laughs.] Yes, but it wasn’t immediate. We were very lucky. We were afforded the opportunity to grow organically over time, because it was only a small show, so we could be allowed to evolve. We never set out to create the monster we created. We set out to make the best car show we could. That, honestly, is all we ever set out to do. And it was what it was, and it grew to what it became, and it found the appeal it found. We were just lucky. It was a perfect storm. The perfect combination of event, context, characters, appetite…it all came together.

BE: It’s very much a car show for people who aren’t even car aficionados.

RH: Well, we kind of do that to save the viewer the bother. We’re car geeks. I mean, I collect cars. I’ve got…oh, God, dozens of them at home, ranging from pre-war to immediate. But it has to have that at heart. We occasionally…not in recent years, but there was a time when we’d be asked quite regularly, “Are you really a car guy, or is it all put on?” You couldn’t pretend! But you don’t have to be a car fan to watch it, because cars, generally speaking, are fascinating to everyone because they affect all of us. Even if all you ever do is get in one to get a ride to school, they’re still part of your life, be it as a symbol, a means of communication, a means of transport, even as self-expression.

BE: What would you say has been the most fascinating aspect of “Top Gear”? You’ve been to so many countries, done so many things…

RH: Well, I’ve grown up there! I was 30 when we started, I’m 40 now. That’s a big period in a chap’s life! [Laughs.] Both my daughters have arrived since then. Lots has happened. It’s been a part of my life for a long, long time. That’s probably the big surprise. No, the bigger surprise is what’s happened to it! It still takes our breath away how big it’s gotten. We can’t believe it.

BE: At one point did you start branching out beyond “Top Gear”?

RH: I’ve kind of always done, because I’ve done the job for so long. It was funny: I won a Newcomers Award when I first started on “Top Gear,” and I stood there and looked at the audience and said, “I’ve done this for 12 years already!” [Laughs.] Actually, it was 14 years by then. But I’ve always done other stuff. I love television as a medium. I’m fascinated by it. I think it is important as a whole. It’s really interesting what it can do, how it works, what it has to say to us and about us. So, yeah, I’ve always indulged. I love cars, but I’m interested in plenty of other stuff. I’m interested in TV, hence when the opportunity came about to make TV in America with Americans for Americans… It’s kind of the home of modern TV, anyway, isn’t it? So why wouldn’t I want to do that, to take a job I’ve done for so long and come make it here? So it’s been really, truly interesting doing it. I’ve always done that.

BE: Well, you’ve obviously done more than a few shows beyond “Top Gear,” but how many of them were your concept pitches and how many involved the BBC saying, “We’ve got this idea for a show, we think you’d be a good host”?

RH: Um…I don’t know what the split would be. I really don’t.

BE: It is a split, though?

RH: Oh, yeah, yeah. There are shows that I take to them. There’s currently a couple in production at the moment that I’ve taken to them. Moreso these days that way ‘round. It’s just something that happens in your life in TV, I think. You reach a stage where, if you’re lucky, it affords you a platform, and you can then come up with an idea, knock on the right door, and say, “Hi! I’d really like to make this!” [Laughs.] And then you get through the door and get to make your suggestions.

BE: So was “Crash Course” your pitch, then?

RH: No! “Crash Course” was from them to me. BBC America Worldwide Productions were looking for their own shows to make, and because I enjoy a smaller profile from “Top Gear” over here, the idea came up and they pitched it to me. We’ve developed it for me. It’s come a long way since the first conversations. Yeah, that’s the great thing about making TV: coming up with ideas, molding ideas…it’s a very collaborative process. Or it should be, anyway. And that’s great. I’ve really enjoyed that process and watching it evolve.

BE: What was the most challenging episode of the first season of “Crash Course” for you?

RH: In the first season, probably using the dangle head processor in the woods in Oregon. It was just bloody impossible to use that machine. [Laughs.] It was really difficult! And, annoyingly, the woods opposite of where I live, I have a run around those woods, a five-mile trek that’s very uphill and downhill and very wooded, and they’ve been logging it, and there is a dangle head processor being used. And every time I pass the thing, I have a little shudder of remembrance of how I grappled with it. So that was the hardest one in that season.

BE: What was the one that surprised you by being easier than you anticipated?

RH: Well, none of them felt that easy to me, to be honest. [Laughs.] None of them, really.

BE: What can we expect from Season 2?

RH: For Season 2, we’ve completely changed it, and I’m delighted. Using the vehicles was a great idea for Season 1, ‘cause there’s a logic to my being there to host it on BBC America. For Season 2, they’ve let me just hang it now on the people and the jobs themselves, so it’s not vehicle-dependent, which is great. So the variety we’re covering is everything from stand-up comic to Harlem barber, stuntman to snake wrangler. It’s right across the board. Which is great, ‘cause it means you can take a look at a whole load of American jobs, from cowboy to whatever, some of them iconic and symbolic, some of them less so. Some of them modern and very different. And that’s really fascinating to do. Bloody hard work on occasion, a bit scary on occasion, but amazingly good fun.

BE: Yeah, with all due respect, I don’t necessarily look at you and see “cowboy.”

RH: I’d like to be a cowboy! It was quite good fun. I can ride a horse reasonably well. [Laughs.]

BE: I wanted to ask you about a few other things from your back catalog. First of all, what was it like working with Justin Hawkins of The Darkness?

RH: He’s fantastic. God, that’s awhile back! [Laughs.] That was great fun. It’s great when we get good guests on. When we first started making “Top Gear,” we said, “Does anyone want to be on our little car show?” And nobody was particularly bothered. Now, when Hollywood rolls up now and again, it’s amazing!

BE: Who was the most surprising guest you pulled for “Top Gear”?

RH: It’s very surprising when people like Tom Cruise throw themselves at it. It’s, like, “Hang on a second, you’re an industry in your own right!” [Laughs.] Okay, they might come on to publicize their show, but then to actually be bothered to really throw themselves at trying to get ‘round the track… I mean, Sir Michael Gambon, dignified, advancing in years, a well-respected actor…he nearly flipped the car! Which is staggering. So, yeah, we’re constantly surprised by our guests.

BE: As far as drivers go, which celebrity driver turned out to be better than you anticipated?

RH: Oh, I can’t even remember, to be brutally honest, ‘cause it happens so often. [Laughs.]

BE: Can you talk a bit about the experience of interviewing Evel Knievel?

RH: He is…was…amazing. It was intense. The really moving moment was when we were in the car, driving ‘round his hometown of Butte, Montana, talking about his childhood, and we passed the streets that he grew up on, and he was talking about riding around on his bicycle with his friends. I said, “Well, Evel, this is really weird, ‘cause when we were kids, I spent all my childhood riding ‘round on my bicycle with a piece of cardboard in the spokes, pretending to be you. What did you do? ‘Cause there was no Evel Knievel!” And he said, and this is God’s own truth, that he used to ride around on his bicycle with a piece of cardboard taped so that it resonated in the spokes like an engine, pretending to be…Joey Chitwood, I think it was, who was a local stuntman. And the idea of Evel Knievel doing exactly what I did as a kid…it was genuinely moving. Y’know, he was…he could be difficult, yes. But he was one of the world’s first sort of global commercial symbols based on a personality. He was right at the forefront of that kind of thing, and I think he was both the beneficiary of it and in some ways the victim.

BE: Yeah, from the clips I’ve seen of the interview, you walk away respecting his accomplishments, but he comes off more than a little bit bitter.

RH: Well, yeah, he had a hell of a ride. It wasn’t always a bed of roses. What I liked about that documentary – and I’ve done it since with another one, with Stirling Moss – I didn’t deliver my opinion on him at any point, nor did I try to. I tried to give them both a platform from which they could show you, the viewer, who they were, and you can form your own opinion. And I think that’s important when I make factual shows. Straight up factual, not like “Crash Course,” which is immersive and reality. That’s about me and my take on it. When I make straight up factual shows, I want to show you what I’m there to present. That’s why we call them “presenters” in the UK: because I’m presenting something to you. I’m then arming you with information and context, so you can better understand what it is. You form your own opinion. Never am I standing there saying, “Look how much I know about this,” or, “Look how funny I can be about this.” What I’m saying is, “Look, this is interesting. If I tell you this about it, it’s even more interesting.” And I think for awhile, certainly in the UK, factual TV rather lost its way. And I’ve been working very hard to keep saying, “No, the facts lead. Is it interesting? Do you need to dress it up with some character host, telling you more about themselves than the subject? ‘Cause if you do, don’t make it, there’s no interest.”

BE: Is there anyone else in the field whose work you particularly respect?

RH: Factual, or broadly across TV?

BE: Factual, in this case.

RH: Well, there’s the likes of (David) Attenborough, because he just makes…he just tells you interesting stuff. He doesn’t give you his judgment. I’m making quite a few natural history shows at the moment, because it’s a passion of mine that goes back as far as cars, to when I was a kid, and I’m having a great job doing it. And that’s what he did. And still does. He’s never given his opinion. They’re not opinion things. It’s simply a fact. And I love making factual shows, where the facts lead. And if it’s not so interesting and compelling that you immediately run to the bar afterwards and tell friends about it, then don’t make it.

BE: One of your other efforts was a program which revolved around the Holy Grail.

RH: [Laughs.] Yes, it did…and that’s another that was awhile back!

BE: It was. I bring it up mostly because I was wondering if you were familiar with the book that Rat Scabies of The Damned wrote a few years back (Rat Scabies and the Holy Grail).

RH: I’m familiar with him, of course, but not with the book. I’ll have to check that out! Yeah, that was quite awhile back that I did that show. It was highly educational, though, that’s for sure. One of the first sort of educational BBC shows I did. Good fun.

BE: And on the slightly less educational side of things, you also served as host for “Total Wipeout” in the UK.

RH: [Laughs.] I loved those shows, because it was so unambitious in its intent, and at no point was it saying, “We’re gonna change somebody’s life and make them into a pop star or make them a million pounds.” It was just people doing it for the love of it, to show their kids or families or workmates that they could do it. I loved that show. I put more thought into the script of that show than anything else I’ve ever worked on. I loved the ridiculousness of it. In this day and age, there’s never been a less cynical and exploitative show than that. It’s people who choose to do it not for the money but for the glory…what glory there is. And that’s great to watch.

BE: Have you ever run the course yourself?

RH: Yes, but I cheated. [Laughs.] I wore a wire. But I gave it away that I cheated. I let it be known that it was all pretend.

BE: I know we don’t have much time left, but I wanted to at least touch on the whole Vampire experience, as far as how it affected you.

RH: Oh, the crash, you mean? It’s behind me now, six years ago, but it was brain damage, which is a horrible way to hurt yourself. My heart goes out to anybody with ADI – acquired brain injury – and it happens to a lot of people, from kids falling off bicycles to soldiers getting shot at to idiot television hosts crashing at 320 miles an hour. [Laughs.] But it’s now been filed away in my life as one of the formative experiences, along with meeting my wife, having children, buying a house…all the things that make you who you are. It’s a long business recovering from such a thing, because it makes you have to reevaluate everything about yourself, and the only thing with which you have to reevaluate it at the time is the thing which itself is damaged. So it’s a hard thing to come through. But it’s part of me now, as with the other things.

BE: Having been in an accident myself, albeit one decidedly less flamboyant, I’m curious if you had any hesitation about getting back behind the wheel right away.

RH: No, but it’s made me look at risk, as I always have done. I haven’t changed that. I have a beautiful wife, two beautiful daughters than I love more than life itself…I’m not going to risk not being there for them. I’m not going to risk selfishly. So I do evaluate everything I do. It’d take a brave TV producer to put me in harm’s way now, also because there’s a lot more paperwork involved now. [Laughs.] So we’re very careful. I want to walk away at the end of the day.

BE: Is there a favorite project you’ve worked on over the years that didn’t necessarily get the love you thought it deserved?

RH: By viewers, do you mean?

BE: Or critics, I suppose.

RH: Well, either way, I think the answer is “no,” because I think I’ve been really lucky. The things I’ve really thrown myself into… [Hesitates.] That’s not to say I haven’t made turkeys, ‘cause I’m sure I have. [Laughs.] But if something’s not very good, you don’t expect it to do well. But, no, I’ve never gnashed my teeth and wanted to scream at an audience, “What’s wrong with you? Why didn’t you like that?” That’s never happened. I’ve either known, “Yeah, you’re right, that’s not very good,” or else it’s been well received, in which case it’s gotten what it’s deserved.

BE: Lastly, how many more years of Clarkson abuse do you anticipate taking?

RH: Well, first of all, it’s mutual. [Laughs.] We have to put with one another, all of us. I’ve spent more time with those two great, gangly oafs than I have with my wife over the last ten years, probably, so we’ll continue to endure one another’s company on “Top Gear” as long as we’re asked. There’s no plans to part ways at the moment.

But we’re not here to talk about Sakey’s books. We’re here to talk about his TV show.

On December 6, the Travel Channel will debut “Hidden City with Marcus Sakey,” a series that will, over the course of its 12 episodes, explore 12 different cities around the United States – caveat: for these purposes, we’re treating the Florida Keys as one big city – by investigating some of the more sordid (or at least less than cheery) parts of their pasts. For example, in Boston, Sakey explores the history of the Boston Strangler. In Chicago, he looks into the infamous protest riot of 1968. Neither is the sort of thing that’d pop up on the cover of a tourism brochure, but it is the sort of thing that fascinates Sakey. I’ve had a chance to screen the first two episodes of the series, which, not coincidentally, find Sakey working his way through Chicago and Boston, and I found it to be highly enthralling viewing.

Okay, so maybe Sakey doesn’t have the eccentric intensity of, say, James Ellroy. (If you haven’t seen Ellroy’s series “L.A.: City of Demons,” I highly recommend it.) But you can sense Sakey’s fascination with the material he’s discussing and the people with whom he’s conversing, which goes a long way. Plus, c’mon, it’s the guy’s first time playing host. Give him a chance to grow into the role, huh? And, anyway, the end of his adventures in Chicago, one thing’s for sure: he’s up for anything if it’ll help him get a better handle on the discussion at hand…even if it involves being temporarily blinded.

Bullz-Eye: So I checked out both of the episodes on the screener yesterday…

Marcus Sakey: Oh, cool! What did you think?

BE: A lot of fun, to say the least.

MS: Beautiful! Thanks, man, I appreciate it.

BE: In fact, I went on Facebook right after I watched it and said that my eyes were burning just watching the Chicago episode.

MS: [Laughs.] Yeah, I think part of the reason I ended up hosting this was that my friend and producer felt that I was dumb enough to get pepper-sprayed.

BE: It’s a good selling point.

MS: [Laughs.] Yeah. Sometimes not being that smart has its advantages.

BE: So, now, was this series something that was pitched to you to host, or did yourself actually have a hand in creating it?

MS: I co-created with the producer, Tom Cappello, who’s the executive on the show. He actually reached out to me about two years ago to see about doing something like this – I was writing crime novels – and, you know, I joke about the pepper-spray thing, but in truth, it took probably two years of envisioning the show, coming up with the concept, refining it, and pitching it before getting to where we are now.

BE: Given the pitching process, I presume you did a fair amount of research long before it ever got picked up, as far as what cities you were going to cover.

MS: Yeah, exactly. We dug into that. For us, the central idea was a novelist’s point of view on this stuff. You get to look at these crimes and the way they reflect the city’s character. The way that I might, as a novelist, rather than a more journalistic approach. For example, we don’t write anything in advance. I go in with some idea of what to expect, but no real preconceived notions. We’re not trying to jam it into a box. So I’m meeting with these people and doing these things, and that kind of draws out the themes of the city. The themes that come out about the city come out from me actually experiencing it. That’s sort of what I mean about it being the novelist’s approach. Plus, I can do things like trying to guess what’s in people’s heads…which, I gather, journalists are not supposed to do. [Laughs.]

BE: That’s what I hear. So you’ve got 12 episodes in this first season. I’d guess that your original list of possible cities was a bit longer.

MS: Yeah, there’s been a lot of discussion about the cities, and it’s a fun thing to throw back and forth, where we might like to go. It’s sort of a balance. You want to get cities that you think have a broad interest, plus some surprises. So when there’s cities that are very well known, like New York, we try to take an unusual spin on it. For New York, it’s three crimes, all from ’76 to ’78, a very specific time in New York history, when the city was going bankrupt and it was sort of the heart of the “Taxi Driver” New York. We looked at it that way. Then you’ve got something like the Florida Keys, where it’s a whole different approach. It’s just, like, “What does crime even look like in paradise?” [Laughs.]

BE: Like New York, Los Angeles has so much potential subject matter that I’m sure you had to pick and choose your selections carefully.

MS: Yeah, Los Angeles was interesting. There’s no shortage of crime there. [Laughs.] As you know! It was interesting there because we wanted…well, obviously, it’s just not a town you can talk about without talking about image. And yet to me, one of the things that’s most interesting about Los Angeles is this whole myth that Los Angeles is fake. That’s just not true. Los Angeles is very, very real. It just trades in myth and image, and it builds on that. It’s a company town that builds image. So it was fun to look at it in that way. Like The Black Dahlia, who, after her death, was turned into a star in the worst kind of way. The Wonderland murders with John Holmes, that’s the dark side of the dream. You ever seen “Boogie Nights”?

BE: Absolutely.

MS: Yeah, actually, I guess everybody’s seen “Boogie Nights.” [Laughs.] Well, the guy…Burt Reynolds’ character was inspired by a real-life porn director that we got to sit down and drink Scotch with, which was a very interesting conversation. And then there’s the L.A. Riots, which is as real as you get.

BE: I’m actually in the middle of re-reading Helter Skelter, so I had Manson on the mind, but I guess I’m not entirely surprised that those murders didn’t make the final cut, just because they’ve been covered so many times.

MS: Yeah, they have, and…it was under discussion, obviously. It’s hard not to. But for us to pick a crime, it really has to reveal something about the city, and I think the Helter Skelter murders…they do, certainly, but it’s been covered so much and so thoroughly that I don’t think it would’ve revealed anything that people don’t already know.

BE: To jump into your writing career for a few minutes, what actually led you to the decision to pursue a career in writing?

MS: Oh, man, I’ve been love with the written word, with stories, literally as long as I can remember. I remember the moment that I learned to read, when the squiggles became a code, and I was, like, “Holy shit, I can see Spot run!” [Laughs.] And, you know, that was it. I was just hooked from that moment on. So I’ve wanted to be a novelist my whole life. The funny thing is, of course, knowing what I wanted to do, I then went and did other things for 15 years first. [Laughs.] But, you know, you need a little seasoning. There aren’t a lot of 18- or 19-year-olds that have something worth saying in a novel.

BE: How did you hone your craft, as it were? Did you study other authors’ work, or did you just kind of keep writing, writing, writing, to see what stuck?

MS: Yeah, it’s a bit of both, y’know? I think, as a writer, your apprenticeship is reading constantly. I’m always amazed when somebody tells me they want to be a writer, and when I ask what they read, they say, “I don’t.” Well, good luck with that. [Laughs.] “I want to be an Olympic gymnast, but I don’t really like the gym that much.” So it’s constantly reading, dissecting what other authors did. I took some classes towards an MFA, but not very many before I dropped out. Mostly it’s writing. The secret that I always tell aspiring writers – and they’re always disappointed – is, “Butt in chair, fingers on keyboard.” That’s how you do it. [Laughs.] Believe me, I wish there was fairy dust, and I wish I had a bag of it. But it doesn’t work that way.

BE: I’ve learned over time that turning off your email and Facebook doesn’t hurt, either.

MS: [Bursts out laughing.] No kidding! I always end up playing a little game with myself. When I’m writing a novel, I have a daily word count that I want to hit, and I just have to set little goals. It’s, like, “Well, when you hit 350 words, you can check your email and Facebook. And then it closes down until 625.” [Laughs.] It’s stupid, but, y’know, you’ve got to reward yourself in these tiny ways.

BE: Obviously, you always knew that you wanted to be a writer, but did you always know that you wanted to write crime thrillers?

MS: No, that I came to later, actually. I always knew that I wanted to write novels, and I wanted to write stories that kept people up too late. Y’know? Things that just riveted you. That’s always been my goal. I was the kid reading under the blankets at night with a flashlight…and I suspect you were as well. [Laughs.]

BE: Oh, yeah.

MS: I wanted to…that was the experience I was shooting for. The thing that got me into crime writing was realizing that it’s a combination of doing that, and then also you can explore real-world issues and philosophical questions and moral dilemmas all turned up to 11. It’s easy to have a principle or to think you know how you might react to something, but climb into a crucible and let’s set it on fire. [Laughs.] Then see what happens.

BE: So back to the show. Is it weird finding yourself on the TV screen?

MS: God, it’s completely surreal. A completely surreal experience, yeah. I was never even an actor or anything. This is not…this is a totally new experience to me. And the thing I’ve done is just kind of try to ignore the cameras and recognize the people I’m talking to. There’s a kind of people who…y’know, you get some access to them when you’re writing a novel, but nothing like this. I mean, we’re talking to people who are absolutely on the front lines of history, who shaped these enormous events. And it makes it easier if I just focus on that and talk to them.

BE: I’d guess it’s almost just as weird to see your name trumpeted in the title of the series. I interviewed Brad Meltzer last year, right before his show started on the History Channel…

MS: Yeah, he’s a nice guy.

BE: He is. But he said the whole thing just became an instant running joke with his family about how ridiculous it was that his name was in the show. He said he’d ask, like, “Honey, what are we having for Brad Meltzer’s Dinner this evening? Because last night we had Brad Meltzer’s Chicken, and I’d love it if we could have Brad Meltzer’s Pasta tonight.”

MS: [Laughs.] Yeah, my wife and I were chatting last night, and she paused the DVR, and…you know how sometimes it catches up to real time and starts playing again? Well, when it did, it cut right in on a commercial with me walking down the streets of Chicago. She paused it again, and she said, “Is everything about you, Marcus?” [Laughs.]

BE: “It is now.”

MS: “Yes, it is, baby. Yes, it is.” [Laughs.] I think it’s really important that people are busting your balls on that kind of thing. My friends all find it hilarious. I can’t ask a question now without them saying…like, if I ask where they want to go for dinner, they say [Quoting the show’s intro] “I’m not a cook. I’m not a restaurant reviewer. I’m a crime novelist.” Yeah, all right, guys, thanks for that…

BE: Which of the cities proved to be the most surprising for you?

MS: Well, there were surprises in all of them. I think the one that was most counter to expectations was the Keys, actually, and mostly because we’re filming in paradise, and we’re thinking, “This is going to be fantastic!” I mean, they’re all stressful and long days and everything, but we’re, like, “This is gonna be great!” But, man, it was FUBAR from the drop. I mean, literally, as we’re trying to fly into the Keys with all of this camera equipment – you’ve got, like, 27 cases – we discover at the airport that, because the runway in the Keys is so short, we can’t do that. We can only bring one bag. So we had to fly everything into Miami and have people drive all night. And it just goes from there. We’re staying on a boat, which sounds nice until you realize it’s 100 degrees and there’s no air conditioning. We interviewed this big, eight-foot-tall actor who plays a pirate, but he kept dropping his shit in the water. The captain of the boat had to keep diving for his saber. [Laughs.] So it was just sort of one thing after the other like that. It was fun. It made for funny stories. But it was totally not what we expected.

BE: Have you found that any of the cities have been a little dodgy after the filming of a particular segment, like, “Are you sure this isn’t going to make us look bad?”

MS: No, there’s been all kinds of cooperation, actually. It’s been really great. It is funny, though: there truly is a different culture to all of these different cities that you see doing this but wouldn’t if you just went to the museums and the shopping districts. Even all those little things…like, in Boston, nobody wanted to be filmed. I mean, not our primary interviews, but other people. Normally, you walk around with a camera and everybody’s, like, waving and flashing gang signs and trying to get on TV. In Boston, nothing. Nobody wanted to be filmed. If they were in the background in the bar, they came up to us and threatened us. They’re a close-mouthed town that doesn’t want to appear on TV. [Laughs.] So the little things like that are kind of interesting. You get the culture of these places. But the cities themselves are often really welcoming.

BE: I didn’t know if you might’ve had issues with government officials saying, “Well, we don’t really want to emphasize that particular aspect of our city.”

MS: You know, there are certain groups that will meet with us or something. But the stories we’re picking, there’s always a lot of ways to tell them, so we’ve been fortunate to get really, really close. Funny thing, but…well, again, it’s in Boston, but we were doing the Whitey Bulger story, and that had been planned, but then he got caught a week before we flew there. I was, like, “Goddammit, Whitey, couldn’t you have held out one more week?” [Laughs.] ‘Cause it complicated everything, you know? The FBI suddenly couldn’t talk to us about the case, because it was a pending investigation. But the thing is, because I’m telling this as a storyteller, a novelist, there’s always another angle that we can dig into.

BE: Yeah, plus, now that I’m thinking about it, most of these ages are old enough that at this point the cities are probably, like, “Yeah, we know, it’s part of our history, we’re resigned to it.”

MS: [Laughs.] Exactly. And, I mean, who decides not to go somewhere because someone was murdered there 50 years ago, anyway? Our show isn’t about the lurid side of a city. It’s not, “Find the darkest streets.” But it is about trying to understand a place through its shadows, through things that happened there that, okay, maybe the city isn’t proud of them, but they still really do tell you something about it.

BE: Lastly, what are your expectations for “Hidden City”? There are a ton of reality series out there. What do you think yours brings to the table that others might not?

MS: What I hope it brings is a new way to look at cities where you really kind of come along on this adventure with me. It’s not me telling you how it is. It’s me going to check out how it is, and then reporting back what I find, being very honest and free to have judgments. [Laughs.] And to talk the way I talk. I think we’re wearing out the “bleep” button at Travel Channel! But I think…hopefully what people find is that it’s an adventure they want to come along on.

If you’re a car nut, motorhead, whatever you want to call it, you’ve probably spent hours digging up episodes of the internationally renowned series “Top Gear.” Search no more, auto geeks – “Top Gear” is finally coming stateside.

You can catch the US premiere of “Top Gear” this Sunday, November 21st, at 10/9c on HISTORY. The show will feature all of the super-cars, extreme stunts and challenges, car reviews and celebrity interviews that have made “Top Gear” the series of choice for car enthusiasts around the world. The U.S. version will be packed with high-adrenaline action entertainment as it tracks the colorful history of the automobile as well as the eccentric adventures of its hosts with “Top Gear’s” customary wit and humor.

Hosted by comedian and car enthusiast Adam Ferrara (Rescue Me, Paul Blart: Mall Cop), stunt driver Tanner Foust (The Bourne Ultimatum, The Fast and The Furious: Tokyo Drift and The Dukes of Hazard) and car-obsessed NASCAR expert Rutledge Wood, “Top Gear” is pulling out all the stops for the US iteration. Of course, the show would not be complete without its own version of The Stig, a masked driver who will performing stunts and high-octane feats.