There was not an industry for child actors. I never really made any money. It was all about fun for me.
I feel that in order to truly be an actor, you have to differentiate yourself and your roles, and you have to constantly challenge yourself. I'm not interested in just doing glitzy movie after glitzy movie and being on the cover of Us Weekly every day.
Soaps are a great springboard for any actor but if you want to be taken seriously, you have to be careful.
It's fun to explore areas that are taboo that you're not allowed to in real life as an actor.
I've worked with very few actors who have been at all difficult.
You see these actor/director relationships in the celebrity world and you understand why. The director knows which buttons to push and it makes it so much more familiarized.
As an actor, you want as much variety as you can muster up. Otherwise you just keep playing the same chord over and over again.
I've never had a plan. You look for different actors you want to work with or different subjects you want to explore, or sometimes it's just a momentary fancy.
As an actor, all you want to do is to work and do good work.
As an actor you accept that you have to publicise what you do, but as for the whole personal life thing that people sometimes choose, no, that's not for me.
It's only human and natural that an actor should see the film in terms of his own part, but I, as a director, have to see the film as a whole. He must therefore collaborate selflessly, totally.
Actors are always a little high at work. Acting is their drug. So when you put the brakes on, they're naturally a little disappointed.
Method actors are absolutely terrible. They want to direct themselves, and it's a disaster.
It's about storytelling. The story is told through images. So with the cast, I had to make sure that the emotions were readable without sound... I know some great actors, if you turn off the sound, you don't really know what they're saying
Sometimes when an actor says something almost perfect, but you know you have to edit it, if you tell them to change something immediately, it will come out great
When I shoot actors, I have that dilemma. I want the actor to be good, and sometimes I have to push them to a place that isn't pleasant. I always think: 'Is it worth doing for the sake of the movie?' But I have to remember the bigger picture.
I'm always excited to work with actors.
I find, surprisingly, that actors are liberated in their work if there's stuff going on around them, because they can't think too much about who they're supposed to be.
I read about some movie where they did everything on blue screen, and the actors were not even connecting to each other.
I like actors who don't have to think too hard about what they have to do to achieve their performance.
In a way, putting actors deep into this sort of complicated universe frees them from thinking about who they should be. They just are somebody.
I love any kind of recognition because as an actor I'm very hard on myself sometimes.
I know a lot of actors don't like to watch themselves and sometimes I don't, but generally I do because I like to just see if there's anything that I can change in the future or make better or anything like that.
What's enjoyable for me, as an actor, is to do as many different things as possible.
We knew, very early on, that we had to be very, very clear that directors need to speak to actors and actresses and be very clear about what is expected, and find out whether they're comfortable with that. Wardrobe has to be in place. There have to be checks.
