Paul Darrow Quotes

A while ago, I did a television adaptation of 'Bleak House,' and the character I played, as far as I was concerned, had no redeeming features whatsoever. I wasn't about to try to find any; I didn't need to.

As an actor, you can do what you want with your role. That's why they hire you; to take the role and make it real.

Actors make choices for different reasons.

'Deadwood' was just a wonderful opportunity for me. Outside of my own things that I've written, I hadn't had the opportunity to play a character with that amount of depth and range.

You have so much freedom as an actor in your character's choices, and I really learned to take advantage of that.

I would probably choose supporting roles if I had to make a choice. It's actually a really hard thing to say. It's all on a role-by-role basis, ultimately. I shouldn't be so quick to say that. I feel like you're given greater license to be colorful and eccentric in supporting roles, and that's interesting to me.

It's interesting when you get those roles, which seem like nothing on the page, and you kind of subvert them. It's hard to say no.

Theater actors like to change character roles. They don't like to always do the same thing.

I don't really have choices in the material I get. So I have to make the choices in the way I play the characters.

I think if you're too embroiled in the need to relate too closely to the character, then you start to judge the character for the audience rather than to present it to the audience for their enjoyment and them to mull over the questions that the characters present.

I've done a lot of dramas, and I've done a lot of serious stuff - some really heavy stuff... which I loved, but I wanted to do something light and airy. I think the challenge for an actor is always to see which parts of you you can explore and go have fun with.

I never really thought about what characters I play. I always just wanted different characters.

I don't really worry about the size of the part much any more. It's nice to have more time to work on the character, and to have big scenes to play. But if there's something playable there, and if it's interesting to do, then that's nice.

I feel I should never do passive characters. They don't work for me.

There's no particular role that comes to mind that I'd like to take on, but for me, it's about playing interesting characters and not just two-dimensional ones.

I think that each character has fascinated and interested me enough to want to play him.

I think a lot of actors are overly concerned about being well liked in the parts they play.

Here's probably a short answer - I never feel in this piece that I'm stepping out and being Andrea Martin. I always feel like I'm Golde, so whatever Golde would do within those realms, that's what I would do.

I don't categorize characters into one syllable. These are fully-rounded characters that I don't judge; I just play them.

I don't chart out the life histories of the people I play. If I did, I'd be in trouble. I work with my heart and my head, and naturally emotions follow.

In my experience, it's usually up to the actor how a character is portrayed.

I think that the character that I'm playing now is so fundamentally different than Ally that I haven't I haven't felt like I had to worry about it at all. But I definitely wanted to make a different choice.

I don't think you can help but personalize a role. You almost play to none of the preconceived notions of it. It's more or less a personal experience and journey.

It sounds maybe a little old fashioned, but the parts I want to play and I do play, you don't want to inject too much of your own personality. What you sacrifice then is a slight mystery.

I always wanted to be a character actor rather than the poster boy that they tried to make me 100 years ago. An actor has a degree of responsibility to change for the audience, to give them something new each time, to surprise and not bore them.