Bryan Konietzko Quotes

A lot of the time, a moral compass is all that separates a hero from being a villain; otherwise, the two are very much the same. Both are generally the richest and most complex characters, and they get to have all the fun. I guess it's those types of roles that I ultimately gravitate towards.

The villain of any story is often the most compelling character.

If you don't care for the villain, if you don't love him and hate him at the same time, then he's just boring.

One of things that drives me nuts is you rarely get bad guys who are written very well.

I think everybody likes to play the villain. They're always much more interesting characters.

I never play a villain that I don't have something I can either do or say so the audience sees there is something redeemable about them. In other words, I don't want to do evil for evil's sake. I don't want to do Jason slasher movies. There's no point in that.

In any story, the villain is the catalyst. The hero's not a person who will bend the rules or show the cracks in his armor. He's one-dimensional intentionally, but the villain is the person who owns up to what he is and stands by it.

If you think about Shakespeare, you remember Richard III and Macbeth before you remember Ferdinand, whose role is just to fall in love and be a bit of a wimp. I love the baddies. More important, though, is making the baddies somehow, weirdly, understood.

It's fun playing the villain now and again; villains are so simple, and you don't have to worry about the audience loving you.

Villains are very, very boring to do. They're so much easier than heroes.

In general, I am more interested in the darker characters when I watch or read stories.

In my career, I've been lucky to do the bad guys that are more interesting, where the audience wants to spend more time with them and get to know them. That's what I'm always looking for and trying to do.

The character of Cable is complex.

It's always more interesting to play the villain.

What makes a good villain is someone who doesn't just challenge the hero but comes organically out of that character's history and circumstances.

For me, in any story that I take, the antagonist is more interesting and multi-dimensional.

I love the character of Jaime Lannister. He's just so complex - a character that we love to hate - but it's a lot more complex than hatred. It starts off, and he seems so arrogant and so smug.

It's cool to play a sinister bad guy who also has a human side.

'3:10 to Yuma' was one that I just kept on talking and thinking about after reading it. And I think the reason is because, like in most Westerns, you have the very clear-cut bad-guy/good-guy, however, as the movie progresses, you kind of see that it's a very fine line that divides these two.

Sometimes there is more exploration in the character for a villain.

I find the trick to playing a villain is that you can't be bad for the sake of being bad. It has to be rooted in some sort of heartbreak.

Even with a villain, you don't want him just to be some pockmarked punchbag.

I think that characters who are nice all the time and who you sympathize with can get really boring.

I really like playing the bad guy. There are so many more objectives to play when you're mad or villainesque, or when there's some agenda that you have. That's drama, that's where the heart lives. I love playing the bad guy, but especially the bad guy who's still with the girl.

I think anyone loves to play a character that is either evil to a certain extent or has a real definable character flaw. Those are always really fun, and, I think, funny.