D. B. Weiss Quotes

I would want to do a role like the one Ezra Miller had in 'We Need To Talk About Kevin.' That is a real juicy role.

M*A*S*H offered real characters and everybody identified with them because they had such soul. The humor was intelligent and it always assumed that you had an intellect.

I love gritty drama. I'm passionate about films and drama that make you think - hard-hitting, gravelly characters.

I'm very glad people love 'Breaking Bad,' but the harder character to write is the good character that's as interesting and as engaging as the bad guy.

There is more meat and mileage in complex characters, like 'Running with Scissors.'

I didn't sleep the night I finished 'Sister Hills.' It was so unsettling. I felt really wild. I didn't have a clue. It's a very loaded subject, and I did not know what I had. I was interested in watching how choices unfold over time. It's a story that's raising questions.

I think my best quality as a writer is the ability to craft complicated, nuanced, interesting characters.

I always respond to characters who have depth. I'm always interested in those people. They're the ones who surprise you.

I'm really a big fan of HBO and Showtime shows, so I wouldn't mind being on an edgy show... where I could challenge myself to do gritty stuff - a homeless guy or just some guy with a lot going on who's got problems. It's more fun to do as an actor.

Broadchurch' was all about shades of grey, both in characters and storytelling, and I wanted to see that through to the end.

Internationally if you see, 'Narcos' and 'House of Cards' are all very dark shows with very dark characters. The audience may hate the character but they will love the actor.

It's really interesting to play someone you wouldn't want to ever spend more than a couple of drinks with - but who has redeemable characteristics.

It's hard to reinvent the wheel with a cop show. But 'Rookie Blue' has a pure emotional center that's not cynical.

I like a role where some of the character's motivations are confusing or at least interesting.

The goals of literature are multifold, but creating nice, positive protagonists that you'd want to grab drinks with or invite home to mom can hardly be considered one of them.

Somebody - and I'm going to guess it was Hitchcock - once said that everyone has their reasons. If you remember that, as a writer, you'll write better than average villains.

Actors usually tend to gravitate towards the evil things that stretch them.

I love playing roles where it's not just the good guy or the bad guy.

'Chappelle's Show' was like the Tupac of TV shows. It came out, it got everybody's attention, it was a bright shining star, but it burned out, and for some strange reason, it burned out quick.

I don't like characters who are either good or bad. I just don't experience that in life, so my writing hasn't evolved that way.

I think all interesting characters have some kind of a complex.

In Shoojit's films, there is no hero and villain. Every character has its own space and there is a social message in all of his films whether it is 'Vicky Donor' or 'Madras Cafe.'

The thing that I love about 'Scandal' is every character, it's not clear if they're good or bad. Everyone is both good and bad.

I get the feeling that audiences have become mature and they understand that not every character is in black or white. There can be grey shades to it.

I can't be an arm candy to the hero. I need to play characters that have layers, that people can relate to.