Steven Knight Quotes

TV is a writer's medium.

I'd always loved movies, but it wasn't some sort of desperate love of celluloid. It was literally like, "I want to write things, and I want people to see them more."

Hollywood has its own way of telling stories. I was just telling stories that I was familiar with. And it's what I want to do in the future: I want to take my audio cinema and put it on the screen.

It's a risk, but I'm sort of ready to let go of thinking of movies as books that you can watch. The notion of, 'If I put the narrative blocks in the right order, this will solve all of my storytelling problems.' No, it won't, and you end up with little more than books on film.

You can be far more challenging, articulate and intelligent writing for television than you can writing for the cinema.

I love doing television; it's such a brilliant way to tell a story over six hours rather over the two hours of doing a movie.

I just always had a love for television and movies.

You can have ambiguity in television that you are not allowed in film... at least in Hollywood studio films.

There's such good writing now on television and I don't see a lot of great writing on films sadly.

It's not the love affair I have with film, but television can be a playground for interesting ideas.

People, certainly in the U.K., look down on screenwriting as an art form, but I love the discipline of it. Next to the bagginess of novel writing, it almost feels like a martial art.

The craft of putting together a performance on film or television is incredibly intricate; you're putting together a story that is completely out of order, that you have to make some sense of, that you have to keep some coherence to the story, to the character.

I want to do film and TV. I want to make good stories. I want to write; I want to be more involved.

I see myself much more as a writer/director or at least an aspiring writer/director - not necessarily in film.

I love making movies, I love the differentness of it, I love writing. But I've always liked television. I grew up on television.

The muscles that writers need for film are very different from TV muscles. Now, when I hire the writers and put the writers' room together, I know where their muscles need to be.

I would love to. A dream of mine is to produce films, as well as to produce content for television.

There is no such thing as a good script, onlya good film, and I'm conscious that my scripts often read better than they play.

I could be just a writer very easily. I am not a writer. I am a screenwriter, which is half a filmmaker... But it is not an art form, because screenplays are not works of art. They are invitations to others to collaborate on a work of art.

I love film and TV, the medium of them, just because it's such a smaller screen. It's much more precise. Ideally, I'd like to do maybe a film a year of some sort and use that to work more in the theatre because theatre really is my first love.

There are very few films that work like a novel.

I've been told, and I think I recognize it, that there's a cinematic quality to my writing, with a sense of image and place and scene - and, some would say, my tendency to finish my books the way Hollywood finishes its films.

I like films to be complete in their written form.

Screenwriting is the most prized of all the cinematic arts. Actually, it isn't, but it should be.

Like every novelist, I fantasise about film. Novelists are not equipped to make a movie, in my opinion. They make their own movie when they write: they're casting, they're dressing the scene, they're working out where the energy of the scene is coming from, and they're also relying tremendously on the creative imagination of the reader.