George R. R. Martin Quotes

Much as I admire Tolkien, I once again always felt like Gandalf should have stayed dead. That was such an incredible sequence in Fellowship of the Ring when he faces the Balrog on the Khazad-dûm and he falls into the gulf, and his last words are, "Fly, you fools." What power that had, how that grabbed me. And then he comes back as Gandalf the White, and if anything he's sort of improved. I never liked Gandalf the White as much as Gandalf the Grey, and I never liked him coming back. I think it would have been an even stronger story if Tolkien had left him dead.

I never liked Gandalf the White as much as Gandalf the Grey, and I never liked him coming back. I think it would have been an even stronger story if Tolkien had left him dead.

Character deaths in and of itself should never be done for shock.

One lesson I learned from 'The Monstrumologist' was never to get too attached to your own characters. That's harder in practice than in theory. At the end of the third book - which coincided with the end of my contract - I was an emotional wreck. I mourned Will Henry and Warthrop.

If it's time for your character to go, it's time for your character to go - you know what I mean? That's it. It doesn't matter who you are.

We don't have a problem killing off characters on 'House of Cards.'

When any character gets killed, there's always a sadness about that, because they're part of the family in a way.

The producer and writers [ of X-Men: Apocalypse ] were kind of feeling me out with, "Are you okay with the fact that you die?" and I was, like, "Yes." That's something that people would talk about, so I thought it was cool that I died. Havok was in three movies and then I get to be remembered.

I never used to kill characters, because I thought killing characters was cheating.

I don’t mind if the character is a small character, but I would just like her to have a journey in the film. Sometimes the characters are just there as a prop to further the man’s story. The great directors I’ve talked to, I’ve said listen, I don’t mind playing a woman that is a tiny part, but how does the story affect her? What can I play in the end that’s different from the beginning? Otherwise, it doesn’t make sense, because it’s just like being a prop.

Once you decide that you're going to have the death of Spock, then how does that affect the other people? Why is it there? I got a lot of stick from a lot of people from the very beginning about the idea of killing Spock. Somebody said, "You can't kill him." And I said, "Sure you can; the only question is whether you do it well."

If a scene doesn't work on three levels - it's not advancing the story, the characters, and telling me something new - then put it in the trash.

I think it's good to leave people with the memory of that being a great character. And if we have a reason to bring him back, we'll bring him back.

Rule of storytelling: When a character is shoved against a wall, shove them against a wall harder.

Characters for me are born on page one and they die on page 100.

Roughly, the action of a character should be unpredictable before it has been shown, inevitable when it has been shown. In the first half of a novel, the unpredictability should be the more striking. In the second half, the inevitability should be the more striking.

In a certain way, sometimes it does feel like we say goodbye to a character, and we don't want to bring them back unless we have a good reason. We left the door open if we wanted to use him more. I always think it's better to leave the audience wanting more.

The rule for finding plots for character-centered novels, which is to ask: 'So what's the worst possible thing I can do to *this* guy?' And then do it.

I suspect that the theme, the nature of the characters, and the method of getting from the beginning of the play to the end is already established in the unconscious.

Plot is no more than footprints left in the snow after your characters have run by on their way to incredible destinations.

Don't put your characters on a treadmill. They need to go new places, face new challenges and do new things.

The reader wants to see something happen between pages one and four hundred, and nothing happens if the characters don't change.

I push myself as hard as I can. Sometimes that can be painful and stressful but inthe end it's worth the price... I like to play characters that I can draw from in my own life. I've invested so much of my life into my work that I almost don't have any choice.

I first read Wendell Berry's short-story collections, "Fidelity" and then "Watch with Me." They just knocked my socks off. The characters and the fellowship of the small town reminded me of my own small town in Illinois.Then I discovered that, much like J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, that all of Berry's fiction was centered in this same town.

You're always choosing the start point and the end point. And almost by definition, the most interesting period is where something happens, as a result of which something is different at the end. And so to me, the idea that you know everything about a character at the beginning is sort of ridiculous. Something has to be revealed. I like it when the deeper you go with the character, the more you see the layers start to peel away. It's more challenging to me, but it's also just interesting. Those are the things I like to watch. I like to watch the evolutions of something.