Lisa Edelstein Quotes

I've often said the reader knows every bit as much about Thorne as I do. When I created him for 'Sleepyhead,' I was determined he should be a character who would develop, book by book, change and grow as we all do, and who - crucially - would be unpredictable.

It's nice to create a character, not just within two scenes, but within the journey of a whole movie. It's fun to do that.

There is always that thought that you might get stuck with a character. But there's always the notion that every character is always evolving.

I think everybody goes through changes, and the same should be said for fictional characters, especially ones that you follow on television.

Every actor wants to have a character that changes, that has some kind of movement, that gets from point A to point B, that doesn't just supply one note.

The life of a character doesn't just exist between action and cut.

If you change a character too much, the audience falls out of love with the character, but characters need to evolve and grow over the years.

I love playing Blair Cramer, and I'm thrilled to see what more they have in store for her. After playing this role for so many years, I still feel like there is so much about her that is still untold.

The Duffers like that; they like watching their characters grow.

As you do on any cable series, if they introduce you as the villain, then you better start working towards making him a really good guy, or if they introduce you as a really good guy, then you better start working towards being the villain. Your character has to go somewhere, or else they become very uninteresting.

In film, because you know where the ending is, characters can change, but in television, you substitute revelation for change, and that can be hard to pull off.

I think what good television does well is that it shows characters evolving.

One pleasure of working on a trilogy is watching characters warp and grow over time.

I tend to relate to a character in terms of the arc: what's interesting is where he starts versus where he ends up.

I'm trying to make all the characters change and grow, or regress.

I think often times on Joss Whedon's shows he can make you hate a character for a period and then love the character. He does it effortlessly.

There's something pretty awesome about staying with a character and growing.

There are so few shows that are willing to take risks with their characters in the way that 'Homeland' does. And yet, the audience still comes back and loves those characters.

Novels demand a certain complexity of narrative and scope, so it's necessary for the characters to change.

I kind of thought the writers were starting to take Taylor and make her kind of down and dirty.

For me to have the opportunity to stay with one character for, God willing, a long period of time, is really exciting.

I am fine playing 'Law & Order' and even the 'Jurassic' movies to be straight up, as far as the characters being portrayed there, but I never want to stay in straight-up land too long. I always wanted to do something where the character's world gets to be explored.

Usually when you have a sequel, the character always stays the same and that's true basically of 'Rocky III,' 'IV' and 'V.' He didn't really change.

I'm not sure Kinsey has changed in these first twelve books. I think the reader learns more about her, but from Kinsey's perspective, only three years have passed while the rest of us have been getting older at a much faster clip.

Every film you're commissioned to write is all about an arc; usually, the arc is that the world creates a change in the character, usually for the better. To not have an arc, the messages and ideas in the film became more prominent.