Everyone says villains are thankless parts, but those are really the best roles.
As long as they keep offering me some good parts and so forth - there are some parts out there that fit me pretty well - I'll keep going for a while.
First of all, the leads aren't the kind of acting work that I like. The parts that are meatier are not the ones that have to have a romance.
I don't get the action... well, I never did get the big action hero parts. I was always locked into making the kids movies, which were a lot of fun.
One thing is a fairly simple and straightforward thing. I don't long to direct. I really want to get some good parts.
There are some fantastic parts for older actors.
I think I was technically uncredited as Local #1, because there were three of us. But I had the most lines [in My Sweet Charlie].
From being a writer of plays, it was not that surprising that somebody thought of giving me a job as an actor. After I played one part, others came along.
I want to keep doing different things. I'd like to do a more personal, dramatic movie next, I think. But as long as it's about characters and good writing and good parts for actors, that's what's important.
If you're looking to be loved for a part, it's great and enticing to be adorable in a romantic comedy. But then, as an actor, you get stuck.
I'd much rather play the psycho than the pretty girl in hot pants.
The good thing about 'Weeds' now is, I get to play some dramatic parts in that as well.
I'd hate to lose the character actress part of me, because, by God, the parts are much more interesting.
I only know how to play bad mums because they're the best parts.
I am very close to a number of actresses who are trans and hungry for parts.
The 'boy next door' parts I get offered, I don't find interesting.
All the Shakespeare parts are for young women, mostly.
I kept feeling like there were no parts for girl who want to play to the mezzanine.
It's always great to play parts that are larger than life.
