Quotes About Performance

The true art is being able to take whatever the writer's done, and if it is a bit flimsy or it is a bit rushed or is just box-ticking writing, then the true artist would be able to make that come off the page and sing for an audience or a viewer. I'm still learning how to do that properly.

You can manipulate the viewer in film. With theater, what you see is what you get.

Even the finest actors will have great difficulty showing somebody's loneliness. To put an actor on a chair and ask him to do nothing and yet tell the viewer everything about the character, it's a difficult task.

When I said yes to host the 'IPL,' I wasn't trying to fill in someone else's shoes. I wasn't trying to prove a point. I was only going to lend my style to the show, ask the right questions, get my facts right, keep the viewer informed and basically leave no room for error!

As an actor, the whole process of shooting for movie or television is so artificial though the final product may be extremely realistic to the viewer.

'MasterChef''s preliminary stages deliver just the right level of almost-drama for viewers feeling shagged out after a hard day's fruitless existence.

I do my own stunts. You see someone like Graham Norton would have had a stunt double, but no, I give 100 per cent to my viewers.

Magic's about understanding - and then manipulating - how viewers digest the sensory information.

As an actor, you don't want to know the beginning and end to your character's arc. It makes it more fun. You're not playing the end. You're playing it realistically. You don't know where this character is going to go and what's going to happen to him, which just makes it more interesting for the viewers to watch.

It's weird because when you initially write a song, you write it with no understanding that the world is maybe going to hear it one day. So when you go into the studio, you don't see the hundreds of people at a gig or the viewers on TV, you just write a song without any inhibitions or boundaries.

You get the information, and it's not your job to judge it or not judge it. You adapt, and you do it. That's what we do as actors. We're just as surprised as the viewers, sometimes.

Regardless of the success of a drama or film, I will be satisfied if viewers say that my acting has progressed and has gained more depth.

My performance, I believe, is about my duty to the script, and my duty to the story that we're trying to tell, and I try to do that in a way that is true, in a way that's going to hold up the script, and that's going to be fun for the viewers to watch.

People can now get to see anything they want, in any shape or form, anywhere, on laptop, iPad or 'phone. What's not controllable, though, is the live element. So there's still a real thrill for TV viewers in watching actors pulling it all together and performing live, and a real challenge for the actors.

I feel that it is a privilege to make viewers laugh.

It's like going back to 'X Factor' but it's even bigger because Eurovision has so many more viewers.

I am not ready to test the viewers' patience by playing one role far too many times.

After 'Dor,' viewers showed the confidence that I could play serious roles too and so I was offered roles in films like 'Eight By Ten' and 'Wanted' and many other big movies.

I feel that if my work excites me and makes me deliver my best, then it should, hopefully, entertain viewers as well.

You can't cheat the audience anymore and roles that are honest and edgy are liked by the viewers.

Shootouts are spectacular for the viewers and they are interesting for the players.

I love 'Eurovision!' It's the best thing in the world, and it should be mandatory viewing.

The thing about 'CD:U.K.' was, because the show started quite small with small viewing figures and it built and built, the bigger the figures got, the better and bigger the pop star you got.

I don't mind what the critics say, but I don't generally read them. I'm more concerned with viewing figures.