Quotes About Characterization

I try to distinguish my characters from each other.

When you write a show, every character is you to some extent.

I like dramatic ballets, particularly if they're ballets in which I have a chance to go from one extreme of style or characterization to another.

I love finding ways to make familiar characters into someone unique.

You get Don King's point of view in what is almost a Shakespearean, classical technique. He comes across almost like a lovable rogue, like Iago in 'Othello' or Richard III. He's doing all these bad things, but I kind of like him. It's like 'Pulp Fiction': Everybody's a bad guy, yet you like them.

Fancourt can't write women,' said Nina dismissively. 'He tries but he can't do it. His women are all temper, tits and tampons.

I get tired of hearing some science-fiction fans saying that characterization isn't important in SF. In point of fact, I think it's probably more important in SF than in mainstream fiction. After all, if the author can't characterize humans well, he or she probably can't characterize aliens well either.

Who are these characters? What do they want? Why do they want it? How do they go about getting it? What stops them? What are the consequences? Finding the answers to these grand questions and shaping them into story is our overwhelming creative task.

When a movie character is really working, we become that character. That's what the movies offer: escapism into lives other than our own.

Julius, who had a sour, bitter nature, became Groucho. (He was also the quartet's treasurer, storing their wages in what vaudeville actors called a "grouch bag.") Adolph, who played the harp, naturally became Harpo. Leonard the pathological womanizer Fisher dubbed Chico, pronounced "Chick-o." Milton, so the story goes, became Gummo because, as a hypochondriac, he put on waterproof sneakers, known as "gumshoes," at the first sign of rain. Their

I prefer other people to make judgments about the way I play and to characterize me, rather me describe myself.

People say: a donkey is stupid. When a man is told that he is not very intelligent, stubborn and lazy he is politely called an ass.

Characterization requires a constant back-and-forth between the exterior events of the story and the inner life of the character.

You can never know enough about your characters." —W. SOMERSET MAUGHAM

I like really, properly detailed, described characters.

The beauty of Sudhir's protagonists is that they are not shown as black and white. There are various layers to the characters.

We only see female protagonists who are likeable, with one cute flaw, such as adorable clumsiness. I'm fed up with it.

Oftentimes in films, the female character, if she's not the protagonist - and often, even if she is - feels like an imitation of what a woman is.

The instinct to impersonate produces the actor; the desire to provide pleasure by impersonations produces the playwright; the desire to provide this pleasure with adequate characterization and dialogue memorable in itself produces dramatic literature.

I am like my characters - sometimes even the female ones.

I've always had difficulties with female characters.

I love writing about men. To get by in the world you have to know how men think. Not that all guys think alike, but women tend to think about more things at the same time, an overgeneralization, but I find it easier to make my male characters focus than I do my female characters.

Often, female characters are quite one dimensional, especially in a two hour film; television gives characters room to breathe and develop.

Take 'Ex Machina.' Everyone said it was one of the great feminist works of science fiction. But what I found disappointing is that everything about the main female character is defined by men.