Quotes About Ethics

No villain thinks of himself as a villain, and that's the approach I always take.

I prefer a real villain to a false hero.

If I play a villain, I try to find his lightness and his good side. And if I play a hero or a good guy, I'll try to find his darkness or his flaws. Because I don't believe in good and evil. I believe in grays.

You can't always play the hero. You have to play the villain.

In the game of cricket, a hero is a person who respects the game and does not corrupt the game. The one who doesn't or corrupts the game, they are the villain. They should be punished, and they have been punished in the past.

For me, especially with the villain, it's not very interesting to write a guy who is just 100% bad.

I never agree to do a character that molests a woman. I have been very conscious not to do such roles. I believe that even a villain should have character, which people can remember.

Who is to say who is the villain and who is the hero? Probably the dictionary.

The characters that have greys are the more interesting characters. The hero who sometimes crosses the line and the villain who sometimes doesn't are just much more interesting.

It's interesting sometimes when an audience can empathize with a villain.

Just as Yama is a villain for evil forces, my character in 'Yaman' is also a villain against those who don't follow dharma.

Johnny 'Fairplay' Dalton manufactured a lie about his dear grandmother dying in order to win a challenge. This is one of the best villain moments of 'Survivor' ever! This lie was pre-planned, evil, and perfectly played out.

A lot of the time, a moral compass is all that separates a hero from being a villain; otherwise, the two are very much the same. Both are generally the richest and most complex characters, and they get to have all the fun. I guess it's those types of roles that I ultimately gravitate towards.

Back in the '30s, '40s and '50s, you had clear-cut heroes, clear-cut supervillains. Today, you have more of a blend, more of a gray area between the two. You have the rise of the sympathetic villain and the rise of the antihero.

I think you have a social responsibility as the villain, which is pretty different from the hero's responsibility. If you have any kind of a social or political conscience at all, the first thing you want to do is make malevolence recognizable to people, almost as a kind of teaching aid.

I don't think anyone sets out to be the evil villain.

The difficult part of writing about someone you don't admire is that it's easy to demonize them. What you get then is a cackling villain, twirling their mustache at every dastardly deed they commit.

I've always wanted to play the villain. You get to be morally corrupt. You don't get to do that in real life.

There's gotta be a villain; there's gotta be a good guy.

In Shoojit's films, there is no hero and villain. Every character has its own space and there is a social message in all of his films whether it is 'Vicky Donor' or 'Madras Cafe.'

Namor has shades of grey but always ends up doing the right thing. I've played characters with an edge - played villains if not super villains - and he's an anti-hero.

And still, villains are also superheroes; they just fight for the other side, but theyre still superheroes.

It's fun playing villains. It's people who are not held by any moral constraints - or any constraints, for that matter. It's a chance to be completely off the leash and do things that you never could in real life.

But you see, I have played more good guys than I have played villains.