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.
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.
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.
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.
I'd hate to lose the character actress part of me, because, by God, the parts are much more interesting.
The good thing about 'Weeds' now is, I get to play some dramatic parts in that as well.
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.
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.
The 'boy next door' parts I get offered, I don't find interesting.
It's always great to play parts that are larger than life.
