All of the material for 'The Fine Line' was created via improvisation with my partner, but not in front of an audience. We'd continue to refine it in front of an audience based on their responses until it was set and scripted.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I think when a lot of actors hear improv, they think of throwing a line in or doing a slightly different take.
In the theater, I could envision myself as wonderful because of the audience response to my lines.
There are a lot of visual marks that have to be hit, and lines that need to be said in a right way - so there wasn't really any improvisation on the set when it came to the bulk of the script.
In discussing the process with the actors, I made it clear to them that they could improvise but that the sum total of their improvisation needed to impart certain plot points, and schematic material.
When you're onstage in theater, if you mess up a line, there's no 'Cut! We'll get it again.' It's full steam ahead.
As an actor, I've always been interested in making sure I can perform the role and the lines in the way the writer intended.
We constantly run lines together before every show too, and then there's a long, traditionally long, story to tell the audience every show. Today, we're doing it twice.
I would fix other people's lines if they asked me on occasion. The hard part of writing is the architecture of it, getting the story and structuring it. Not the tweaking of lines.
I was delighted to have lines when they came - learning lines for film isn't a problem, but television is a little different, because we shot those shows the whole way through.
Knowing what thought process goes into constructing a line helps an actor know how to deliver that line because you understand the intention behind the writing.