I've worked in the theater, television, and films. A five-hour TV series is certainly more time than a character I'd be playing in a film.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
I have done a lot of work in Hollywood myself. I worked in television for roughly 10 years, from the mid-'80s to mid-'90s. And I was on staff at a couple of shows. I did some feature films, including originals and adaptations.
I really enjoy doing films, but I also love television. I certainly would not be against doing some regular television work and being on a show that runs several years.
I'm probably going to go more the feature film route for a while, just so I have more time on my hands. If I did go back to television, I'd do a comedy, a half hour. Or I'd go back on an hour long if it was ensemble, if I had a smaller role, if I could work less days.
Often times people complain about the lack of time in television, but I have to say, you don't have any more time to film in feature films then you do in television. It's just a question of how many scenes you'll be doing in the course of a day.
I would never turn down a movie, but at the same time, but my ideal job would be a half-hour sitcom.
I will always choose to work in a movie based on whether I would want to watch it - if I would be willing to spend money in a theatre on it. The script and the people you will work with come after that.
If you're doing an hour-long show, you're working movie hours, doing a 12-15-hour day. We work three or four hours a day, and get every third or fourth week off to give the writers time to write. It's the cushiest job in Hollywood.
Working on a film is so great because you have the luxury of more time when you're on a movie than when you're on television.
I've been really lucky to work with some really great film people in the past, but television works on a much quicker schedule, and it's the TV directors I've worked with that I looked to and became a big fan of.
I've worked in television all my life, but really I've always wanted to work in the movies.