When I'm writing, I'm writing for a particular actor. When a lot of writers are writing, they're writing an idea. So they're not really writing in a specific voice.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
My theory is that everything an actor does, from the way he looks at his watch to the way he moves across the stage, is in the service of advancing a story, and in that sense, it's all writing. In that sense we, while acting, write.
I think if an actor is right for a role, casting sees that, and the words that are on the page, depending on how it's written, can really help your character develop.
When you have another actor as your boss, they understand how to communicate easier sometimes than just a writer.
As an actor, you are in a unique position because you're not only memorizing dialogue but really embodying it. You naturally feel the rhythm of good writing.
When you write for a show that's not yours, your job is to hear the voices of the characters and write as best you can for those voices.
As a writer, all you want to do is write for great actors. That's all.
A writer can write in an attic, or on top of a bus. Or with a sharp stick in some wet cement. To act, an actor has to have words. A stage. a camera turning.
I try not to think of actors as I'm writing because I think you do them a disservice by writing for things they've already done.
It's often wrong to write for specific actors because one ends up using what is least interesting about them, their mannerisms and habits. I prefer not to write for specific people.
When people give you a writing assignment, they're asking what you think. That's the very opposite of being an actor. When you're an actor, no one wants to hear what you think.