Quote

'Friends' was a true ensemble. There really was no star of the show.

While 'Friends' was about a 20-something population and what they were going through, they were also dealing with issues with their family.

The thing that cracks me up is how these reality characters start out thrilled and excited just to be on television, and how they move to thinking they are as big as the Friends.

Who didn't grow up through the '90s watching 'Friends?'

True friendships don't fade in Hollywood, as so many myths about show business would have you insist.

Most of my good friends are my friends from high school or childhood, and they're not actors - they have 9-to-5 jobs. But I've obviously, over time, developed friendships with actors. It's two completely different worlds.

'Friends' played in this territory of being funny, and then also just grabbing your heart. And not afraid of that. It was a comedic soap opera. Not being afraid to have an audience feel something, laugh and cry, was quite extraordinary and quite wonderful.

'Among Friends' was really well written and had strong characters, and while all the elements were there to make it a great genre film, it also left room for me to put a creative flair on it that wasn't your typical slasher or psychological thriller.

I grew up with 'Friends' from day one and, like, 'Seinfeld' and 'Frazier,' those sorts of shows, but for sure, 'Friends' was it for our family. Like, we would watch every Thursday night at eight o'clock; I couldn't wait.

'Friends' started because Rachel left her husband at the altar. This likability factor is just so stupid to me. It's the same thing as 'wish-fulfillment,' which is a big word you hear in a lot of Hollywood rooms. It basically means that people want to see other people living a life they can't lead, and I don't buy that. I think that's not true.