A Quote by Timothy West

No producer should revive a play unless they have a very good reason for it. I think there's quite enough about a good play to make it available to new audiences. — © Timothy West
No producer should revive a play unless they have a very good reason for it. I think there's quite enough about a good play to make it available to new audiences.
Well, he's got a much bigger circus to play with, and he has a lot more financing available, and he has a lot more time available. I think that makes a huge difference. I think he instinctively knows how to make films and all the different ways that you can make stuff. He's very gadget-wise, and he's very smart about all the different things that are available to a filmmaker nowadays, and he makes very good use of them. He has a theater in his house, for God's sake. It has proper curtains on it and everything. It's pretty wild.
If it's a good play, don't get too high. Make a good play, follow it up, and then if it's a bad play, if there's a mistake or there's something wrong, don't worry about it.
I'm confident enough to say I was better than my mates! But with the different competitions I did play with some good players, who didn't make it for whatever reason. I was lucky enough to be able to do what I love, and my mates have continued to play at a lower level and really enjoy it, I know that's exactly what I'd be doing if I wasn't here today.
We don’t have to do a bunch of things to figure out how to win the Ryder Cup. Just go play golf. ... I’m a little bit too casual probably about a lot of things, but you can’t force good play. Good play comes from good hard work and actually being prepared to play, not being forced to play.
But we will play 6, 7 new songs each evening, approximately a third in the concert. I think it's a good balance. It will be very interesting to see the public's reaction. But i think when we'll play the very first new piece, we will be scared.
Work with good directors. Without them your play is doomed. At the time of my first play, I thought a good director was someone who liked my play. I was rudely awakened from that fantasy when he directed it as if he loathed it. . . . Work with good actors. A good actor hears the way you (and no one else) write. A good actor makes rewrites easy. A good actor tells you things about your play you didn't know.
The title's so upfront. It gives fair warning about the play's content. I'm writing about a kind of disenchantment, an anger, but quite a cool 90's anger, at a time when we're not very good at openly being angry. . . . I don't think I ever thought the title was titillating. I thought it was incredibly catchy. If the play is about the reduction in human relations down to a consumerist rationale, then thematically, the title is entirely linked into the thesis of the play.
That's really important in a producer - a producer that can step up and play a keyboard, play a bass, play a guitar, and help you with things instead of just saying, 'I think this could be better.'
If a man writes a brilliant enough play in praise of something that is universally loathed, the play, if it is good and well enough written, should not be knocked down because of its approach to its subject.
Game Over is a very frustrating game convention. In short, it means, 'If you were not good enough or did not play the game the way the designer intended you to play, you should play again until you do it right.' What kind of story could a writer tell where the characters could play the same scene ten times until the outcome is right?
A play should give you something to think about. When I see a play and understand it the first time, then I know it can't be much good.
You just suddenly think that there's something quite childish about acting. Basically, it's pretending, isn't it? It's good fun and I enjoy it, but it's a funny way of making a living, particularly when you make a very good wage, as I've been fortunate enough to do.
I'm in a position where, theoretically, I could play the same ten concertos and make a very good living bouncing around playing Mendelssohn, Tchaikovsky and Barber, but I really think artists should keep pushing limits and trying new things.
The only reason for doing a play is to make a statement about it, and by that I don't mean a conceit of the producer.
I have been very fortunate to see some very clearly excellent players play well to the very ends of their career, where they opted not to play anymore. I'm talking about Adrian Beltre. I'm talking about Torii Hunter. I'm talking about David Ortiz, Chipper Jones, Derek Jeter. These are players who decided, 'You know, I've had enough. That's good.'
Jimmy Page is an excellent producer. Led Zeppelin I and II are classics. As a player he's very good in the studio, but I've never seen him play well live. He's sloppy. He plays like he's got a broken hand and he's two years old. If you put out a good album and play like a two year old, what's the purpose?
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!