A Quote by Alan Rickman

The audience should feel like voyeurs. Their response is absolutely crucial. — © Alan Rickman
The audience should feel like voyeurs. Their response is absolutely crucial.
I prefer that for my own satisfaction over radio, there's no audience. TV, there's no audience. I need the response of the audience, even if it's a silent response.
With Dream Theater live, I may have been a bit of a focal point because I absolutely live for the energy on stage, and having interaction with the audience is absolutely crucial to me - regardless of how some others have described it!
Which implies that the real issue in art is the audience's response. Now I claim that when I make things, I don't care about the audience's response, I'm making them for myself. But I'm making them for myself as audience, because I want to wake myself up.
I just feel that if people write about a film, then they should also write about audience's response.
Fiction should be an ethically safe space, free of fancy ideas. It should be dedicated modestly to relationships or escapism or the needs of luscious voyeurs.
I do actually like performing to a live audience. I like the response. I do a lot of Doctor Who conventions now, and the reason that I do them is that there is a live audience I can get to directly.
We should integrate the quality of ex-players at the highest level more in football, especially in the youth sector. That is absolutely crucial for me.
Honestly I think it was gradual from the first time I came. It's been a gradual thing as far as audience and response wise. I feel like I was conditioned for this type of impact.
Immediate, simultaneous connection between the audience and a performer is crucial to me. It's why I do what I do. Other things, like recording, are satisfying, but they're not the same. I love the connection I get with the audience when I'm sitting behind that piano.
There's a lot of exhibitionists who want to tell their stories anonymously and there's a whole lot of voyeurs who want to feel like a fly on the wall and hear about people's lives.
With her eyes alone she could give this response, this absolutely erotic response, as if febrile waves were trembling there, pools of madness... something devouring that could lick a man all over like a flame, annihilate him, with a pleasure never known before.
A good novel should be deeply unsettling - its satisfactions should come from its authenticity and its formal coherence. We must feel something crucial is at stake.
I think 'Befikre' has got a polarised response. Some people absolutely loved it and some didn't feel connected with the film. I feel the film is a little bit ahead of its time.
I have a lot of friends who were stand-ups, and they just stopped after a while, because they didn't like that battle, or they just couldn't do it. And then they would get on a sitcom and get visible and get back into it, because the audience was just way easier on them. But they lost those crucial years of learning to turn any audience into your audience.
I feel like, anytime I'm onstage, I tend to feel very connected with people in the audience or with the sort of heartbeat or tempo of the audience.
I like films that don't have that unonimity of a response; that don't have consensus in the audience. What it is essentially for me is that if you go back and watch the film a second time, do you feel that you've been played fair with? Are all the clues in place? Indeed, sometimes these things are even overstated. Specifically, for that reason.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!