A Quote by James Nesbitt

Some actors can distance themselves from the parts they play, but I fall into the category who use bits of themselves. — © James Nesbitt
Some actors can distance themselves from the parts they play, but I fall into the category who use bits of themselves.
There are some actors who can only play themselves, but good actors must really be separated from the people they play.
I think actors are brave souls that have to use parts of themselves that I'm just not comfortable doing anymore.
Actors are different. Some actors play themselves very successfully, but I come from the theater. Having done Shakespeare, we sometimes did three or four characters in the same play.
The thing I was up against in documentary films - was trying to get non-actors to convincingly play themselves in a way I'd come to know before the camera started rolling. And many non-actors can't do that convincingly, even if they just have to play themselves - they can't be naturalistic. And I would always want to recreate something I'd witnessed them do or say, and it just would be incredibly difficult because of the fact they weren't actors.
Some actors play themselves, don't they?
Girls who stay true to themselves manage to find some way to respect the parts of themselves that are spiritual. They work for the betterment of the world. Girls who act from their false selves are often cynical about making the world a better place. They have given up hope. Only when they reconnect with the parts of themselves that are alive and true will they again have the energy to take on the culture and fight to save the planet.
Some men are so full of themselves that when they fall in love, they amuse themselves rather with their own passion than with theperson they love.
Each religion is a brave guess at the authorship of Hamlet. Yet, as far as the play goes, does it make any difference whether Shakespeare or Bacon wrote it? Would it make any difference to the actors if their parts happened out of nothingness, if they found themselves acting on the stage because of some gross and unpardonable accident? Would it make any difference if the playwright gave them the lines or whether they composed them themselves, so long as the lines were properly spoken? Would it make any difference to the characters if 'A Midsummer Night's Dream' was really a dream?
I think good actors - good, collaborative actors who see themselves as leaders in a given production - can and should offer ideas that have nothing to do with wanting to direct themselves.
When people censor themselves they're just as likely to get rid of the good bits as the bad bits.
In some ways, making documentaries is like being a journalist. You interview people and then use the bits you want to use as opposed to the bits they want you to use.
Some days are happy days - of themselves, as if for their own sakes. They seem to be enjoying themselves, regardless of what use may be made of them.
Actors like Daniel Day-Lewis, Gary Oldman, they totally immerse themselves in their parts.
A lot of the characters I play seem to be lying to themselves in some way. They maybe present themselves as confident or good at something, but in reality, it's clear that they don't know what they're talking about.
Even in the things that look most frivolous there has to be the threat of something quite painful to make the comedy work. I suppose the play of mine that's best know is NOISES OFF, which everyone thinks is a simple farce about actors making fools of themselves. But I think it makes people laugh because everyone is terrified inside themselves of having some kind of breakdown, of being unable to go on. When people laugh at that play, they're laughing at a surrogate version of the disaster which might occur to them.
I think that some people like to be someone other than themselves when acting, while others are most themselves. I fall into the second camp. For me, acting is a great exercise in getting to the truth about myself.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!