A Quote by Natalie Dormer

We don't have enough young, female antiheroes. We don't accept women as antiheroes the way we do the men. — © Natalie Dormer
We don't have enough young, female antiheroes. We don't accept women as antiheroes the way we do the men.
There are so many male antiheroes but not nearly as many female antiheroes.There's a lot of pressure on female characters to be likable. That puts a lot of pressure on women to be likable.
I'm more comfortable writing traditional protagonists. But 'Steve Jobs' and 'The Social Network' have antiheroes. I like to write antiheroes as if they're making their case to God about why they should be allowed into heaven. I have to find something in that character that is like me and write to that.
That's always been part of my goal - to show the dark side of women. Men write about bad men all the time, and they're called antiheroes.
A theme that has always interested me is how women express anger, how women express violence. That is very much part of who women are, and it's so unaddressed. A vast amount of literature deals with cycles of violence about men, antiheroes. Women lack that vocabulary.
Women are really complex and totally enigmatic. Humans are really complex, but in film, we've only ever seen that with men. We've seen antiheroes time and again with male characters.
I wanted to make room for antiheroes.
I've always had antiheroes in my film.
You have antiheroes in dramas, like Tony Soprano. But it's a little bit harder in comedy. You don't see it quite as much.
We seem, as a culture, to start to adhere to these antiheroes and have grown tired of the traditional, straight-up-and-down good guy.
Antiheroes who are sort of honest to themselves are the ones you root for. Like, Barry Seal isn't trying to be anything other than he is. He isn't fooling anybody per se.
Some people compare Spike Spiegel to Dirty Harry, and they're both antiheroes. But Spike is an extension of myself.
You know, whenever women make imaginary female kingdoms in literature, they are always very permissive, to use the jargon word, and easy and generous and self-indulgent, like the relationships between women when there are no men around. They make each other presents, and they have little feasts, and nobody punishes anyone else. This is the female way of going along when there are no men about or when men are not in the ascendant.
I think audiences definitely respond to people who are not living the perfect lives. The flawed characters, the people who are struggling. The antiheroes - people like to see that a lot more.
Loser lit antiheroes aren't well intentioned or earnest; they don't care whether you like them or not. They're self-mocking, ironic and inventive; they narrate their downfalls with manic wordplay, rampant metaphors, wisecracks, and escalating flights of spleen-fueled lyricism.
It's a different thing with cable TV. You don't have to have your characters be lovely again by the end of the episode. And in this era of the male antiheroes on cable TV, you don't even need to make them likable; you just need to make them compelling. As opposed to film, where it's still those basic tropes of good versus evil. But for women, I don't think that has been widely seen yet.
Riddick is an antihero. He's the quintessential antihero. We all know how much I love antiheroes. It takes you 45 minutes in the movie just for Riddick to understand the word "heroism," let alone for anyone to hope that he can be heroic.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!