A Quote by Philip Seymour Hoffman

Actors are responsible to the people we play. — © Philip Seymour Hoffman
Actors are responsible to the people we play.
Actors are responsible to the people we play. I don't label or judge. I just play them as honestly and expressively and creatively as I can.
There's this constant narrative of anxieties: Is the U.S. in decline? Is China rising? People forget... no other country is trying to play the role we play. They're not signing up to be responsible for security in the Middle East, responsible for the global economy, responsible for enforcing international norms.
There are some actors who can only play themselves, but good actors must really be separated from the people they play.
Not that it entirely matters: There is a perception that all actors make their movies. A lot of people assume you're responsible. George Clooney told me actors get all of the blame and all the credit.
There are level-headed actors and outlandish actors and financially responsible actors and financially irresponsible actors.
There's two types of character actors. There's character actors who play all different characters. Or there's actors who always play the same part; they're just a bit funny-looking.
It's responsible for the sloppiness and imprecision of the War on Terror, for example. It's responsible for taking people's tax dollars and spending the country into debt on useless wars and pointless pork projects to buy votes. It's responsible for bailing out the banks instead of standing up for the people the banks cheated. It's responsible for plenty.
People like to think that actors are terribly worried about ghosts of other actors in the parts they play. But you just have to get on with it.
Actors can't retire. If actors retired, there would be nobody left to play old, wrinkly people. You have to keep going, darling - don't you?
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.
I think, in general, straight actors should be able to play queer roles just as much as queer actors should be able to play straight roles. I think the reason why the debate is there is because we haven't had enough queer actors being cast in anything. People are in need of that representation in general.
Work is good when people are responsible, and in low-budget movies a lot of the actors don't want to be there. They're there to build a resume.
I come from a tradition where the writer writes a play for the actors, rather than for himself, and the dialogue is made to work onstage, so it needs actors to help shape it. So you never get a play right straightaway.
Older actors can still play young, but it's harder for young actors to be able to play that age range.
The great amount of fun that I have is I can cast dramatic actors to play comedic roles, and I can cast comedic actors to play dramatic roles because, really, there's no such thing. There's just actors.
There comes a point in many people's lives when they can no longer play the role they have chosen for themselves. When that happens, we are like actors finding that someone has changed the play.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!