Top 1200 Dynamic Characters Quotes & Sayings - Page 12

We are not lacking in the dynamic forces needed to create the future. We live immersed in a sea of energy beyond all comprehension.

Technological 'revolutions' don't really overthrow anything - they simply append a new and dynamic market to that which went before.

TV is designed to keep characters in place for years on end. The best example is 'M*A*S*H:' You have a three-year police action in Korea, and they stretched that out to eleven seasons. It was a great show, but when you think about it, a weird unreality overtakes a television series. You see the actors age, and yet the characters don't.

A civilization is complicated, in the first place, because it is dynamic; that is, it is constantly changing in the passage of time, until it has perished.

The dynamic, creative present, however conditioned and restricted by the effects of prior presents, possesses genuine initiative.

When I did 'Fast Times,' I felt very close emotionally to the characters. I liked those characters because they all had to work, so they were dealing with adult problems even though they were very immature, and I could relate to that.

Love is the dynamic motivation behind every worthy purpose; it is the upward thrust that lifts men to the heights.

I just felt like, you know, I read a lot of scripts out in L.A., out here in the industry and I just felt like this film was just being genuine. I just felt like it had really great characters. And all the three different characters have completely different stories and they're all kind of intertwined together thematically. So I just thought it had great characters, great themes

When you build characters from the outside in, they become, oftentimes they become like 'Saturday Night Live' characters or they become like caricatures of the character.

You can accept it that it may be true what somebody else says, but until you have experienced it, it is not dynamic to your own awareness.

Set lists are like movies. They need a great beginning, a dynamic shift in the middle, and bang at the end.

I think characters are most terrifying when they're relatable. It's best when your most horrible characters make sense, and are believable. That's when a movie is most terrifying.

I love the dynamic contrast between the spontaneous shots and the more formal, pro-rock-star photos.

Nobody knew if the pilot would even get picked up because it had two gay lead characters, which has never happened before. And now every show has at least two gay characters, if not many more.

I dont really like simple characters too much; its too easy. I like a challenge, and I like characters you connect with on screen.

First comes an idea. Then, characters begin to evolve out of the landscape of that idea. And then, finally, characters dominate: plot is simply a function of what these people might do or be. Everything has to flow from their personalities; otherwise it will not be emotionally engaging, or plausible.

I start with a pretty yoga-based warm-up. I do jumping jacks and burpees, and I do a lot of dynamic stretching.

Human intelligence is richer and more dynamic than we have been led to believe by formal academic education.

As someone who is non-binary gender identifying, I feel a particular responsibility to portray members of my community on stage and on screen, not only as fully fleshed-out characters who are integral to the plot, but as characters whose gender identity is just one of many parts that make up the whole person.

I tend to see my characters from inside and outside at once; this is a technique I use to retain a slight distance. It means my characters can act in unexpected ways on two axes: physical and mental. It isn't just, 'I thought this and then I did this,' which is the technique of the modern psychological novel.

I've been a social gospel-er and a person who sees politics as a central dynamic to the encoding of religious rhetoric.

With a pilot, there's a lot of information that gets packed into 46 minutes or whatever it is. Usually what happens is that, throughout the season, you get to spend a little more quality time with the characters and get to know them a bit better, whether it's based on circumstance or relationships they've created with other characters.

With all of the characters I've played, I feel like I've tried to communicate through my eyes and face, as much or more than with words. That's something that I like to watch in films, and something that I like to bring to the characters that I play.

Even if there was an opportunity to school yourself in different characters - characters that have distinct personalities which may be totally different from yours, you have got to completely divorce your own personality to be able to go over to the other personality.

I was watching the last season of 'Mad Men,' and they're now so in their characters and they're so comfortable in their characters, and they're doing such good work. That can only happen from doing it over and over, and developing a character over seven years.

I always find it actually funny that the analysis is that the characters I play in comedies are the manchild, the adolescent, characters that refuse to grow up. And yet, if you look back in the history of comedy all the way back to the Marx brothers, that's a big part of comedy.

Those situations are weird. You're in a room, and I knew they already loved this guy [for the role], so you're like, "OK, this is a different dynamic."

I like being in real environments. I love being in the place that it's about - these sets and locations are characters in the movies. Can you imagine Breakfast at Tiffany's shot somewhere else? It's classic. Characters are part of storytelling; they're just as important as everything else.

I think art, especially literature, has the particular power to immerse the viewer or reader into another world. This is especially powerful in literature, when a reader lives the experience of the characters. So if the characters are human and real enough, then readers will feel empathy for them.

The interesting thing about a lot of serialized television is that it's a blessing and curse. Smart writers really take their time in investing in backstories and characters. As a viewer, you have to invest in them and love them before you can chip away at what's going on more on a deeper level with secondary characters.

Jon Jones is a dynamic fighter, he's very exciting, he's been going out there and beating people convincingly.

The safety-obsessed church lacks the inner dynamic to foster profound missional impact in our time.

Tennis is not like other sports where the coach is hired by an independent entity, and that makes a huge difference in the dynamic.

Nevada has a very dynamic economy, with gambling being the number-one industry, followed closely by blood donorship.

The dynamic element in my philosophy, taken as a whole, can be seen as an obstinate and untiring battle against the spirit of abstraction.

I love Cillian Murphy's character in 'Peaky Blinders' and Tom Hardy's in 'Taboo' - theses are characters that, as audience members, we follow along with and root for. But our own morality is tested throughout that journey, because these characters ride a thin line between morality and amorality.

Evil needs to be understood for what it is: the dynamic of the absence of Light. It is not something that one should prepare to battle, to run from, or to outlaw.

The dynamic of fathers and sons seems to be more around competition regarding things such as knowledge, accomplishments, expertise.

I was thinking about what would it be, what would the characters be like, and it just suddenly dawned on me that, hey, nobody is doing an underseas show. So I started drawing these weird invertebrate animals, various characters like crawfish and starfish and squids and sponge.

No one else can match the environment we're creating for expanding the game experience to everyone. Our path is not linear, but dynamic.

The idea of having different characters is really just to get the storyline across, you know? Coming from one particular character makes, to me, the story boring. I get that mainly from novels and that style of writing or movies where there's multiple characters who carry the storyline.

Ultimately, any character you write - no matter how fantastic or alien - is an extension of yourself. When our characters reflect the truth of our souls and psyches, they become real and compelling. The wonderful paradox is that the characters then take on lives of their own, separate from their creators. That's where the magic comes in.

I remember how surprised I was when my first novel was about to be published and I was informed that I could be sued for anything any one of my characters said. 'But I often don't agree with what they say,' I protested. The lawyer was not interested in the clear distinction I make between my own voice and the voices of my characters. Neither, I have found, are many of my readers.

Mysteries always have the potential for interesting connections between the elements. I'm also most interested in the relationship between the characters. As in 'Masterpiece,' I'm trying to create characters who not only are solving a mystery but are solving the riddle of their own personal relationships.

Who on earth is going to use 'utilize' in a text message, a whopping seven characters including the always-hard-to-type 'z,' when you can say the exact same thing in three characters? I can't think of a sentence in which 'use' can't replace 'utilize.'

I always thought that life is full of stories and characters that feel like literary stories and characters. So when I started making documentaries, they weren't humble empirical things, just following people around. I was always trying to impose a story.

Similarity is stasis; difference is motion. And if the two happen to exist in dynamic equilibrium, everything is right in the world.

Certain majors [lables] just know what they're doin', and got a good grip on the dynamic of what's happening, and some don't.

I think our 'Reno' cops are, basically, if you made us make fun of ourselves at a party. That is what we would do. We would do those characters and not really think about it. We didn't develop the characters; everyone just put on a name tag and started improvising.

Literature doesn't have a country. Shakespeare is an African writer. His Falstaff, for example, is very African in his appetite for life, his largeness of spirit. The characters of Turgenev are ghetto dwellers. Dickens characters are Nigerians.

'Masaan' was a small role, but people connected with it. I loved playing a man who does not have many complexities in life. I was inspired by my father for this role. You find such characters in novel or in stories. You don't find such parts in movies where characters are either good, bad, or grey.

thought without expression is dynamic and gathers volume by repression. Evolution when blocked and suppressed becomes revolution.

Since appearance can't be peeled decisively from the reality of a thing, attunement is a living, dynamic relation with another being.

It's hard to guard two dynamic players working together rather than guarding them going one-on-one.

When I used to teach creative writing, I would tell the students to make their characters want something right away - even if it's only a glass of water. Characters paralyzed by the meaninglessness of modern life still have to drink water from time to time.

When you're directing an ongoing series, the tone has already been set. So a director will come in and fulfill that tone - reinforce the characters and their behavior. The challenge is to find unique ways that you can visually tell the story while keeping the established tone and the pace and the characters.

What's cool is that in the story of the movie [The Hangover] our characters are also really kind of getting to know each other and bonding over the course of the movie. And I think you're seeing a real, a literal sort of friendship growing both in us as actors and on screen as characters.

I've been really impressed with 'Supergirl.' It's a great show because it's appeals to DC Comics fans, staying true to the characters in spirit and costumes, and it also appeals to casual fans who enjoy good action, fun storylines and interesting characters.

You have an iconic character in Superman. You want to keep him vital and relevant to the audience as it evolves. So there's a creative dynamic.

I have a lot of blurring between fiction and non-fiction in so many of my works. For example, my first novel, 'When Nietzsche Wept,' has a great deal of non-fiction in it. I didn't create many characters at all. Almost all of them are historical characters that actually existed.