After a year's research, one realizes that it could have been done in a week.
When I started out I was a failed actor.
Every scene should be able to answer three questions: "Who wants what from whom? What happens if they don't get it? Why now?
When the three branches of government have failed to represent the citizenry and the mass of the media has failed to represent the citizenry, then the citizenry better represent the citizenry.
One person may need (or want) more leisure, another more work; one more adventure, another more security, and so on. It is this diversity that makes a country, indeed a state, a city, a church, or a family, healthy. 'One-size-fits-all,' and that size determined by the State has a name, and that name is 'slavery. '
Forget narrative, backstory, characterisation, exposition, all of that. Just make the audience want to know what happens next.
The main question in drama, the way I was taught, is always, 'What does the protagonist want?' That's what drama is. It comes down to that. It's not about theme, it's not about ideas, it's not about setting, but what the protagonist wants.
I'd be dong something creative - something I could express my personality through. I enjoyed working as a gardener before music consumed more of my time. I would probably be still working as a gardener, perhaps, and I wouldn't mind doing odd jobs on the side that were creative, but I'm not sure what they'd be.
If you've been to Moscow, it's a really exciting and great city, but it still feels like you should be a little careful about which way you're going to step.
All British people have plain names, and that works pretty well over there.
I used to joke about this but I've recently realized that I really believe it: I spent many years training myself to write very slowly for pretty good money. So the idea of writing really quickly for free offends me.