Peter Riegert

I did a play in high school, then one in college. My first professional experience was off-off-Broadway. I'm conveniently blocking the title. I'm sure I was terrible.

In 1962, the smallest things were upsetting to authority. It wasn't the Civil Rights Movement. It wasn't the Anti-war Movement. It was something else, but it was a harbinger of what was to come.

Setting a movie in an earlier age gives it a mythical quality.

I've learned there is a void in adult stories across the land. Hollywood, whatever that is anymore, is losing their ability to tell those stories because they're not even thinking of that audience.

I adapted an O. Henry short story called 'By Courier,' which got nominated for a Best Short Subject Oscar.

In 2000, I realized I had reached that certain age when the parts get scarcer. So I decided to try my hand at directing.

I got to learn from the American audience. Hearing what it is they're not getting. These are audiences, 35 to 40, an older demographic that controls seven to 10 trillion dollars. And the producers and distributors have convinced themselves this group doesn't go to the movies.

Sometimes you make a connection with a writer or a piece of material, and there's not much to ask.

As a matter of fact, part of being Jewish is the whole question of what it is to be a Jew.

You realize Shakespeare wasn't stuck for an idea when he said, 'All the world's a stage.'

There is a temptation for an actor to editorialize what they're doing. And you can't do that with Pinter. It's almost like a musical score. His lines are so specific, but they can mean different things to different people, like an alternating current.

I apply the three gag rule, which is if I can read a script without gagging more than three times, then maybe I can say yes to this job.

A movie is a filmed rehearsal in a way. The audience doesn't know that because you're taking out the things that don't work. There's no comparison to the theater because it's live. But making a movie is just as challenging and exciting, I find. A movie is pure process. The theater is the result of process.

I like Guinness, and that will make anyone Irish. That and soda bread, and I'm good to go.

Obviously, any time you're closer in terms of what your knowledge is to a character, you can add something. But an actor's job is not to play only people he can identify with.

You rely on a lot of things about learning to play a particular character.

There are movies I've seen or books I've read that attach themselves in a way that's greater than the ability to understand why. How do you explain that kind of connectedness?

You have to have an ego to be an actor, but you need an ego just to get through life! Unless you want to sit on a corner and suck your thumb, it takes a healthy ego to get up in the morning and say, 'I deserve to be here.'

When you get older, unless you're a huge star, the parts become less and the competition becomes greater. Because the guys left standing are the best.

I did 'Animal House' in 1978, then 'Local Hero' in 1983, and then in '88, 'Crossing Delancey.' And I realized that every three to five years, you need a big role to put you into the national psyche.

There are times when you have to fight for something you believe in, that you love.

We don't think of them as acting, but we take on certain characteristics based on where we function, and those relationships draw out aspects of who we are as people. And that's what acting is. Different parts draw out different parts of your nature.

Ease is something that I think many admire in other people, in sports or whatever it may be.

I think when you're younger, as an actor you have much more of a notion that you are doing something to the audience. But with experience, I think you begin to worry less about what the audience's experience is and concentrate on working with the other actors, and that tends to let the audience do more work.

It's a very neurotic time we live in, this postanalytical period where everybody goes to a shrink to solve their problems.