I am quite an insecure person, and I think that, like any director, if I'm asked about my vision for a piece, I feel very vulnerable.
I think theater is so undervalued. I have seen things there that have been far more vivid than things that actually have happened.
'Friends' is easy to dismiss, but it's really good television - the art with which those actors play with comedy shouldn't be denigrated. And they also know how to play irony, which I think a lot of English actors might find quite difficult.
I believe that theater has to be utterly life-changing for the people watching it.
If you can't see it, you can't be it. It's just having those brilliant women break out and do something - then other girls can say, 'I can do it, too!'
I never wanted anything to do with the theatre as a child. I was dragged there under duress.
It would be quite interesting to use Kermit the Frog to act like a real frog. But it wouldn't produce captivating theatre.
If you put a blank canvas in front of Matisse and say, 'This has to be a success,' who's going to pick up a paintbrush?
For me, 'Angels in America' is not really about AIDS. For me, it's a metaphor for anybody who is struggling with serious illness or having to face their own demise. All of the characters face some form of destruction in themselves.
The actors work out how to create the show with me during the rehearsals. They owe it to themselves and each other to maintain that contract regardless of what the critics say.
I had a very embarrassing time acting extremely badly at university, which is when directing suddenly became so attractive.
I worked in casting for about five years before I became a director, and that taught me a huge amount because you never actually will see the character walk through the door - and if you do, then you have to be slightly suspicious of that.
I've seen many shows ruined by bad reviews and good reviews, so I always tell my actors not to read the reviews until after the run is over.
A bad audition is usually the director's fault, not the actor's. It's up to the director to get the atmosphere right to get the best out of your auditionees.
I had done drama at university, but I never thought I could be a director. There were so few female directors then. I just assumed you had to be a man to be a director. I also assumed you had to be extremely authoritarian and extremely intellectual, none of which I was.
I'm interested in teasing out the contemporary issues in what I'm working on, however old the piece might be, whenever I'm working on it.
The better the acting is, the less visible the director and the less visible the actor.
It's difficult to find an actress prepared to play a fading star.
As you get older, you realise that your identity becomes more important - the environment in which you have grown is actually part of who you are just as much as your family or your school.
If you are working in a publicly subsidized building, then you have a responsibility to deliver truly interesting, risky, innovative, even provocative work. Work that speaks to your audience in many resonant ways. The priority is less about the financial rewards.
