'Six Feet Under' was about repressing our deepest, most primal impulses, and 'True Blood' is about giving full sway to them all the time. In a way they are like yin and yang.
Well, here's the thing with relationships on 'True Blood': Once they happen then you have to throw a monkey-wrench into them, because to have people be happy is not that exciting.
Death showed up in my life very early on, so I'm aware of it. If you look at most of the things I write there's a sort of contemplation of mortality - although 'True Blood' doesn't fall into that. Even though there's such a ridiculously high body count!
'True Blood' differs from 'Six Feet Under' in that there are way more characters and plot-lines, but fundamentally it's still about the characters and their emotions.
'True Blood' was the most amazing adventure of my life; I met some of my best friends.
I've always freelanced as an actor, and you always have to worry about the next paycheck. When I booked 'True Blood,' I promised myself I would take advantage of the fact that for the first time in my career, I could afford to turn down big money to go and do small, character-driven indies.
To go from 'Generation Kill,' which is a very real, dark, gritty series, to 'True Blood,' which is flamboyant, crazy, way out there... I couldn't ask for two better jobs.
Sookie is always in distress, it wouldn't be 'True Blood' if someone wasn't trying to kill her.
I felt like I'd culturally arrived when a character on the HBO show 'True Blood' was reading a hardback of 'Heartsick' at Sookie's kitchen table.
I really feel like 'True Blood' is a big, giant slice of cake for the audience every week; it's offering people 60 minutes of sometimes thought-provoking entertainment. If you're gonna give an Emmy out, you should probably give it to the audience of 'True Blood.'
