What inspired me most about this interview was the gratitude and dedication to craft that these actors exuded. I was both humbled and inspired by their circumspect attitude these actors took towards public perception and how little the failure/success in the box office meant. Granted, an actor of that level –unlike a producer— has the luxury of deriving merit based on a film’s creative success, alone.

What’s interesting to me, on a personal level, is the fact that downtown theater artists in New York have the same luxury. I say this, drawing from the eight years that I spent making creatively –rather than financially rewarding– theater in Downtown Manhattan, before moving to Hollywood. Downtown theater artists in New York, of course, have this same luxury because the audience is so much smaller that cost and consequently, box office expectations are much lower. Also, as there is no real connection to commercial producers, the value system is also different there.

Ultimately, an artist with the spiritual fortitude to take full ownership of their creative ambitions can and will have the luxury of defining success based on creative merit, alone. And that’s whether or not they are always able to make films that they consider creatively successful. The awareness of what their creative needs are combined with persistence is what ensures their creative needs will eventually get met.