I find often in Hollywood there are many people who play themselves really beautifully. And certain parts are not that dissimilar from who you are as a person.

I guess I've always been really attracted to period pieces and always felt visually I was probably more made for the '50s or the early '60s than I am for a modern day.

I like being the lead but I like being in an ensemble. There are different challenges and dilemmas with both. If you're carrying a film, there's a certain weight, but there are a lot of scenes to explore the character. When you're in an ensemble, you have to convey the entire character in a limited number of scenes.

I think that there's a tendency for actors who play strong women to have them take on all the worst characteristics of men, to become cold and detached and hardened.

I think when I first started acting there were different people who I thought, 'I want that person's career or that person's career.' And as time has gone on, it's become really clear to me what is important to me; getting the best roles, the roles that I feel are challenging and scary and that I haven't done yet.

I'm intrigued by films that have a singular vision behind them. A lot of studio movies have ten writers by the time they're done. You have a movie testing 200 times, making adjustments according to various people's opinions. It's difficult to have an undistilled vision.

It's not often that the idea of continuing something for a potentially long period of time sounds exciting to me, because I really am a gypsy by nature.

One of the things I really love about TV is this symbiotic relationship you can get between the writers and the actors, and the characters start to come to life because you start to collaborate.

Unfortunately, 'chick flick' has become a term to describe most movies that I don't even like. They're these movies that, yes, have women in them but they really don't reflect who women are, and there's something kind of silly or shallow or gossipy about them.

We are all multidimensional and kind of have dual personalities. Everyone puts on different roles depending on what circumstances they're in without even noticing that they do that.

Well, first of all, I'm an incredibly gullible person - I'm so bad that when I said that to someone, my friend said, 'You know, 'gullible' isn't even in the dictionary.' And I said, 'Really?' As I was saying 'Really?' I will acknowledge that I then realized what was happening, but that's how bad I am.

What I've realized is that we're our own harshest critics. We give ourselves limitations. But I want to push through that wall, on a creative and personal level.

When my friends have a health concern, they call me. I've always been a vitamin taker. I also take digestive enzymes and antioxidants, and supplements that help with the thyroid and adrenals for my time-zone changes.

Yeah, I guess I'm not a particularly religious person, but I do really believe strongly that we all need to believe in something, and that's very personal to each one of us.

As an actor, you're naked emotionally; you're revealing yourself emotionally.

For me, I never, never, from the moment I started acting, had a desire to be famous.

I always feel like I want to work with people who raise my game, and I can do the same for them, and we can jump off the cliff together.

I always had challenges when I was younger, because I looked so young but sounded older.

I feel like I'm the only person - or woman, at least - who hasn't read 'Fifty Shades of Grey.'

I generally make a sort of playlist for my iPod for whatever project I'm doing.