I'll always do 'Sherlock' - it's something I'm not going to give up on.

I was the boy that turned a girlfriend into the most celebrated lesbian on television. I got so much stick for that.

I think it's fair to say that, yeah, I'm playing Doctor Strange, I get there.

If I'd had fame early on, I'd have been able to abuse it in the way that a young man should.

I'm very proud of the work I do, but I genuinely can't involve myself with an audience as early as somebody who's not part of the film can. So there's that side of theater that appeals to me, where you give something and the response to what you've created is a communion between you and the dark that contains however many people. It's thrilling not having a reflection other than through the people you're communicating with. But people ask, "What do you prefer?" and I don't have a preference. I love them both. I really do.

I don't want to miss things.

I think what I loved in cinema - and what I mean by cinema is not just films, but proper, classical cinema - are the extraordinary moments that can occur on screen. At the same time, I do feel that cinema and theater feed each other. I feel like you can do close-up on stage and you can do something very bold and highly characterized - and, dare I say, theatrical - on camera. I think the cameras and the viewpoints shift depending on the intensity and integrity of your intention and focus on that.