A Quote by Channing Tatum

I've always said that movies are a direct mirror of the director. — © Channing Tatum
I've always said that movies are a direct mirror of the director.
Oftentimes when I'm deciding to do a movie, the main thing is really, that I look at, is the director. I've come to feel that more and more. The more movies I've done and the older I've - the more experience I have, I always knew it was a director's medium, and I always said that.
The film is a direct mirror of the director. If your director doesn't know how to dress, there will be an aesthetic of the film that won't come through - whether it's in the costumes if he doesn't know exactly what he wants or the look of the film.
I've always been slightly hesitant about generalizing movies made by men and women being different in their nature; I think movies by each director are different. Having said that, I think that it's kind of disgraceful that there aren't more female directors.
I wouldn't not want to be a director and write as I wouldn't not to want to be a writer and direct movies.
I always wanted to direct movies. That's what I set out to do. When I was a little kid I just dreamed of making movies, and I went to film school [at Northwestern University].
I always wanted to direct. I always saw myself as a director.
I became a director by accident. M.S. Raju garu asked me to direct a movie, and I said OK. It all happened in 5 minutes.
When I write something, I want the best director to direct it. And that's not going to be me. So when David Fincher comes along and wants to direct 'The Social Network,' when Bennett Miller comes along and wants to direct 'Moneyball,' or when Danny Boyle wants to direct 'Jobs'? Hallelujah. I want them directing it.
When the digital world is really here, movies can be disseminated from satellite direct to homes and direct to small theaters in Mongolia and northern Russia and obscure places that the market for movies is going to grow and grow and grow.
It's sometimes discouraging to see all of a director's movies, because there's so much repetition. The auteurists took this to be a sign of a director's artistry, that you could recognize his movies. But it can also be a sign that he's a hack.
I like to direct movies, but I don't like to goof around for eight years talking about it. And it's pretty irritating to get a movie on. So to complicate it by having more irritation as a director, I don't really need it. And because I direct a great deal still, but in the theater, I kind of get that anyway. Which is not at all to say I would never do it again, or it would never happen again.
Unless you're a directing producer of a television show, for the most part, the director comes in one week to direct and episode, and then leaves. I'd much rather produce television and occasionally direct an episode of a show I'm producing, then just come in as an outside director.
I would say that since I was nine years old I've always wanted to write and direct horror movies and action movies. There's never been a time in my life where that wasn't all I wanted to do.
It is true that I got recognition. But however good the comedies are, nobody will accept a good comedy director as a good director. That is the sad part of it. Nobody knows who directed the 'Laurel and Hardy' movies. They know only Laurel and Hardy. Directors will never get a good name if they direct a comedy film.
Actors can make five movies a year. A director can make one movie, every two years. It's a whole different level of commitment and of sweat equity, and therefore there's a direct correlation to passion.
I'm not interested in making movies only with female protagonists. I think it's ridiculous to think that a female director can't direct men. That makes no sense to me.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!