A Quote by J. C. Chandor

To have a second movie that you're proud of and that actually turned out the way you wanted, shot by shot, I realize I'm probably going to be able to do this for a little while for my living.
I shot 'Fruitvale Station' on super-16, and then I shot a movie called 'The Harvest' on 35mm, and then I shot 'Little Accidents' on 2-perf 35.
I got my shot at the movies. I love doing standup live. I didn't know what I wanted to do. I wanted to try movies, so I gave it a shot. I had two shots and I didn't really do it. That wasn't really happening for me. On the second movie I got to meet the girl that would be my wife. So I got to hang out with her and get engaged, and get the whole wedding thing. It was really great.
We rehearsed for a bit for an Indie film, which is kind of unusual, we had a week of rehearsals before we actually shot the films so we were able to really break down the script and kind of work through all of the improvisational things that he wanted to do, so he had a chance to really feel his way through before we actually shot it and I think that helped a lot.
The major difference between the big shot and the little shot is the big shot is just a little shot who kept on shooting.
When you're doing a live-action movie, you have your day set up and you're going to do this shot and this shot, and eventually the sun is going to go down. It's a sequential race to whatever is going to end the day.
I'd like [Santa Claus] to give Wes Anderson, the director, enough money in his next budget for an aerial shot - just a little copter shot. He really wanted this one helicopter shot, and Disney wouldn't give him the money. Just wouldn't give him the money. Every day, he was talking to the studio about this helicopter shot.
It comes to the point where, if a midrange shot is there, I'm going to take it. If I'm open, I have to shoot that shot. That's a great shot for the team and myself.
I knew that they were going to be reading actors for Manute, and I wanted to give it a shot. I wanted a shot to do it, and they embraced that and said, "All right, come on in. Let's see what you've got." So, I went in, and the rest is history. It felt good when I went into the office, and it just worked.
I was watching Monster's Ball, which is a fabulous movie. It's just a little gem: beautifully shot, and shot in a way I never would have done. It made me feel very old, really, because it wasn't eccentric for its own sake, it was just very original.
Every shot feels like the first shot of the day. If I'm on the range hitting shot after shot, I can hit them just as good as I did when I was 30. But out on the course, your body changes between shots. You get out of the cart, and you've got this 170-yard 5-iron over a bunker, and it goes about 138.
When you make a movie, you do it so piecemeal. You're doing it, not only scene by scene, out of order, but shot by shot, line by line. And there's this idea that the director has the whole thing in his or her head and they're going to somehow weave it all together in the end.
I'm not a big fan of shooting something that looks like it could belong in any movie. I'm not a fan of, okay, 'wide shot, wide shot, medium shot, close-up, close-up - we'll figure it out in post.' I hate that.
He knows all the golf lingo. You know? You hit your ball, he's like "there's a golf shot. That's a golf shot." Well of course it's a golf shot; I just hit a golf ball. You don't see Gretzky skating around going "there's a hockey shot, that's a hockey shot."
In my view there is a level of human knowledge that involves just getting it right aptly. This "animal" epistemic level is an inferior level in just the way of Diana's long shot in the dark while drunk. That shot is inferior in a certain respect if too poorly selected as a hunter's archery shot, even if not quite as poorly selected as would be a shot aimed at the moon. Even if Diana's too risky shot turns out to be apt by attaining success through sublime archery dexterity, it is still inferior in the particular respect of being so risky and hence so poorly selected.
I mean, one shot you treat like you have forty little matches instead of one forty shot match. It makes all the difference in the world. It's easier to just forget about a not so good shot.
I think a shot can actually influence a scene in a huge way. For example, comedy is always better in a two-shot. What's between the characters is what's funny. So you learn about these things as you go along.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!