I have no issues if audiences don't like a film or a performance, and the film doesn't do well. My problem is when they say that the film was good and performances were excellent, but the film didn't run. I have a problem when that happens.
'Black film,' unless it's lucky enough or creative enough, or timely enough to build a life of its own, hangs subjacent to 'white film' on Hollywood's financial score board... aided and abetted by the supposition that so-called black film has no foreign market.
The song 'Bolo Naa' from the film 'Chittagong,' which got me the National Award, wasn't even promoted in India, whereas the film won laurels all over the world.
I think a director is hugely responsible for the fate of a film, so if it does well, he should be appreciated. As an actor, I can only perform well or choose to work with a good director in a good film.
To be honest, you have to do a big Hollywood film to get enough money to do a good independent film!
I do think it's true that anytime somebody comes to you and says, "I'd like to be in your film," it's never good to dismiss them or make fun of them, because if they're passionate and driven enough, they very well might find a way to be in your film.
Well, as far as film, either you're making a film or you're making videos. Digital capture is always trying to emulate the range and look of film. I believe personally that film has more.
My best film is always my next film. I couldn't make Chungking Express now, because of the way I live and drink I've forgotten how I did it. I don't believe in film school or film theory. Just try and get in there and make the bloody film, do good work and be with people you love.
I think 'The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo' is a good example of a film where you have to juggle a whole lot of information to follow that story, and even if you haven't read the book, it seems to go pretty well. And that is a film where the characters didn't meet until 74 minutes into the film, not on page 17.
I'm a film maker, not a crusader. I know a film will not change the world. If it can make a difference to a few that's good enough.
I made four comedies, and all did well, but I always wanted to do an action film. When I saw 'Singham,' I thought this was the right film. Many stopped me, saying, 'You are doing so well in comedy, why do you want to make this film?'
For me, when I choose a script, I put my heart and soul into it, and that is exactly what I look for in a film. A good film is a good film. And if it's a bad film, irrespective of whether it's made 300 crores or 200 crores or any amount of money, it doesn't matter to me.
If people get inspired by 'Baahubali' as a film, and they realize they can make a big film or a historical film which has good drama and good visuals, if they realize there are good stories to tell here, then it is good.
I considered going to film school; I took a course in film and was very interested in filmmaking as well as film writing.
Success of a film is not only based on the film being good or bad. A lot of other factors are involved as well.
My last experience of film-making was Tickets, a three-episode film in Italy, the third of which is directed by myself. It's not for me to judge whether it's a good film or a bad film, but what I could say is that nobody had a cultural or linguistic issue with what was produced.