A Quote by Keira Knightley

Bigger films are more difficult because the number of people is so huge. — © Keira Knightley
Bigger films are more difficult because the number of people is so huge.
I think the one thing that I've experienced with American films is just that the size tends to be so much bigger, the budgets have been bigger, the size of the sets have been bigger, the number of people working on them is bigger, but that's not to say that I haven't been able to get close to people or develop good relationships.
We can't deny that films have a bigger reach. After the popularity of the 'Slumdog Millionaire,' a lot of people started reading Vikas Swarup's 'Q & A'. From a business sense, films are a good tool to increase the number of readers.
Bigger-budgeted films have more restrictions and less freedom to create. Because of this, I try to find freedom in the people I work with. I often work in ways I don't want to. It's more about controlling the situation. Lower-budget films are freer.
Everything we can think of that should have a processor, and they'll all be connected. People talk about fridges re-ordering when you run out of milk, but it's going to be much bigger than that. The transition to this world will require a huge number of applications to be developed, and that's a huge opportunity for Infosys.
I love doing short films because they're much more intimate and there's far less waiting around than on the bigger films.
The idea was not to make a huge business, because the bigger you get, the more restraints I thought I might get. Number one was to do what I set out to do: make new and interesting things within the size of the business that is possible to do without restraints. The second goal was to do the business in order to achieve the first goal. That's what many people don't understand.
All of a sudden, there are great Japanese films, or great Italian films, or great Australian films. It's usually because there are a number of people that cross-pollinated each other.
I often find the smaller, independent films are much more rewarding than the bigger stuff, but you do the bigger stuff because it's a business, and you've got to show your face a bit, get yourself around.
The whole reason one wants to do lower budget films is because the lower the budget, the bigger the ideas, the bigger the themes, the more interesting the art.
Nature is so huge. I mean, you can't even look one way! Everything is huge. That was my natural instinct, to create huge art, to create huge pieces. And to me, I still could create bigger works. The opportunity doesn't come along to do anything any bigger. So I've worked as big as I've had the opportunity to work, basically.
As you have two more huge characters as Cable and Domino, 'Deadpool' is growing, and it's making 'X-Force' franchise bigger and bigger.
If someone makes an inroad into a new territory, a new market, people will follow their success. That way, I think we will be getting more pan-India films and not restricted to a region or a language. More and more films will come out on a bigger budget, on a larger-than-life scale.
I think the problem I have with films is that, because there's so much hype around them, they become bigger than they should be, really. There are things that people do every day in their little workshops that they'll take to heaven with them. You've got to realise that it's not everything, making films.
The bigger you grow, the more intimate communication has to be. It almost has to be belly and belly. As you get bigger and bigger in an organization, everything gets more and more detached and everything is on email or voicemail. That's the worse thing because lack of intimacy is one of the downsides (of growth).
If today I have been able to sell myself, it's because I agreed to shed my clothes and my inhibitions. And the more clothes I take off, the greater the number of people who come to see my films.
When private industry makes a mistake, it gets corrected and goes away. As governments make mistakes, it gets bigger, bigger and bigger and they make more, more and more because as they run out of money, they just ask for more and so they get rewarded for making mistakes. In the meantime that is exactly what we are doing by subsidizing companies which are failing, we have a reverse Darwinism, we've got survival of the unfittest, the companies and people that have made terrible mistakes are being rewarded and other people are being punished and being taxed.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!