A Quote by Leigh Whannell

A lot of times when a film is a success, the fans of that film take ownership of it - it becomes their property. — © Leigh Whannell
A lot of times when a film is a success, the fans of that film take ownership of it - it becomes their property.
I'd never read 'Prince Caspian'. I watched it and loved that film. Everybody was talking about its lack of success; its relative success in comparison to the other film. It's a great film. It deserved to do a lot better than it did. It's very difficult to make a film that will match up to the first.
I think it's like the '60s - we're going to see another revolution in film where these new filmmakers stand up and take ownership of what film is and mould it into what they want.
But in film you always watch situations or stories that you really have no relation to. A lot of times just because there's no personal connection doesn't mean you can't connect with the film or the characters in the film.
Now I realize that I have to let everyone take what they have to take from the film. No matter what I think about the film, it becomes a little irrelevant. I think I would say that the film is trying to show us that - and I spoke about that earlier - we have to let the teachers invest in their own classroom. There's no use in trying to control everything. Education is fundamental.
I was one of those avid moviegoers as a kid, and we didn't have video, so we went to see everything five times. I went to see every foreign film playing in my town. As times went on, I watched a lot less films. I have a different film school now. My film school now is my life experience.
I'd say the film to avoid is a director's second film, particularly if his first film was a big success. The second film is where you've really needed to have learned something.
I've always believed that if you want to really try and make a great film, not a good film, but a great film, you have to take a lot of risks.
'The Stepfather' was the first time I sort of carried a film, or led in a film, and doing it was fun, and I felt very special. Afterwards, though, I was terrified. I just thought, 'Wow, this is basically going to be about me. If this film is a success or a failure, a lot of it's on me!'
Whenever the protagonist of the film becomes bigger than the hero of the film, the film is bound to become a hit.
Success of a film is not only based on the film being good or bad. A lot of other factors are involved as well.
In the nature of things, those who have no property and see their neighbors possess much more than they think them to need, cannot be favorable to laws made for the protection of property. When this class becomes numerous, it becomes clamorous. It looks on property as its prey and plunder, and is naturally ready, at times, for violence and revolution.
I never feel that because of my presence a film will taste success. A film's success or failure does not totally depend on me.
I think that what people abroad want from French film, inside French film becomes our worst fear, "Oh, another film about love!"
I think 'Neram' gave me the right break. At that time, I felt that the film was experimental and risky, but the film's success made people take note of me.
When you do a film like 'My Soul to Take,' and people think it sucks, that hurts. We put a lot of work into it, and it's a good film, but you go on.
To me, a revolutionary film is not a film about a revolution. It has a lot more to do with the art form. It's a film that is revolting against the old established language of cinema that had been brainwashing the people for decades. It is a film that is trying to find ways to use sound and image differently.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!