A Quote by Mohanlal

It's not enough that you act in a movie - if it has to work, the audience should like it. — © Mohanlal
It's not enough that you act in a movie - if it has to work, the audience should like it.
I think awards are good for the movie. They can bring a new audience to the movie. I've always claimed that things like that don't get you work. Work gets you work. That's my blue-collar, protestant work ethic.
It's basically how I choose movie roles. Would I like to see this movie? Is this movie important? Why would I do this? And Headhunters is a movie that I would like to see in the cinema. And when it's sold to 50 countries or whatever, for me it's a great deal. I make movies for an audience so if that audience grows, I feel really honoured and thankful for it.
If I had the opportunity, I would make the proposal that no man should be killed except by somebody who knows him well enough for the act to have impact. No death should be like nose blowing. Death is important enough that it should affect the person who causes it.
What I do is write books for an audience that thinks in a movie language. That's the way I think, and I also believe that not enough authors keep up with the audience.
But then when I'm in a halfway successful movie, it irritates the hell out of the critics in New York, because they'd like to kill my pictures if they could. So maybe I'm pretty good in the movie. Then they use all these words like I'm 'surprisingly' good, or 'shockingly enough,' I'm good. It's like I crawled out from under a magazine and they're surprised I can act.
I should like to use another word: 'audience' or 'reader' or 'listener' seems inadequate. I suggest the old word 'witness,' which includes the act of seeing and knowing by personal experience, as well as the act of giving evidence.
I think I should be respectful of fighters. This sport is brutal enough itself. I don't think you should say stupid statements or should act like savages.
I think if the movie has resonance and stimulates the viewer to talk about it, you can have as large an audience as you want. The most important thing for me is that the movie exists. And that's success enough already.
I don't want to show deleted scenes. I don't like an audience looking at what the movie might have been - if it's in the movie, it's in the movie.
Very difficult to understand American audience, what they like, what they don't like. Some movie I like very much, it doesn't work. Some movie I don't like, it gets big box office. Very difficult.
The challenges should be familiar. They should have some relationship to the feelings - like, if a movie's about being demoralized at work, it should feel familiar to people, whether you're a roofer or a lifeguard. But there's a million different ways to be demoralized, especially at work.
I've always thought of the audience. I just want to entertain the audience. That's what it's about: what's good for the movie, what's best for the movie, what's best for the audience.
A good score should have a point of view all of its own. It should transcend all that has gone before, stand on its own two feet and still serve the movie. A great soundtrack is all about communicating with the audience, but we all try to bring something extra to the movie that is not entirely evident on screen.
Christian audience, I think, have grown very tired of movies that try to pander to them. For instance if someone goes, "Ok, we're designing what we're going to do with this movie. It's a Christian movie and they'll eat it up." And you know what? Consumers are smarter than that. They go, "The movie isn't that great and he thought that I would just be a sucker and plop my $10 down for it?" Because you're looking down at the audience. You can't pander to an audience.
We're all so jaded. We've seen so many movies. We know what's going to happen in every single movie. I mean, there are some movies where I'm like why do I even need to keep watching? And so, if you can make a movie in which you're completely surprising the audience left and right, and left and right, then you've won. If a jaded film critic or reporter or an audience is like, "I didn't see that one coming," that to me is like a victory.
I think a script is great when it starts with the structure and works with the structure without falling into the typical three-act system in which the audience is ahead of the movie. I hate that, but that is like 99% of what I read.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!