A Quote by Neha Dhupia

Having anything to do with a hit film is great. Even if you're a third assistant to the director or second to the editor, if the film does well, every technician, every actor benefits from it.
Every film for every actor is a make-or-break film. I believe every film has the power to break you or make you. So, an actor will treat every film like his last film. That's the way we need to work, and that's the way you can drum up that passion needed to do good work.
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.
I first started working in film when I was 17. I was a director's assistant, an editor.
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.
Then I usually leave the choice of the second assistant director and any other assistant directors to the first assistant director, who will choose because he or she is responsible for the conduct and the efficiency of the second assistant directors.
In Hong Kong, in our generation that started out in the 1970s, being a director wasn't a big deal. We didn't even have director's chairs. We weren't particularly well paid. The social standing of a film director wasn't that high. It was a sort of a plebeian job, a second or third grade one. And the studio heads are always practical, there's never any fawning because someone is a director. There's very little snobbery about one's position as a director. The only ones people treated differently were those that were also stars; or the directors who also owned their companies.
1968 in Paris renewed my options. There was suddenly a desire of inventing new things, and I while I was working as an editor, the assistant editor thought I had a gift, and when he shot his own film, he hired me as his assistant camera, and I trained myself to do the light for him.
My first film was a big dud at the box office, and my second film did decently. I used to wonder how it would feel to have a hit film. I thought I'd be larger than life, but I'm not feeling anything I imagined. It's a completely different experience.
I have always believed that an actor cannot afford to have a favorite genre. He must excel in every kind of film and fit in with every director's vision.
Every film I've ever worked on, and that includes 'Braveheart' and 'Trainspotting,' I've always witnessed a director having a breakdown. Every director will have a day, without exception, where they just can't do it anymore, they don't know what to say to their cameraman, their cast. It's the sign of real, physical exhaustion.
The director is the only person on the set who has seen the film. Your job as a director is to show up every day and know where everything will fit into the film.
It's alright to make an actor sing if the director already has an ideal sequence in his film. But I am totally against bringing in actors to sing in every film without any context and just for marketing purposes.
I am an actress. My first film was a Telugu film, my second film was Bollywood, and third was Indo-Chinese.
It's not necessary that every film has to hit Rs 100 crore box office, or the Rs 50 crore budget. If the film makes double of its project budget, we consider that a hit, and that also means that the film is in profit.
Every time that I'm challenged with a film I think that I haven't learned anything, that every film is different and that every thing that I have learned is useless in this new adventure.
I would say the three stages of making a film are the initial 'are we gonna do this,' 'how much will I be paid,' is there a lot of nights, who's it going to be with? The second stage of doing a film is how much fun your going to have doing it. The third stage is was the film a hit?
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!