A Quote by Sreenivasan

I believe that the purpose of cinema is to entertain. The so-called geniuses may have given new meanings to it, but for those who developed cinema, the aim was to entertain.
I always wanted to make cinema which will entertain the masses, cinema that could be called escapist but is mounted on a realistic scale with high production values.
Cinema is not just a medium of entertainment. Yes, it should entertain, but cinema is made to convey a message, to say something.
I feel the primary job of cinema is to entertain.
This is what the difference is between Hong Kong and Chinese cinema - Chinese cinema was made for their own communities. It was for propaganda. But Hong Kong made films to entertain, and they know how to communicate with international audiences.
In a way, this is what the difference is between Hong Kong and Chinese cinema - Chinese cinema was made for their own communities. It was for propaganda. But Hong Kong made films to entertain, and they know how to communicate with international audiences.
MORE CONSISTENTLY THAN EVER I WAS TRYING TO MAKE PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT CINEMA AS AN INSTRUMENT OF ART HAS ITS OWN POSSIBILITIES WHICH ARE EQUAL TO THOSE OF PROSE. I WANTED TO DEMONSTRATE HOW CINEMA IS ABLE TO OBSERVE LIFE, WITHOUT INTERFERING, CRUDELY OR OBVIOUSLY, WITH ITS CONTINUITY. FOR THAT IS WHERE I SEE THE POETIC ESSENCE OF CINEMA.
I don't believe that one has to tear down the cinema screen in order to renew cinema. But new input and new energy are lacking. They are flowing above all into the television technologies. We must, therefore, concentrate on the CD-ROM.
I believe in cinema! Unfortunately, 90 per cent of Hindi cinema is non-cinema. Only marketing works here. Even the item songs in these films are an extension of marketing.
I entertain more than just sayin', 'oh that's a female rapper,' or 'oh, that's a rapper,' period.' But, me, I put out music, and when I put it out, I also entertain on Twitter. I entertain on stage. I entertain talking to people.
Our films have to entertain without the viewer being guided to a humdrum set of do's and don't's. At the same time, as a filmmaker, my films should evoke some feelings, some thoughts in their minds. That's the purpose of cinema. It has to be a learning experience without advocating rights or wrongs in a subtle manner.
The public should want to see a movie and it should entertain them. If it fails to do so, it is not good cinema.
Some people feel that the purpose of cinema is entertainment - which in itself is a healthy enough goal, provided you define what constitutes entertainment. But I come from a family where I grew up believing that cinema - art - should be used as an instrument for change and that's the kind of cinema I've largely done and been attracted to.
There are those who think that Zeffirelli's Hamlet is the way to treat Shakespeare. I think that cinema can handle much more. We somehow expect cinema to provide us with meaning, to console us. But that's not the purpose of art.
It is my first preference to do films with social significance. Art cinema has given me credibility and status as an actor, but commercial cinema has given me a comfortable living.
Americans don't understand what metaphor in cinema is about. They're extremely good at making straightforward, linear narrative movies, which entertain superbly. But they very rarely do anything else.
Good cinema is what we can believe and bad cinema is what we can't believe. What you see and believe in is very much what I'm interested in.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!