Usually when I start to work and to prepare the movie, some inspirations, different kind of human beings, it can be someone I know, someone I don't, a girl, a boy. So usually when I start, quite right away, some inspirations come.
I have a set of images that go around the world in an art gallery installation. Each of them have different audiences, and they kind of each elucidate the subject in a slightly different way, and they ping off of each other.
With 'Hail, Caesar!' it was about all the skill sets I had to learn, but each movie requires a different way of working. You're a piece in a new world, and there is always a difficult part within that world. For me, it's not consistent from movie-to-movie, each film has a central challenge.
I personally find that each instalment has a different director, cast and crew, and I've also been in a different season in my life for each of them, so I feel like each movie is a unique experience that centres around my undying passion for music and dance.
Everything I've wanted to turn into a film becomes something new and different when it becomes a movie... Each time I work with an author, I say to them, 'A book and a movie are different things.'
I don't want everybody to try to sound like something; I think that God has given us each unique talents and passions. The things that come out of me will be different than my neighbor, because I have a totally different set of relationships, totally different set influences and personality traits.
'Rogue One' does not feel like a 'Star Wars' movie. There are no scrolling yellow letters. There is no classic John Williams score. It feels like a movie of a different type set in the 'Star Wars' universe, a movie where there is no magic to save you. It is not a movie for children.
Each environment is different, each job is different, and each realm of creativity that they give you is different. You try to do the best you can and put as much time into it as you can, but different jobs have different circumstances come about.
Actually shooting a 3-D movie is not different at all than making a 2-D one. You never really notice that you're making a 3-D movie. The terminology used around the set is a little bit different, but other than that, you'd never know.
Set a page in Fournier against another in Caslon and another in Plantin and it is as if you heard three different people delivering the same discourse - each with impeccable pronunciation and clarity, yet each through the medium of a different personality.
Each movie is different because each audience is different. You're not dictated by what they tell you to do. You're more dictated by seeing symptoms of things you didn't intend, and how you can fix those symptoms.
The process of composing the film score for each movie is completely different. They all have their own personality and their own completely different life, but there's never been a formula. Each time, it's a new thing.
I try to keep my voice natural for each character, but the spirit and the cadence and breathing for each character is totally different. It's those things that set each role apart from the others.
It's different for each individual. It's different when you talk about homosexuality. It's different when you talk about a malady like deafness. Everybody might have a different response to that and that's what makes it an interesting subject to throw in a movie.
It never seems to occur to anyone that each reader is different, and that even those who might be said to resemble each other will each bring an individual set of experiences and references to their reading, and interpret and misinterpret it according to these.
Each of my Shakespeare pieces is different to the other, but each espouses a set of philosophies common to all my theatre work.