Top 1200 Good Films Quotes & Sayings - Page 17

In certain areas I don't function well and in other areas I function very well. I'm very good professionally. I have good discipline, I'm able to write every day and do films and not go six times over the budget. I mean I'm a coherent person, but I also don't like to go through tunnels when I travel. I'm claustrophobic.

People will now go to films with subtitles, you know. They're not afraid of them. It's one of the upsides of text-messaging and e-mail. Maybe the only good thing to come of it.

I'm always open to acting in Tamil films. In fact, I'm open to films from the south.

I feel that I have not got my due in films. However, I did a lot of good work on television and that's why I never got typecast.

My dream is to one day own a country house on the shore in England, have gotten married, wipe some debt off and get a few more good films.

I know how to make films and now I'm able to make films with the resources and the tools that match my imagination, and what filmmaker doesn't want to do that? I feel very fortunate to have that. I don't take it for granted.

I want to do some bigger films, so long as there's some sort of exciting creative element or a good filmmaker behind them.

Most Pixar films are better than most live action films.

When you do films after films, you don't let life happen. At least, in my case, I end up relying too much on emotions, which aren't raw enough. Travel helps me to get a renewed approach towards things.

There are wonderful films that become studio films, but they're conceived independently. That's where the action is. 'Being John Malkovich' is a great example of a picture you wouldn't think the studios would want, and it turns out to be a movie that touches everybody's heart.

I think it's important for an actor to see the work they've done because every time you revisit a work you come up with a new way of improving it. It's a good way to brush up your craft and your skills, so I think it's a good thing to do, keep seeing your films.

Films are made for audience's appreciation but films are also made for artistic satisfaction.

Films were always there at the back of my mind. I would try to move away, but films kept coming to me. I would do movies for friends. I guess some things are meant to be!

One of my favourite films is called 'Lacombe Lucien,' directed by Louis Malle. The lead character in that film, like the lead characters in many '70s and '80s films, has a moral ambiguity to him.

Coming out of the '60s and the Vietnam War in America, it was commonplace for people to make films that had relevance to them. And since the '70s, cinema has gone almost entirely in the direction of spectacle and escapism and superhero films.

I'm not seeking out genre films, but this just came my way, and Miramax was good enough to add a role for me because we wanted the chance to work together.

If I want to be the sexy Bipasha Basu, then I'll do a song here or a glam role there. But I want to be part of films that are watched, films that earn money and are new age, with author-backed roles.

I decided to do advertising, as ad films were made in only 10 days, and started assisting Sanjeev Sharma and Mansoor Khan. Surprisingly, I was a whiz kid and soon learnt to edit films and became an expert at it.

I remember watching 'The Lunchbox' that released around the same time 'Ship Of Theseus'. Both films found space in the independent cinema circuit. But at a personal level, 'The Lunchbox' is one of the favourite films.

I don't want to exclusively direct white films, or black films. I want to have a choice.

I've played a lot of fathers in my life, and it seems that my kids are getting older and older in films, and I'm always surprised at how good they are.

Jennifer Aniston and I have always just really gotten along well... I was just fortunate to be a good fit for parts in her films.

I wouldn't say I'm a connoisseur of film. I like certain films, but I don't pretend to be a connoisseur of films, no.

In the end, with all of my films, I want to understand the continuity between these films and understand what they're trying to do.

I'm not making films for critics, I'm making films for people to go out and enjoy.

Wiseman's films are some of the most pure cinema, and to take a journey in a Wiseman film is like no other. He's been doing it so long, with a body of over 40 films!

Art films aren't necessarily photography. It's feeling. If we can capture a feeling of a people, of a way of life, then we made a good picture.

Film has always been a really good tool for me to communicate emotion about why I create a collection. I'm probably one of the first designers to make short films.

I always argued against the auteur theory; films are a collaborative art form. I've had some fantastically good people help me make the movies.

Some films clearly seem to divide people. And I do think there's something incredibly exciting about the commonality of us as human beings, which some films are lucky enough to tap into.

I felt I would have the most creative freedom making experimental films and teaching, as I had many good examples of people around me who did just that.

I can't say that I wouldn't prefer to make small films, basically because I think they are probably more interesting in terms of the material. But every now and again, it's quite good to do a big one.

I think that people who make films and think they're changing the world are sorely mistaken. If that really is your goal, there are far better ways to do it. I'm making politically observant films for audiences.

Me and music are not good friends, so I do my best to augment the music part [of my films] and come up with something worth watching.

I'm very pessimistic about adaptations from one medium to another. I've got a very kind of primitive, Puritan view of it. I tend to think that if something was derived for one medium, then there's no real immediate reason to think that it's necessarily going to be as good or better if adapted into another one. There have been very good stage plays that have made some very good films. But there are not so many differences between the theater and the cinema as there are between the cinema and, say, reading a book or reading a comic.

Subconsciously, there was always an actor inside me. But while growing up, it was a very normal childhood because my dad never got films to the dining table and never discussed films.

Licensing is how indie rock people make a living these days, so whatever about that. But I want good films and good placement for the songs because I want to be exclusive. I don't want to just sign it away because I don't want songs to lose meaning, but I'm also...I don't care [that] Wilco sold songs to Volkswagen. That's great. They probably drive Volkswagens.

I was not interested in films, but I was forced to act when I was just 14 or 15 years old. Now, I feel that that was not the right age to enter films. One should at least be 21 to enter the industry.

I'm a huge fan of the films of the '70s and even into the '80s, Sidney Lumet, all those films that used what was going on in people's lives as drama. And not only are you entertained, but hopefully have a greater understanding of your world coming out of it.

You don't do background music the way a lot of more conventional films do. The music is often kind of a character in your films to the extent that sometimes you stop and watch someone perform a song.

I will do all genres. I will do intense roles, along with the kind of films that I have grown up watching, like 'Biwi No. 1' and 'Judwaa.' But I won't do films where, if you take me out of the script, nothing changes.

When I was seven, I said, "I want to act." When I was 10, I realized that films exist, and I wanted to be in them. Not a comedian, I wanted to be a dramatic actor. Films just seemed such fun, and like such a great thing to do.

In the '90s, I kind of put aside all those things I loved in the '80s and I got really into watching foreign films and art films and stuff like that, and sort of soaking those up.

Sometimes people that are very good at improvisation in life, meaning like stage improvisation, aren't good in films because you have to ultimately take a scene where it needs to go. It's not about just saying something that's funny. You can say something funny but if it's not on story or driving the scene to its end it's really not very helpful at all.

Each one of my films is personal; each one of my films is emotionally autobiographical. And I like directors who do that.

I don't see making films to entertain and making films to inform as separate things.

I want to do good films. It is not that I have any problem doing commercial roles, with all the glitter. I am doing 'Cabaret.' It is very glamourous.

The United States and Turkey are the only two countries that don't have some kind of subsidy for the Arts. The whole culture in society has made certain films more acceptable. I turned down so many films in the '60s and '70s.

I've always been interested in showing our films to international audiences. The easiest way is through the festival circuit, a big marketing platform for films that aren't big enough to be in the mainstream race.

I learned very quickly that the hard thing in life is to make good films. Technically, filmmaking is the camera and the actor telling the story and that's what I'm more interested in doing.

I'm not eager at all to present my life out there for public consumption. I like to do one or two films a year and then do what is absolutely obligatory in terms of promoting them. My life outside of films is vital to me.

I have enjoyed the films directed by Prabhu Deva and simply love his choreography. And he is the best dancer India has. I feel he knows what the audience wants, and that is why the films he has directed are hits.

Lynch is not as strange as his films. He's a complex guy with a very interesting view of the world. But he's very accessible, with a good heart.

When you're talking horror or sci-fi, you're working in a genre that has loosely certain thematic elements, or, you could even call them rules. But rules are there to be broken. I think that young filmmakers should go all the way back to the history of horror, from silent films like "Nosferatu", and through to today's horror films, so they understand the history of horror films and what has been done. Understand that, and then add something new or original.

Well, I think by and large, certainly in terms of cinema, American culture dominates our cinema, mainly in the films that are shown in the multiplexes but also in the way that it has a magnetic effect on British films.

The kind of films that are made depends on the kind of films that are becoming hits. That's why I always say you should be very careful about which film you decide to watch.

You really think that on my films people tell me what to do? I don't think so. On my films I decide.

I made tons of films. I did animation for my friends' films. I animated scenes just for the fun of it. Most of my stuff was bad, but I had fun, and I tried everything I knew to get better.

When you have these surprise breakout films that do well, that have good performances in them, it puts a lot of pressure on the Academy to recognize those projects, so it's more of a conversation about what is greenlit.

I think we shouldn't be shy of thinking that we can interpret text like a movie again, depending on the point of view and what we do with it more than anything else. Of course a lot of remakes of important films, particularly of horror films, they suck.