Top 1200 Movie Critic Quotes & Sayings - Page 20

There was one vampire movie that Gerard Butler was in, 'Dracula 2000,' and they touched on something interesting, but it only worked in the context of that particular movie, which was that the original vampire was Judas.

A lot of times, I'll resist the temptation to visually define a movie until, one, I really understand just what the movie's about, and two, until I start talking to my cinematographer.

Most people who've had a big hit movie like 'Paranormal Activity,' the next thing they say is, 'I want to make a $100 million movie.' I have no interest in making more expensive movies.

Multiplicity was a movie that tested really well. People seeing the movie really liked it, but then the studio couldn't market it. We opened on a weekend with nine other films.

First of all, I had the desire for that format [silent movie], and then when I was talking to people, I felt that people needed justification. Why are you doing a silent movie? Is it just for your own pleasure? I felt it was not enough for them so I realized I have to choose the subject that will make things easier for them and to tell the story of a silent actor makes sense for doing a silent movie.

A movie that I've seen probably the most is 'Fanny Alexander,' the Ingmar Bergman movie. I even dragged my friends to the super long version that had an intermission. I don't know how much they liked me that day.

I was focused on The Hunger Games movie with my director, with the studio, and with the cast and crew. We all just focused on making the best possible movie we could, and earning the right to do more.

And then to see the whole movie, you're pretty much waiting until the end of production. And the major lifting in terms of editing and all that stuff is done before you shoot the movie. That's an unusual way to work.

I'm one of those directors who read reviews, even if they're bad, because I started as a film critic as a cinema student. I indulge in the art of criticism in general.

But the only important thing in a book is the meaning it has for you; it may have other and much more profound meanings for the critic, but at second-hand they can be of small service to you.

I think the danger in trying to set too many things up or do too much world-building in a movie so soon is you forget to actually make a movie.

A movie that I've seen probably the most is 'Fanny & Alexander,' the Ingmar Bergman movie. I even dragged my friends to the super long version that had an intermission. I don't know how much they liked me that day.

Reviewers are usually people who would have been, poets, historians, biographer, if they could. They have tried their talents at one thing or another and have failed; therefore they turn critic.

I don’t believe that a reviewer or a critic can really criticize well unless he can praise well.

Great is paint; nay, God is the painter; and we rightly accuse the critic who destroys too many illusions. Society does not love its unmaskers.

I think it worked two ways. One, a lot of people writing about the movie used that as shorthand and it could either be a good thing or they could use it to dismiss the movie like we were a copycat movie or something like that. It's very much its own story. It is a young woman in a post-apocalyptic society, but after that it's just a whole different kind of story and a different journey that she goes through.

The writer must be four people: 1) The nut, the obsede 2) The moron 3) The stylist 4) The critic. 1 supplies the material; 2 lets it come out; 3 is taste; 4 is intelligence.

I thought it was a glorious thing to be a critic and to be a literary editor, and one was really doing something that mattered: to keep up standards, to take books seriously.

The greatest of all French critics, and possibly the greatest European critic since Aristotle .

I studied fine arts and architecture, but I decided to move into movie design because I grew up in a small town in the Marche region and spent a lot of time after school in the movie theater.

The difference between a movie and a play is that the production you end up with is the production. If a movie that I spent time on turns out to be crap, it's never going to be made again.

An artist who theorizes about his work is no longer artist but critic.

Some of the best movie experiences I've had are when I just walked by the theater and decided to see a movie I hadn't heard anything about and bought a ticket, because that's really the first time you can experience it untainted.

Being in the moment with these guys was just a profound experience every day, and when we shoot a movie it's actually a very short process, especially an independent movie like this. It was only thirty five days of shooting.

I discovered early in my movie work that a movie is never any better than the stupidest man connected with it. There are times when this distinction may be given to the writer or director. Most often it belongs to the producer.

I just felt that you can't have a character fall in love so madly as they did in the last movie and not finish it off, understand it, get some closure. That's why the movie is called 'Quantum of Solace' - that's exactly what he's looking for.

The movie I worked on that had the most problems and interference came from the smallest indie movie I've ever done. I couldn't believe what the director had to go through; he was destroyed.

The whole first movie [Twilight] was pretty fun. I had never really done a movie like it, when there's such a big cast of people that are around about the same age. Everyone didn't really know what was going to happen with the movie, but there was a good energy. There was something which people were fighting for in a way. They wanted it to be something special. Also, none of us were really known then as well.

When you've been a character in a movie - and this has happened when we've done concerts as Spinal Tap or as The Folksmen - people see you as characters walking out of a movie. And you appear in public, then, to play, it's a very schizophrenic thing.

A man goes to the movies. The critic must be honest enough to admit that he is that man.

I always try to better myself with every movie I make. I don't take anything sitting back, and so I try to learn from every film I make and carry that onto the next movie because I think it's important as a filmmaker to keep growing with each film, and I think I am growing with each movie.

I saw the movie Sid & Nancy. It was a pretty good movie. It didn't really make me a punk rock fan. But anything that's new, as long as it's good I enjoy it.

This whole creation is essentially subjective, and the dream is the theater where the dreamer is at once: scene, actor, prompter, stage manager, author, audience, and critic.

Why does everyone like this movie? And Americans kept going to the movie. So Hollywood figures out the market, and the market wants to know what happened in Benghazi.

I've learned that you never have to think about how to make money. You need only to focus on what you think is going to be a good movie or what's a movie I'd like to watch as the audience.

For the critic, the author does not exist; only a certain number of writings exist.

Dreams come true, but then things happen that are beyond anything you could dream. To be in a movie and to be in the same room participating in a movie with Meryl Streep? Come on!

'The Lego Movie' did better than we could possibly have imagined. We were very nervous that people would discount it because it is called 'The Lego Movie.'

Whatever I do is done out of sheer joy; I drop my fruits like a ripe tree. What the general reader or the critic makes of them is not my concern.

I relate to the feeling that Da Vinci was often plagued by the idea that what he did wasn't good enough, that he was his harshest critic. He'd sometimes destroy what he was working on.

I've always said that an art critic can put aside politics around art.

If the function of the artist is to see, the first duty of the critic is to understand what the artist saw.

It is better to be making the news than taking it, to be an actor rather than a critic.

There are no minor decisions in movie making. Each decision will either contribute to a good piece of work or bring the whole movie crashing down around my head many months later.

When you are in every scene of a movie - which I must say I really much prefer - you have more control over the film that you're making. Because the choices you make as an actor can't help but change what the movie is saying.

That was one of the things I hadn't really put together. Since the first movie and this movie, the rest of us have been living that revolution, largely engineered by people who were Tron fans. That's pretty deep, man.

I'm so proud to have work in this movie, "Brokeback Mountain," a movie that once again shows us that love is what makes us all very similar in spite that we can be so different, too.

I love when people write about something, I learn what I'm doing through the eyes of a good critic, positive or negative. It's still a learning experience.

It's hard when you read an article saying bad things about you. It is as if someone is sticking a knife on your heart. But I am the harshest critic of my work.

I don't mind reminding people it's a movie, or that you're telling a story. Everybody knows this, but for some reason, we want to be real. I don't get it, I like the fakeness of my craft. I don't think the audience minds-they all know we're making a movie.

I was an awful critic. I operated on the assumption that there was an absolute scale of values against which art could be measured. I didn't trust my own subjective responses.

Praise or blame has but a momentary effect on the man whose love of beauty in the abstract makes him a severe critic on his own works.

'Breaking Away' was a great experience. It's the kind of movie that engenders a lot of goodwill from people. It's a movie that they cherish. and I feel very welcomed and accepted by people because of that.

I'd really like to do a movie, either as a producer or director. My ultimate fantasy would be to direct a movie and produce the entire soundtrack. I don't really see myself acting.

Comedy is a difficult thing for a critic, as, unlike all other art-forms, it has an inbuilt success-o-meter: laughter. Therefore, there's no real need for critics.

I used to agonise over what to do next, but now I'm making a movie a year. It's insane, but it's only a movie after all. You just hang in there, and occasionally you might make something which you can call art... briefly.

The challenge with 'Watchmen' is making sure that the ideas that were in the book got into the movie. That was my biggest stretch. I wanted people to watch the movie and get it. It's one of those things where, over time, it has happened more.

One critic in the L.A. Times said John Kerry looks like he is thinking too much. Well this is one place President Bush has him beat.

My approach has always been to put 100% into the movie I'm making right now. I think sometimes filmmakers put too much thought into the grand franchise they're going to build. And guess what? If the first movie doesn't work there is no franchise, so I'm always concentrated on making the best, best possible movie right now.

Criticism is not religion, and by no process can it be substituted for it. It is not the critic's eye, but the child's heart, that most truly discerns the countenance that looks out from the pages of the gospel.