I don't mind ratings boards. As a viewer, you have the right not to see a film.
I have to keep reminding myself that I was hired for a reason and one of those reasons is because of the stories I tell and the films I've made previously.
Early on everyone should do, every time they do a big film, they should do a little film. It really does keep you grounded.
I love being verbal in films.
Whenever I don't get injured, the film is a dud. I didn't bleed on 'Rhinestone.' I didn't bleed on 'Stop! Or My Mom will Shoot.'
Even when you're casting, casting is always one of the weirdest subjective areas. You can get a group of people who would decide and say, "This person is a great actor and this person is less than a great actor," but there will always be somebody else who likes that person better than you based on their experience in their other films.
When I was eight years old, I knew I wanted to make films.
You create this situation where you are so dependent on each other. That's especially true for film. In theater, the actor has much more say, much more control, for better or worse.
Recording a scene with paint rather than film sinks you more deeply into your surroundings. You have to look a little harder and a little longer. And you end up with a memento.
My films have always been considered the benchmark in action. I have a big responsibility to shoulder.
My current project was shot on film, and because of that I've spent my entire day removing dust-specks from negatives. You wouldn't have to do that on digital because you don't get dust on the scanner. I say to myself, "Why am I doing this all day?" I could have just bought a digital camera and I wouldn't have to remove dust-specks ever again. But when you move closer to a film image, it has a real truth to it. And I really like that.
I didn't really do too much television. I really went straight into film.
I was born. When I was 23 I started telling jokes. Then I started going on television and doing films. That's still what I am doing. The end.
Whatever affect any of my films have on audiences, I just kind of stop at the door. I make them and I just don't go outside after they're over.
I've been told that I'm a very different person on the set than I am in postproduction when the movie's over and I'm editing, in that I get so wound up in the film that I become selfless to the point where I lose too much weight.
History opens up new worlds to film-makers all the time.
You can't intellectually purge yourself of who you are. Whatever that is, it's going to come out in the wash, the film wash. What you are is going to be relevant, if not to yourself, to the movies you make.
The thing that I'm just scared to death of is that someday I'm going to wake up and bore somebody with a film.
I have made almost as many films in England as I have in America. I will come back to England again and again.
I'm mystified by the stuff that doesn't work. I'm mystified by what's going on in the critical side, too. Stuff I like is getting trashed and stuff that is being praised I think is terrible. I don't really feel in sync with what's happening, but at the same time, what I think keeps me afloat is that I try not to be, and don't want to be, very indulgent. I try to make the films as lean as possible, and to not spend a lot of time crawling up my own ass creatively.
I'm sure some people will say, 'Why do this?' And my response is, 'Why wouldn't you?' The film business in general is using a model that is outdated and, worse than that, inefficient.
It's pretty clear to me that working as a director for hire agrees with me. I like it. The films that have come out of that, I personally like better than the ones that didn't.
I had more fun making Traffic than either of the Ocean's films.
The muscle memory of filtering away all the wrong versions of what you're doing improves the more time you're on a film set. I feel like my problem-solving algorithm got kicked up a notch.
Who could be more desperate than filmmakers?
