I'm like most people. We just concentrate on the present. I live right where the film is going through the film projector and it hits the light.
If I wasn't a film-maker, I'd be a film critic. It's the only thing I'd be qualified to do.
Eventually, in '84, we made a film for a little over a million dollars - with American actors that was shot in English - that was shown in Finland A little action film called Born American.
I've never looked at film-making as a career. I've looked on film-making as an adventure. When you come down the mountain, you get ready to climb again.
Who says that big-budget films are safer than mid-range films? In terms of return on investment, I'd rather have 'Sling Blade' and 'Shine' than 'Volcano.'
My creative partner is a writer, and he's got an executive producing credit on this film. We've made three films together and I would never underestimate the impact of a writer.
I think indie films have more of a fresh, experimental vibe about them, whereas studio films know what they want and can basically get it.
I think we have the wrong notion of commercial and intellectual or artistic film. Because all films are commercial.
I like to leave a film open-ended, with a lingering feeling. I'll not do sequels of any of my films till I have subjects to explore.
When I make an American movie it's going to come out all over the world-it doesn't happen the same way for an Italian film or a French film.
I've always maintained my name will not define my films, my films will define my name. But I wish I was called Steve, or something else.
I only really watch my own films, I don't watch any other films and I don't particularly like any other actors.
As soon as you're at the higher levels of budgeting, you've got to get the film made, and the only way to support the film is to have actors who can support the budget.
Which is why I felt I was truly blessed this year, with leads in two nice films, and also the luxury of being able to do a studio film and an independent afterwards was fantastic.
If there isn't a deep core reason for a film existing, what is the point? For me to be known as a filmmaker that makes films that have a point, I'm stoked.
'Pulp Fiction' blew my mind; beforehand, I'd watch films and there was a beginning, middle and an end, and that's it. There is in that film, too, but it's out of sequence.
If my film does not do well, it really hurts me. But by God's grace, even if some of my films may not have done well, people have still liked my work in it.
Action films are great, but an action film that has characters that are compelling and a story that people can care about is something even better. We love to see action heroes that are vulnerable, that are sensitive, that are family people, that are...
I don't want people to sit there and objectively watch the film. I want them to experience it as something that's under their skin, so you try to make the films really tactile.
I learn so much from watching films like that with commentary and then when you get to hear another filmmaker talk about their films it's a really great experience.
There's no doubt that some of the greatest films ever made have come from the theater. It's all a matter of finding a way to make the theater experience watchable on film.
