Quote

I will argue my points; I will have my opinions. But at the end of the day, it's the director's choice.

I see what's behind everything the director wants to do.

The point of having a director is that they make the final decision; it's their point of view, they set the rhythm and they make the final decisions.

My job, as an actor, is to give the director options. You can only hope that the takes that you thought were the best were chosen. But, then again, if I don't watch it, I'll never know.

There is a director for a reason, because a director knows what's best for the movie. You just give your director as much as you can to work with, and hopefully, the decisions they make are going to be great.

To me, the director is the most important, rather than the story.

Every single director stops at the moment he thinks he has the shot. Sometimes, directors shoot an establishing shot where everything is in the shot. He's going to use this at the beginning and the end.

The film director, in many instances, has to swallow somebody else's decision about the final form of something. It's so hard as to be intolerable.

The first assistant director is just so important that the choice of that person is critical to the movie.

I hate when a movie just sort of ends and is so open-ended you feel like it wasn't finished. I appreciate leaving things up to the interpretation of the audience and letting them make decisions about where things will go in the future - but the director has to make a decision; otherwise it is sort of a cop-out.