To me, length is an artificial and arbitrary factor in a film.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
There's an old saying in Hollywood: It's not the length of your film, it's how you use it.
Making a movie is difficult enough to sort of have a premeditated length that you're going for. I don't know a single filmmaker on the planet who does that.
Sometimes when you're editing a movie, you have the thing that you don't expect - which is you make it longer and longer as you go along.
The length of a film should be directly related to the endurance of the human bladder.
The cutting room is where you discover the optimal length of the movie.
I think movies are too long.
The size of a studio film lets you see technology in a way that you wouldn't on an independent film, like the gadgets and the angles and all that.
So you see, movies are really another dimension.
But short films are not inferior, just different. I think the short gives a freedom to film-makers. What's appealing is that you don't have as much responsibility for storytelling and plot. They can be more like a portrait, or a poem.
I'd always tried not to worry about the size of the role or the size of the film.
No opposing quotes found.