If I actually invited someone to make a documentary about me, and I said, 'Anything goes', and then I refused to answer any questions, that would be inconsistent.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The strange thing is, no matter what, when you become some kind of public figure, you have your go-to answers for all scenarios and instances.
People ask what are my intentions with my films - my aims. It is a difficult and dangerous question, and I usually give an evasive answer: I try to tell the truth about the human condition, the truth as I see it. This answer seems to satisfy everyone, but it is not quite correct.
I'm not trying to acquire a reputation as serious documentary maker for its own sake.
I've always said that if anything - whether it was film or television - was something I responded to, then I was open to it.
Doing interviews about my films really bothers me sometimes, because I have to speak directly and clearly about things I've intended to keep ambiguous, and in a way, I feel like I'm betraying my film.
I found it very difficult to explain to someone why you did a film. It's not like having a conversation.
I want to make it clear that I honestly answered every question put to me during the so-called Iran-Contra hearings. But if they didn't ask me about something, I wasn't about to reveal things that would put other people in jeopardy.
I actually turned down an opportunity for a private interview with Adolph Hitler.
I wasn't interested at all in doing a documentary. I was not a public figure.
As a documentary filmmaker, I'm very respectful, and my interview style is not intrusive. I don't really have an agenda. I just go in there, I mumble something or other, I wait for them to speak, and I wait for them to stop.