It's a morality film, and it poses the question 'What would you do?' I took it very seriously, just as the director did in terms of atmosphere and lighting, and I was just trying to help that vision along.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
To me, it's a very moral film. If my son were a teenager now, I would drag him to see it.
I'd never directed before and this movie's too important to me to put in the hands of some guy who has never directed. Even if it's me.
A film can be big or small - I have to just fall in love with it. To connect with the character, the script, and the director. Sometimes they say to you, 'You should do that for your career; it's a big thing, people will go and see it,' but I wouldn't be able to, because my heart wouldn't be in it. I would drive people quite mad.
Life came in and put me in front of the camera before I could really make a decision, but I think I probably would have gravitated to film.
I never think that a film should answer questions for you. I think it should make you ask a lot of questions.
I do think the moral line you walk all the time about putting something in for the sake of the film and not being affected by people's lives is a very tough one.
I don't think there is a movie that I've been on that I wasn't sure I could direct it better. But certainly also, as a director of photography, I have to serve the movie in whatever way I can as a filmmaker.
You can't do something that is morally vacuous or dysfunctional and then write it off saying, 'It wasn't my film, I was just doing a job in it.'
People want to know if I have a moral standpoint that they should be picking up on, and the truth is, I don't. I don't want people to think that I'm trying to tell them to feel a certain way. I think that's cheap filmmaking.
I don't think any movie I would do would be too serious or serious at all.