Remember, while the work can sometimes appear to be simple to a viewer, the ability to perform expertly, consistently, precisely, over and over again, under pressure and on demand is what's needed.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
I think I would struggle with any job if it was purely about effects. Even as a viewer, those aren't the kind of things that interest me.
I write for somebody who has my own limitations. My reader has a certain difficulty with concentrating, which in my case comes from being a film viewer.
I'm used to adapting my novels for feature film - it can be challenging to cut and compress three or four hundred pages into two hours of dramatic action.
Over time, quality work will lead to an audience for your work.
Taking on challenging projects is the way that one grows and extends one's range as a writer, one's technical command, so I consider the time well-spent.
You don't work as hard to watch a movie. You work harder to watch a play, so what the audience puts into it is interesting.
The thing about producing is that the pressure is off of being in front of the camera, and being critiqued and judged in that way, but there are other pressures producing.
It's still difficult for me to watch my work.
In the studio, I don't do a lot of work that requires repetitive activity. I spend a lot of time looking and thinking and then try to find the most efficient way to get what I want, whether it's making a drawing or a sculpture, or casting plaster or whatever.
I do my work to the best of my capacity. I don't pick a role looking at its length. I take up a film because I would like to see it.
No opposing quotes found.