I don't really have much to prove. I can easily go in a comfort zone, make two films a year, hype them because I've signed them as a star, make them cheap and they will be big hits.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
You don't have to do offbeat films to prove that you can act. I have done it but only to prove myself that I can fit convincingly into every kind of films. I want to do the 100 crore film where the hero does all the work, and I get to relax.
Many people came out and said, 'Boy I'd love to make a film that way.' Well, borrow some money, get some people together - you can get people to work for nothing, just treat them right, treat them as human beings, not stars, give them all an equal share, make them feel a part of what they're doing. There's no big secret to it.
I'm going to keep making films I believe in. Whether I am successful or not is besides the point.
I've been fortunate, but I'm also not very precious about making sure I'm the star of a film.
They're making so few movies that you really just have to make it. It's going to be the only way you end up getting work. I don't believe anyone's going to really go out on a limb and just throw millions of dollars on someone that's not been proven. They're going to have to show somebody something at some point.
I'm not a film star, I am an actress. Being a film star is such a false life, lived for fake values and for publicity.
You just have to ensure that you make good films because audiences today have become picky and smart, and rightfully so.
Obviously, I try to make the films work for an audience. That's the main point of making a film, and in retrospect, one can see that certain films, let's say Leaving Las Vegas, demonstrated its own success.
I will never sign anything which makes me have to do more than one film.
My point was that it's hard to make good films, but I'm not under any illusion that you do all the time.
No opposing quotes found.