With all my films, the pace is not very fast, and so people get bored with them and comment that they're just people talking in rooms and all that.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
But it's mostly about pacing yourself when you do these movies.
With TV, the pace is so fast, the scripts are coming at you, the directors are firing things at you, it's breathtaking.
On an independent film, you really learn about pace. You have so little time to do things, that you really have to know your scenes.
I don't have a lot of patience for movies that aren't cleanly told.
I feel like there's an obsession with pace right now in theater, with things being very fast and very witty and very loud, and I think we're all so freaked out about theater keeping audiences interested because everybody's so freaked out about theater becoming irrelevant.
My father's films are often very slow for the modern audiences, which are used to a lot of editing. It's the audience that watches the film instead of the director dictating the reaction he wants from you.
Hollywood films are alienating to the spectator because they use too much dialogue, too much explication and leave no space for the viewer. They depress me.
Cinema is so slow and boring compared to television.
As a film director and as film actors, you get used to a certain rhythm that's slow. But with TV, it's hurry, hurry, hurry, hurry, hurry. It's a different pace.
Film, for me, is in two stages. One is when I write the script more or less on my own - that's the nice bit. And then comes for me the unpleasant bit when they all go off, 100 people - actors and camera people and film and sound - and I stay away. When they go into the editing room, I come in again, and that's the bit I like.
No opposing quotes found.