Quote

There isn't much improvisation in film - there's virtually none. The people that theoretically could be good at this in a theater situation don't necessarily do this in a film in a way that will work, because it's much broader on a stage.

I don't understand why people don't use improvisation, especially in comedy films, but also, for me, you get more naturalism, and that's why I like the naturalistic performances and strange rhythms and the way that people genuinely interact captured rather than sort of very mannered performances.

Improvisation is not a presentational form, except in small doses, or as a game. It's a tool.

Improvisation is almost like the retarded cousin in the comedy world. We've been trying forever to get improvisation on TV. It's just like stand-up. It's best when it's just left alone. It doesn't translate always on TV. It's best live.

There's always some room for improvisation.

I've always been into improvisation.

Theater has given me a different perspective on the way I approach films.

In discussing the process with the actors, I made it clear to them that they could improvise but that the sum total of their improvisation needed to impart certain plot points, and schematic material.

I try to work on a film that my audiences would appreciate and enjoy their time in a theatre.

I'm used to doing independent film where the style is a lot more casual. With improvising, you obviously find so much out on the day - and in a way, I feel more comfortable doing that.