Theatrically seeing a movie with a group of people and having a collective experience has an authenticity that you can't get with your big screen television.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Films do seem prestigious and glamorous, but when you create something, you want people to see it. TV still reaches so many more people; it still really appeals to me.
Film is a collective experience, as you know.
I always felt that if I was going to do a movie, I wanted it to be authentic.
There's no doubt that some of the greatest films ever made have come from the theater. It's all a matter of finding a way to make the theater experience watchable on film.
We want to make movies for the big screen. We want people to go to the theater and feel like they're watching a movie.
Movies are extremely imitative of one another. Whatever works, people will try to do it.
A lot of people think theatre must be much harder work than film, but anything histrionic or superfluous gets seen on camera so you have to work to distil it into a complete sense of what's true.
If you've been in a film that's seen by millions and millions and millions of people, you're more likely to be recognized for that than for your theater performances, which were seen by considerably less people. Why would I get upset by that?
I just think that the collective experience of going to see a film is something you can't recreate.
Theatre's a whole different beast to film. It requires a lot more of you.
No opposing quotes found.