Anubhav Sinha Quotes

For so many filmmakers, cinema is a means to an end.

I get people saying, 'Opera is too large a canvas for me. I don't love it. I love movies that feel almost like documentaries,' in terms of artistic vocabularies of storytelling. I totally get that discussion; that makes sense to me.

Sometimes it feels as if the artist hasn't done the real work of engaging with the material. Film noir can't just play off looks and attitudes. A thriller needs a dose of genuine suspense. It does not have to be literal, but it does have to feel genuine. Otherwise the artist is just leeching off the form.

Film is such a very good tool for communicating emotions, and all designers and creative people look to inspire an emotional response.

Hitchcock makes it very clear to us. There's an objective and a subjective camera, like there's a third- and a first-person narrator in literature.

And over the course of the last six years, as I've directed more features and commercials, I've become better at articulating exactly how I want the audience to feel.

I think my films are always quite self-reflexive and always question 'why am I doing this, is this the right way to do it, what is cinema for, does it have a purpose?'

My interpretation of a strong director is someone who knows their story. That's what directors are, they're storytellers because they're directing where your focus is going to be as an audience.

In film, you can't go into analytical explorations because the audience will reject that.

You can be a smarty-pants director, but that won't matter if the movie doesn't work emotionally as well as intellectually.

I think film is a very powerful advocate and message carrier.

A movie is made for an audience and a film is made for both the audience and the film-makers.

The fact is I'm not making a film in order to draw pictures or make images about Iran.

Look, I'm just a storyteller. When I make a film, I never want the film to become a vehicle of social propaganda.

The interesting thing about movies, it's not always - y'know, you have to have structure etc and all those things, but an audience responds, in many ways, we walk away and certain things stay in our heads that are memorable.

I'm interested in making films that make people think.

I always felt there was a kind of humanistic impulse in my thinking about film as well as a real interest in its formal and aesthetic properties - just this idea that it can bring you into a very intimate encounter with people.

We're used to a story in modern terms as an information delivery device. Certainly on television and even with the studio films, there's really only one note that you get, and that's clarity. And people will sacrifice everything for clarity. They'll sacrifice the joke. They'll sacrifice the moment, or the romance.

I just want to go on making movies, and some of them will be completely meaningless, except, of course, to me.

For me, film is an extremely powerful way of conveying a message to a mainstream audience.

For me, filmmaking is not about making statements but about exposing human behavior so people are eager enough to start thinking on their own and make their own assumptions.

When I make a film, the yardstick is my mind. If I laugh at the jokes and feel sad at the serious undersides, then the subject works.

My films are like drinking a good beer, but pleasure doesn't mean that it cannot change someone's point of view.

As a filmmaker, I really want to utilize the tools to carry the voice - my voice, and the voice of the characters.

I mean, we should only be talking about the merits of film ["Moonlight"] because one of the great things about the visual language is that it is the great equalizer.