Guy Ritchie Quotes

I'm one of those directors who read reviews, even if they're bad, because I started as a film critic as a cinema student. I indulge in the art of criticism in general.

I haven't read a review of one of my films for the best part of 10 years.

My films always play better outside of New York, especially to critics.

When a film is reviled, you open a film and people say "Oh, it's the stupidest thing, it's the worst movie." You think: oh, nobody's going to ever speak to you again. But, it doesn't happen. Nobody cares. You know, they read it and they say "Oh, they hated your film." You care, at the time. But they don't. Nobody else cares.

Making judgments on films is in many ways so peculiarly vaporous an occupation that the only question is why, beyond the obvious opportunities for a few lectures fees and a little careerism at a dispiritingly self-limiting level, anyone does it in the first place.

If I wasn't a film-maker, I'd be a film critic. It's the only thing I'd be qualified to do.

I like test screenings. I like to see a movie with an audience of strangers. I think it tells you a lot.

I've never had a movie that got great reviews. I've had movies that got different levels of good and bad reviews, but you can more or less count on plenty of bad reviews.

Anytime you put a movie out it's subject to such scrutiny and such criticism.

One thing I don't do anymore is read or pay attention to the critical response, which is a bummer because when I started, and when I was in school, I loved to read old film criticism.

Now a lot of people tell me that 'Daud' was ahead of its times. But when it came out, it was panned more than any of my films.

I love film criticism as an art. I think it's a very important thing.

Pauline Kael had seen Nashville, and she loved Nashville. When I called her, she immediately responded to me because we had become friends, and I told her how great this film was, and she told me, "Well, I'll have to see it for myself." So I showed it to her, and she flipped.

My films seem to be better understood and better received by the monthly publications. On television the first reactions are usually unfavorable.

I mean, the old film critics just excoriated me.

I stopped reading reviews about my own movies. I read stuff about other people's movies.

It's hard to see a film one time and really "get it," and write fully and intelligently about it. That's a review. That's not film criticism.

Sometimes the critics will like a film, and the public doesn't come. Sometimes the critics won't like the film, and the public will come. It's completely spontaneous. It's a hazard.

For me an unfavorable initial reaction happens fairly often. For some reason the more time that elapses after the film opens, the more favorable the reviews become.

I have learnt to deal with the box office result. Whatever happened to any film, thankfully, people always appreciated my performance.

Critical opinion on my films has always been salvaged by what I would call subsequent critical opinion.

It's so miserable and so easy to keep slamming Titanic -- I'll shut up.

Don't go see the movies, I'm a troll. I think the movie was great, but their biggest mistake was me.

To me, All About Steve movie is sweet-natured and sweet-hearted, and I can't get enough sweet-hearted movies. I want to be inspired right now. I think things are pretty tough in the world. And people at the première were loving it - I mean, loving it! So I'm so sorry to hear people saying that it is the worst movie of 2009. I don't buy it at all.

In film as a medium, you're often given a baddie and a goodie and told what to think about them; it's usually a very definite point of view.