Naga Chaitanya Quotes

I think bad movies are made around the world, not just in Hollywood. There are as many bad art films in the whole world as there are bad commercial films.

In our benighted age, when films about amusement park rides and electronic fidgets scoop the honours, perhaps Hollywood redux is the best we can hope for.

I rarely see one of the 'summer blockbuster' movies. I'd like to see a stronger focus on smaller, smarter movies.

People think bigger movies are bad, and that's just not true - there's bad big films, and there's bad little ones. The bad big ones have to make their money back, so they'll push them down your throat, but the little ones just disappear if they're bad.

I think my films kind of walk this line that I'm proud of, that they feel sort of like films of my youth, which were far more commercial.

Good films will run, and people will watch it irrespective of whether it is suspense or a comedy.

I love masala films, and as an audience, I like my dose of commercial cinema.

Multiplex cinema culture has created a level-playing field for directors where small budget movies are able to break even, even make profit.

I hardly watch commercial films but I have nothing against them.

For me, personally, the value of a film is not determined by a review, but the health of the film is.

Hollywood exists only for the B-movies. The best things are coming from Europe.

I'm not trying to be self-serving, but you know, you get to Hollywood, and if you want to make something big and loud and dumb, it's pretty easy. It's very hard to go down there and make a film like 'Sideways,' which I thought was a great film. They don't want to make films like that anymore, even though that film was very successful.

I think it's always hard for people to get their head around the fact that populist, commercial films can also actually be great works of art.

Movies are so rarely great art that if we cannot appreciate great trash we have very little reason to be interested in them.

A lot of dumb pictures have made a lot of money, but that doesn't mean they're going to be anything cinema students will revel over in the future.

As far as acting in films, there is not much out there that is very interesting to do. The ones that are interesting to me are independent films and they have trouble raising money. With people putting their money into blockbusters, there is not much left for the independents.

I see lots of cycles, for sure. There's the whole post-Star Wars era, but I don't think it's the whole story.

I'm excited that 'The Good Guy' is getting distribution because indie movies they're not - people ran out of money and they're not making these movies anymore. It's all superhero movies or real obvious tent pole studio films.

Steven Spielberg is unique. I feel that the kinds of movies he loves are the same kinds of movies that the big mass audience loves. He's very fortunate because he can do the things he naturally likes the best, and he's been very successful.

I am not saying that I won't do big commercial films.

The demarcation between an art house film and an entertainer has blurred, only because a larger section of the audience has accepted such realistic films.

I would love to do a rom-com, but they are not good - good and successful doesn't equate to the same thing.

Sure, 'Twilight' is really huge right now and everybody's freaking out over it, but it will go away soon and I will be back to doing what I'm used to doing: weird little movies that nobody sees.

I firmly believe that emotions are universal, and I know that when they connect with the audience, it works. There is no such thing as an entertaining or a serious film; there are good films and bad films. Good films will always find a vast audience.

A lot of the films I do go down brilliantly critically and win awards, but not a lot of people see them.