Mel Gibson Quotes

I don't believe that you can judge the worth of a movie in the atmosphere in which it comes out the first time. There's just so many reasons why some pictures don't catch on.

Every time I make a picture the critics' estimate of American public taste goes down ten percent.

I don't think 'Cocktail' was a perfect critical success, but it touched a vein in our culture.

I think what people think about my films depends on the film they see. It's all different and opinions are all different.

We work hard on every film, and then it's up to the audience whether they like it or not. At the end of the day, it is the audience wish what to accept and what not.

Julie' has not been perceived as a sleazy film, and I am grateful for that.

The thing we call critics are not really reviewers, they are not really critics. They don't have the discipline to write what we would term as critique - it's really just reviewers. They have a common man kind of taste. If you watch them overall, they are not different from the box-office. That's my view.

On the first movie we got good reviews, but we were still dealing with genre stuff. It's going away. Judge the movie - is it a good one or a bad one? We know we made a great movie and it's being judged for just being a good film.

A film cannot make it into the culture without the support of critics.

I do know my own films don't necessarily work within that high-pressure reductive moment of the opening weekend - or all the ways that many people assess the value of movies.

Whether the work that I do shall succeed or achieve critical acclaim is for the audience to decide.

A strange thing happens when Spielberg discusses his own work. His degree of self-criticism seems a direct reflection of each film's box-office performance. You will not catch him complaining that the audience 'didn't get' a film; if it didn't do well, it generally didn't deserve to.

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

Sometimes critics disagree with the audience, and that's fine. I make movies for the audience. I guess I hope that the critics like it, but on the other hand, I just really want the audience to like it.

What matters is whether the audience likes the film or not. Everything else is secondary.

I don't judge cinema on its box-office success.

I do feel bad when my films don't do well, but I respect audiences' verdict because they know well which films to support. If they don't like a film, we should accept it.

A successful film is a good film, and a non-successful film is a bad film. It's as simple as that.

I feel reviewers are tougher on comedies in general. They don't take them seriously, and the ones that get great reviews are not necessarily the ones that I like.

So I haven't thought about the critics for a long time.

For something to be profitable doesn't necessarily mean it's the best thing in the world for the director. You judge a movie by different standards - I've worked on comedies, and now I've worked on superhero movies, and the reviews are almost parenthetical in both of those genres.

People feel the worst film I made was 'Jack.' But to this day, when I get checks from old movies I've made, 'Jack' is one of the biggest ones. No one knows that. If people hate the movie, they hate the movie. I just wanted to work with Robin Williams.

I don't take reviews very seriously, but in their totality I think they are representative of how the audience feels, and of what their reaction is. There's always one guy who doesn't get it.

I have not given much credence to reviews of my films. Sometimes they're wrong, but it didn't matter to me.

I don't generally do movies that get good reviews.