Lorenzo di Bonaventura Quotes

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.

Criticism even should not be without its charms. When quite devoid of all amenities, it is no longer literary.

But what is criticism? Criticism is purely destructive; anyone can destroy, but not everyone can build up.

Worship the spirit of criticism. If reduced to itself it is not an awakener of ideas or a stimulant to great things, but, without it, everything is fallible; it always has the last word.

I loved that these two guys argued with each other as if movies actually mattered. Nobody I knew talked about movies that way, but Siskel and Ebert took each movie as it came and talked about whether it was a success on its own terms.

In LA I was watching At the Movies with Ebert and Roper, it was, nice to see them differentiate between the subject matter and the art form of making the film, and they both gave it thumbs up, and I was kind of pleased at their honesty as far as reviewers go.

There's a lot of vitriolic ranting out there, but there are literally hundreds of critics on the web who care deeply about film and having something to say about it.

I'm a huge Robert Altman fan and don't take issue with his filmmaking, as eccentric as it is. But I just think 'Nashville' was a world he didn't know.

Even reading my first bad review was an awesome experience. It was cool because you make something and not everybody's going to like it. I felt like that kind of grew me up a little bit into a professional. I was a student filmmaker, and no one writes reviews about student films.

Often a performance can be judged not by a movie's strongest moment but by its weakest, especially when it's the picture's crucial scene.

I don't think of myself as a critic at all. I'm a reviewer and essayist. I mainly hope to share with others my pleasure in the books and authors I write about, though sometimes I do need to cavil and point out shortcomings.

I don't think the audience always listens to the critics. That's been proven time and time again.

No critic writing about a film could say more than the film itself, although they do their best to make us think the oppposite.

I find that quite enjoyable, trying to see the downsides of someone.

Even today, my father watches my films only in the theatre with the general public. And he's very tough. His first call will be to the director and the camera man, and only then will he send me a message.

The critics are not writers - they're not a part of the creative process; therefore, they should not influence how I go about doing my next bit of work.

I think the best way to defend a result is to keep attacking.

As a principle, I will never react to film criticisms. As long as they are part of film fraternity, whatever they say will be beneficial to cinema.

Criticism is okay from people who know the finer points of cinema.

I make films that are what they are. Some people like them, and some people don't.

The audience is my hardest and best critic.

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.

Young actors, fear your admirers! Learn in time, from your first steps, to hear, understand and love the cruel truth about yourselves. Find out who can tell you that truth and talk of your art only with those who can tell you the truth.

There are a lot of movies that are badly made that I love, and there are a lot of movies that are just beautifully made but I don't like them. And critics have a tendency - that's all they focus on, which is, "I like it. I don't like it. It's good. It's bad."

One must be ruthless with one's own writing or someone else will be.