Sriram Raghavan Quotes

At that point, the movie was called Wild Force. Everything fell apart, eventually - our financing completely fell apart - and we were never able to make that film.

I've talked about this a lot, but 'The Witch' took four years to finance because there were certain compromises I wouldn't make.

It's great to make strong, powerful films, but in terms of people wanting to finance them, it's also very difficult.

The vast majority of our film producers are independent producers who live hand to mouth trying to get projects made that they love. They are not owners, they're not money people, and in fact, those who just have the money don't always get a producer credit.

It's just hard to get an independent film made.

Having gotten TV shows on the air, that's so much less work that trying to get the 'Veronica Mars' movie made.

I think, honestly, that the word 'indie' is a false gimmick. 'Independent' used to mean a movie that was financed outside corporate Hollywood, but a lot of what gets called independent these days is totally produced within that system. And there's nothing wrong with that.

On 'Platoon' I was offered in 1984 a very tiny part that Ivan Kane would go on to play. Then the financing fell out, and the film was scuttled for two years.

People say you should do it this way, someone else suggests that, yes, there's financing, but maybe you should use this actor. And there are the threats, at the end - if you don't do it this way, you'll lose your box office; if you don't do it that way, you'll never get financed again... 35, 40 years of this, you get beat up.

The major studios are by and large banks, and they give you what is by and large a loan to make a movie. Like banks, they want their money back plus.

The long and short of it is that I am now in a position in England to green light movies, and that's really excellent - not high-budget movies, but movies none the less.

When a film company is in the red they come to me. Always it is the same.

I don't want to produce anymore small or independent movies because it's just too hard these days.

Trying to convince Warner Bros. to make a $30 million 'Veronica Mars' movie just wasn't going to happen, for understandable reasons.

Now both my films have been number one at the Australian box office and it took about two years just to get the finance for this film, so if it's hard for me then God help everyone else.

The first time I did a big American film, I was surprised by all the different financiers who came to the set and told the director what to do.

In big movies, interests are not aligned between those above the line and the financier, because above the line gets paid whether the movie works or not. The financier only makes money if the movie works, and that fundamentally sets up a contentious relationship.

I want to write a studio movie, but probably one that's for me to be in.

With 'The Last Picture Show,' Peter Bogdanovich brought the script to the company that made it. They liked it, and they gave him the money he needed to make the film. He cast it with the actors that he thought were right for the parts. Now, it's the reverse.

It used to be the case that studio executives like Robert Evans, Darryl Zanuck, and David Selznick would put aside money for what they wanted to be great movies regardless of whether they would perform well with the box office.

I think I should have made 'Dead Silence' as an independent movie.

With an independent film, you have a little more freedom, and you also have less money, so you're sort of struggling to get it done, to get something that works. With a big studio, everything is there for you, and it's easier.

I remember when we did 'Shaun of the Dead,' and when we were trying to get it off the ground in 2001 before we actually made it, a lot of people just didn't want to know.

I became a producer because nobody was ready to finance my films.

For every film that I have believed in - from 'Tanu Weds Manu' to 'Rehna Hai Tere Dil Mein' - it was very difficult to find producers.