George A. Romero Quotes

We cut a few corners and brought the picture in under budget by $25,000, so Paramount let us go back to Boston with a small crew to shoot some additional footage.

It doesn't matter how big or small your film is: you still don't have enough money. You don't have enough time to shoot it.

If we do another 'Deadpool,' we'd love to have more money for visual effects. But I don't think anybody does good with an excess of time or money.

CGI is done after the film is done. It's through the computer. Most of the film is not computer-generated special effects. Most of it is that creature that is in the room with you.

Scheduling is always tough, no matter what the budget size is, and we had our own run-ins with that on 'Fading of the Cries.'

I did this film for less money than it costs to stay in this hotel. We shot it in 20 days. We couldn't screw up takes for fun because we didn't have enough film.

On Lock, Stock, we didn't know where the money for shooting the next day was coming from.

Shooting films in Britain is always difficult, because we've never got enough money to make them.

The biggest difference between British TV and American TV is money. But what money doesn't do on American TV, which I thought it would, is buy you time. You don't get more time. You get more toys.

Even on a $100 million film, people will complain that they haven't got enough money and enough time, so that's always going to be an element in filmmaking.

Just trying to get a film made which is always difficult no matter what kind of a budget you have. Not having a budget makes it even more difficult. Having nineteen days and no budget makes it extremely difficult.

As long as you keep your budgets small, there's a way of making films.

No movie has ever got enough time. It doesn't matter how much money you've got, and it doesn't matter how much money you've not got. You never finish on time. You're always up against it and you're always working up until the end.

Three years after starting, by physically doing everything from raising the finance to special effects, we'd finally cobbled together our low budget film.

There's no way you can shoot low-budget stuff on lots of locations. It's just a practicality thing because every time you move, it costs time and money.

Shooting 'Adam & Paul' was very tough. There was barely enough time, and the budget was tiny. On top of that, we shot in dangerous locations where we had little or no control or security.

When you're shooting super-low-budget - we had 20 days to shoot 'Diary,' and a little over $2 - time is money.

'Generation Kill' was not a very glamorous shoot. For all intents and purposes, it was low budget, and all the money they had went to what you see on the screen.

When you don't have time, especially for a director, you cannot do exactly what you want to do. You have to cut your dream to fit in the movie you're doing.

We have to produce a high-quality show, but we have less and less time and money to do it. If you are using the tapeless approach to save money, you will.

For me, the scale of the budget is part of the creative process. 'Swingers' is the movie it is because we made it for exactly the right budget. Had it been made for a higher number, it would not have been as imaginative as we had to make it, given the budget constraints we had.

The size of the budget doesn't make that much of a difference because the kind of issues I have on a low budget film I I have on a big budget film as well, but they're just much bigger.

A lot of the time, what happens is, when you shoot in L.A., you tend to be able to do things faster, believe it or not.

I always cooperate to complete a film within the budget. Not a single film of mine has overshot its budget.

If you can make a lot more of something, you can make it much more inexpensive.