Content Evaluation Quotes

Pretty much every show that comes on, I'll try to watch at least one episode of it. For me, there are three different levels. I watch the first episode, and if I love it, I'm lockin' it in for the rest of the season. If I'm not too sure about it, I will maybe tune in the next week. It it's just terrible, then I'm done.

I don't limit myself as long as the content is good.

In deciding the ratings of the films, no consideration is given to artistic, technical or dramatic values. Only moral content is weighed.

Some of the material out there - I don't want to say that it's all bad - but there's a lot of bad stuff out there. You just continue reading scripts, and eventually you find something you connect with.

It was a mixed bag pretty much all week. A lot of really, really good stuff out there, some mediocre and some bad.

Nine-tenths of all existing books are nonsense.

There is a generation of skimmers. It's not that they don't want to read in-depth content, but they want to evaluate what the content is before they commit time. Especially on a mobile phone - you don't have the phone, or cellular data, or screen size to be reading full-length content.

It was a tough experience with Alan Horn, who didn't like anything that was R-rated. So you can imagine he hated some of my films.

You have to make your decision based on the content.

What infuriates me is that in America violence is judged in context, whereas language is not. So with language there is an arithmetic that says: one f*** is a PG 13, two f***s is an R. They don't say: one bullet through one head is a PG 13, two bullets through more than two heads is an R.

If we should pass on whether or not a film is pornographic, we should take a look at it.

One man's content is another woman's crap. And the crappy content - let's call it crontent - will never go away.

I read a review on the Herald, it says it takes 40 minutes to get to the first sex session apparently and the whole movie only contains 11 minutes of forbidden fruit.

Our audience tells us what they love, what they don't like, and - worst - what they don't care about.

I will watch a movie that is quote unquote dark and not get the qualification of what is dark and what is not.

TV feels quite constipated, and the thing I find particularly difficult is the branding of the channels where it's not 'Is it a good script?' but 'Is it a BBC2 script?'

In the library of the world men have hitherto been ranged according to the form, and the binding; the time is coming when they will take rank and order according to their contents and intrinsic merits.

Writers would submit scripts to me, and if I liked one well enough to submit to magazine editors, I had the know-how whether the story was good or bad.

The better the coverage, the more discriminating the viewer.

I enjoy about 1 out of 100 movies, it's about the same proportion to books published that I care to read.

And I watch all the dailies and I grade the jokes or the moments, you know, on a scale from... so I know exactly what we have. And so I can then go into the editing room and be like "I want you to do this moment, this moment, this joke, that joke. I'd like to see 3 versions."

When we say a show is successful, it's because, relative to the investment, it's successful, relative to how else we would have spent that money on licensing something else, does this creation - did it attract the audience that it was built for.

You have no idea how many bags of money I've had to turn down. But if something doesn't match up with our goals - if it's too violent, or even if it's just too boring - my father may have been a philosopher, but he was always an entertainer - we're not going to take the money.

I would like to perform more in English. But there have to be many good things gathered for me to be willing to do a movie. I watch trailers of every new American movie and I'm, like, 'OK, I'm not missing anything!'

Judge not by the form of the messenger, but the form of the message.