I don't want to direct a movie as good as Antonioni, or Kubrick, or Polanski, or whoever. I want it to be my own. I think I've got the seed of it and, what's more, that I can make movies that are different and informed by my taste.
As a loyal believer in the Auteur Theory I first felt editing was but the logical consequence of the way in which one shoots. But, what I learned is that it is actually another writing.
Every director has a sensibility and style, and what works is his originality and conviction.
I was a big fan of Joe's film, Narc, so when you hear there's a script coming over from Joe Carnahan, you know it's going to be interesting because he has such a fresh voice.
If you are directing, you have the opportunity to put your signature on the bottom of the frame. You have the opportunity to say, "This is what I believe. That is my credo. That is what I wish to state."
A lot of people have said my movies are all the same. But I don't actually make an effort to have a style. I'm usually just thinking of what can we do to make it funnier or more interesting or just kind of refine it and it ends up like that.
I love movies where you can tell who's directed it even before the credits roll in, like Wes Anderson or Quentin Tarantino. People who make very stylized types of film.
I was always a fan of Nic. With his movie, you know it's "A Nic Refn Movie."
Films should involve a director's idiosyncrasies as much as possible I think.
When you look at any of my films you will immediately be able to tell this is a [Werner] Herzog film. Even if you didn't have any credits, in two minutes flat you would know.
I'm very strongly in favor of the auteur theory.
I don't quite know what an auteur is.
Certain directors are known for a certain kind of beauty; it becomes their signature.
I don't really believe in the auteur theory.
