I'm interested in the human more than I'm interested in building suspense.
I never let the technical stuff get in the way of the storytelling.
I prefer to bring these to the service of story rather than to let them replace narrative.
Ruthless concern with story is what I learned in television.
I give importance only to the story of a movie.
I tend to research as I write so that the narrative can take priority, which is important for a piece of fiction, I think, finding out facts as and when I need to.
The story is more important to me than the part.
As a writer, I always try as hard as possible to get out of the way of the story, so maybe that's the most important thing my readers should know - I'm all about the story, not about the ego.
For horror, the needs of the story have to be first.
People who were more concerned with themselves and looking good to their readers then they were with the characters sacrificed a series for the sake of a story.
I prioritise story over science, but not at the expense of being really stupid about it.
My own idea about 3D is that it is there to enhance the viewing experience but I don't think that you have to use it in a tricky way, I think that the minute you sacrifice story and character for something coming out of the screen, I think you've lost it.
You don't see a wonderful shot in a comedy. Why? Because they don't want to distract you from what matters, which is the joke. It has to be funny, so usually all the things in the background don't matter.
