I always have motives, but I forget them.
You mustn't ask me to explain everything I do. I can't. That's that.
I want my characters to suggest the background in themselves, even when it is not visible.
Everything depends on what you put in front of the camera, what perspectives you create, contrasts, colors.
When a scene is being shot, it is very difficult to know what one wants it to say, and even if one does know, there is always a difference between what one has in mind and the result on film.
My work is like digging, it's archaeological research among the arid materials of our times.
The principle behind the cinema, like that behind all the arts, rests on a choice. It is, in Camus' words, "the revolt of the artist against the real."
If one holds to this principle, what difference can it make by what means reality is revealed? Whether the author of a film seizes on the real in a novel, in a newspaper story or in his own imagination, what counts is the way he isolates it,
stylizes it, makes it his own.
Is it important to show why a character is what he is? No. He is. That's all.
A director is a man, therefore he has ideas; he is also an artist, therefore he has imagination. Whether they are good or bad, it seems to me that I have an abundance of stories to tell. And the things I see, the things that happen to me, continually renew the supply.