Dean Koontz Quotes

I hate sequels. They're never as good as the first book.

And I'm not anti-sequel, but I just feel like there are very few ideas that are meant to be continued.

I pointedly avoid doing sequels, since for the most part I find that a sequel rarely stands up to the original.

I will never write a sequel to anything that I will ever write.

I never take ideas from the headlines. I feel that if a story is good enough, a real story that is, then it's already been covered by the media, and if it's not good enough, why would I want to bother with it?

Stories come to me and I don't know where they come from, but afterwards I can look back and say, 'Oh yes, that's got a little bit of me, or a little bit of my own son in it'. That's where ideas come from.

An author writes a book, and that's the book at that point. And if the author writes the book again, then somehow something has gone wrong, if you see what I mean.

I've gotten to a point where I wouldn't direct someone else's material. It would only be something totally original.

Quality isn't about where the money came from or which company gets to put their name on the thing. What matters is who made the movie and why they made it.

Sometimes it's less about the character and more about the story for me. I'll play a rock in the background if I think the story is fantastic and I can be a part of it somehow. That's what I look for.

I think I have a sense right in the beginning of how big an idea it is and how much room it needs, and, almost more importantly, how long it would sustain anybody's interest.

I think that every enduring story that has expressions over multiple periods, that role of being the keeper of the integrity of the vision is a very important role.

The only thing that's authentic about what a writer writes is his work.

If I do do a sequel, I'm going to have to know for sure that the script is better than the original. So I'm going to be very careful about that because I'm not eager to repeat myself.

I always felt that if I was going to do a movie, I wanted it to be authentic.

I would rather write or record something great and have it overlooked than do mediocre work and have it be popular.

The only reason ever to make a sequel is to spend more time with the characters that people love: to tell more of their story.

No, it's not a very good story - its author was too busy listening to other voices to listen as closely as he should have to the one coming from inside.

Sequels are desperate.

The reason is that for many years I have avoided reading anything whatsoever that approaches my own line of country, out of a somewhat fanatical desire to avoid the risk of unconscious imitation.

I've found that if you just try to make the film you want, you'll find the right audience. If you try to please everyone, you're going to make really boring films.

The informing idea of what you want to say and do, that's what will take you from film school to professional - the idea. That's what is original to you.

If the novelist isn't surprised by where his book ends up, he or she probably hasn't written anything worth remembering.

I don't want to make a movie till I have an idea I have to make. I don't want to make a movie just to make a movie.

Art has never been a popularity contest.