Dean Devlin Quotes

Having gotten TV shows on the air, that's so much less work that trying to get the 'Veronica Mars' movie made.

Anyone who has an imagination can write a book - it's cheap to do - but movies are big money.

I resisted the film business as long as I could, because of the big circus act and the amount of money that it costs to make films - I saw my father suffer through that.

On 'Friday,' I had a big trailer, and we would have a barbecue going and music playing. It was a fun set. There was too much involved for 'The Hangover' to be a fun set. They're trying to get money.

The bottom line of Hollywood is money.

Film is the most expensive, highest risk industry in the world.

But what's interesting is now - and not only in horror, but across the board - the studios basically only make B pictures with A budgets. That's the biggest difference.

Substantially fewer films will be produced over the next year or two. And a significant portion of the production costs of the reduced slate will be borne by hedge funds and other investment groups.

The fact is, it's hard to release movies.

We make movies for the cineplex. They're designed for wide release. They're designed to be seen by a lot of people and eventually make money.

There's no other industry in the world where you could spend $100m as frivolously as they do in the film industry. Think about how much good you could do with $100m... it can be spent in 20 minutes on a movie.

Our company, it's, uh, really un-sexy. And I think most people get into Hollywood to be showy. We first of all make horror movies, which people turn their noses up at. Second of all, we make cheap movies, and Hollywood's a lot about ego and money and, 'My movie cost $200m!,' you know?

I met Harry Thomason when I signed on with 20th Century Fox in 1985.

Film-making, in itself, is such a risky, costly-yet-uncertain business that despite being wealthy, 90 percent of people don't become producers.

The good thing about feature films is that the budgets tend to scale.

Now I do perhaps three films or 17 TV movies a year.

At the end of the day, there is a lot of money that gets put into films.

I feel like I don't have much of a preference. With TV, it's just a longer process, so you need to be more sure that you really want to be involved in it for a longer time than you would be with film.

The budget of 'Vada Chennai' is nearly Rs 60 crores.

In Bollywood, the film's stakes are as high as the actor. In Hollywood, they are way above, and the day we realise this in our industry, we will start appreciating actors.

You can't do anything yourself on TV... unless you have a LOT of money, but you can do an independent movie.

We don't shoot in L.A. much anymore. You know, TV and movies, most everything's shot other places.

I can see television much more easily than I can see features, because the economy and politics of making big, big features seems to me to be narrowing even from what it was.

Movies are grander, with (in my experience) more heavy weight chefs in the kitchen: the studio, the producers, the writers. All of them get to weigh in and you have to listen to all of them because they hired you. With TV, it's a way smaller scale, with only a few people weighing in.

Why don't they make more science fiction movies? The answer to any question starting, Why don't they- is almost always, Money.