Biographical Films Quotes

I've made many films and only a few times I've played real people.

There will always be a slight difference between the reel and the real. Even my family might know 99 per cent about me, but there will be this one per cent about me that nobody will ever know. Being in this profession, I am fine with biopics or movies inspired by real-life-characters.

I committed to directing 'Catch Me If You Can' not because of the divorce component, but principally because Frank Abagnale did things that were the most astonishing scams I had ever heard.

I am interested in biographical stories. Seldom are good biopics like 'Maha Nati' being made.

I don't get the point in a lot of biopics, they're boring. You know what's gonna happen. You're just watching actors show off.

Actors who have tried to play Churchill and MacArthur have failed abysmally because each of those men was a great actor playing himself.

I want to act in films such as 'My Left Foot' and 'A Beautiful Mind.'

Generally my instinct is to not do biographical movies. I want to build characters and not be locked into playing a part in history.

'30 for 30s' are amazing. They're little documentaries and can be anywhere from half an hour to an hour-and-a-half - great sports stories.

You know it's Oscar season when you see a slew of new movies based on true stories whose resolutions you can find in three seconds on Wikipedia.

At some point, all black movies became biopics. All the good, serious ones became biopics. 'Ray,' 'Ali'... those types of movies, those are the opportunities available for mostly men. Those are the opportunities for a black actor to transcend 'black' movies. They have to play a black icon.

It is not that I am only looking at doing biopics. But of course, as an actor, I always love portraying real-life characters because there is so much challenge involved in recreating somebody's life.

Movies are thankfully about real people nowadays, and I don't necessarily always look like a real person.

People have said, 'You don't need to do any more biopics. You don't need to play any more real people.' I don't agree with that.

When you go in for any life rights, you always ask, 'Who would you have play this person, or who would you have direct?'

See, most films are about achievers. You see a film like 'Bhaag Milkha Bhaag' or 'Dhoni.' Even 'Gandhi,' or the biopic on Lincoln. They end in triumph, on a high.

I wouldn't let a biopic be made on me. That's because I don't believe in them. I don't like them.

One of the occupational hazards of reviewing year-end biopics with Oscar ambitions is pointing out discrepancies between the real subjects and their on-screen avatars.

I would never go to a cinema hall to watch a biopic on a cricketer. I am not a big fan of people making biopics on sportsmen, especially cricketers. I think there are far bigger people who have done much more for the country, and films should be made on them.

Movies serve many purposes, and I've visited many of those genres, from the most light, frivolous comedy that is just trying to make you laugh, to movies that explore the most complicated side of the human soul. As an actor, I play all of those things, and I still like it.

The first Elizabeth film was an absolute travesty historically. It really was sloppy. Things like 'The Other Boleyn Girl' and 'The Tudors,' people's perception is distorted because of these. It matters to me as a historian, because I spend my life trying to get it right.

I don't think people should do biopics of living people. I'm totally opposed to that.

I love the true life stories and the biopics - people say I'm pigeonholed, but it's a fantastic kind of pigeonhole - but it's tough to then go and direct it because I know all the real people.

I happily watch movies made on the life and achievement of others.