To me this movie is about what is valuable. To one person it might be a stone; to someone else, a story in a magazine; to another, it is a child. The juxtaposition of one man obsessed with finding a valuable diamond with another man risking his life to find his son is the beating heart of this film.

There is a segment of the American population that has been excluded from the national myth, and that should be redressed.

There is no reason why challenging themes and engaging stories have to be mutually exclusive - in fact, each can fuel the other.

I think one of the privileges of being a filmmaker is the opportunity to remain a kind of perpetual student.

There is something universal in the theme of a man trying to save his family in the midst of the most terrible circumstances. It is not limited to Sierra Leone. This story could apply to any number of places where ordinary people have been caught up in political events beyond their control.

I don't think movies can ever be too intense, but people have to understand why you're showing them the things you are showing them.

And how deeply do I let business considerations affect [screenwriting] choices that might otherwise be more or less esthetic? . . . Do I choose the upbeat rather than the downer ending because I know it will score better at the preview? Can the idea be sold in a single sentence? Can it compete with space aliens and tornadoes and missions impossible?