Interviews, when they are just simply an exercise in hearing what you want to hear, are of no interest. And many, many, if not most interviews have that character. The interviewer who comes in with a list of bullet points they're going to address one after the other. Interviews, properly considered, should be investigative. You should not know what you're going to hear. You should be surprised.

I used to say that interviewing others was perhaps the way I could stop talking and start listening. It's a kind of enforced silence.

Listening to what people were saying wasn't even important. But it was important to look as if you were listening to what people were saying. Actually, listening to what people are saying, to me, interferes with looking as if you were listening to what people are saying.

All alone - shorn of context, without captions - a photograph is neither true nor false.... For truth, properly considered, is about the relationship between language and the world, not about photographs and the world.

It's so much easier to make a movie about someone who is so likeable that you just want to get out of the way.

Those who cannot condemn the past repeat it in order to remember it.

They say seeing is believing, but the opposite is true. Believing is seeing.