So what'll happen is there'll be some very good cinema experiences are going to see 3D where you have to pay more. And there'll be some bad experiences of going to see movies in 3D. And I just hope that this kind of gold rush mentality doesn't kill what could actually be something that really, really benefits the industry.

You might have been able to fool people the first time, or something, but you really can't make a successful sequel today unless people really, really liked the predecessor.

I think that if you're creating an environment completely or...in my research, what I've learned is that if it's a CG world or a lot of visual effects, you're almost better doing that in post.

I think the combination of action and the combination of comedy are two really, really good genres to meld together.

I have a ton of fun, I mean luckily I've been balancing a ton of projects for a lot of years now, and I'm better when I'm busy and I just do my job in a way where I really totally compartmentalize.

If I'm shooting actually a live-action movie and I feel like I can get the shots that I need with the existing 3D cameras, then I see there is no reason to not use those-to not shoot it in 3D. But there are limitations to the 3D cameras in terms of the amount of them, in terms of the size of them, in terms of where you can actually shoot them. There are definitely limitations so you have to weigh the costs. And you have to weigh also what ultimately what creatively you want to get.

I think certain movies are right for 3D. I think certain movies are not right for 3D. And I think the specialness of 3D will be worn off if every movie becomes 3D.