I'm very manipulative towards directors. My theory is that everyone on the set is directing the film we're all receiving art messages from the universe on how we should do the film.

When museums are built these days architects directors and trustees seem most concerned about social space: places to have parties eat dinner wine-and-dine donors. Sure these are important these days - museums have to bring in money - but they gobble up space and push the art itself far away from the entrance.

I would've been intrigued by being a film director. I would've been intrigued by politics. I thought about architecture.

I enjoy looking at words on paper and visualizing how to make them come to life. As a director the creative process is really amazing.

I feel fortunate. I've really gotten to work with amazing talented people and to learn from them which is why I'm doing this. If I can work with the best director I'm going to do it.

I think Chris Weitz is an amazing director and his sensibility - I wouldn't even know how to articulate it - it's just he's a very sensitive interesting guy.

I thoroughly enjoyed working on Enemy of the State. Tony Scott is an important director and has an amazing ability to express himself and he doesn't do it in musical terms he does it in emotional terms. I got along really well with him.

If Martin Scorsese calls I am available. And then there the ones well you can just run down the list - any of those Oscar-nominated films they have amazing directors across the board.

Because I've made a film with such an amazing director as Tarantino I'm much more conscious of working with good directors from now on so that's what's important to me. I don't really care about making a big movie - I just want to make good ones.

Everybody just asks me 'Are you going to make Hollywood movies now?' First I don't know. Second I never dreamed about that I just dreamed about making movies with Tarantino. So if I can make movies with a lot of amazing directors - yes.