"But I think Barry Sonnenfeld let his ego go out of control. He told me in a meeting that he had to do something to make it his film"
About this Quote
There is a particular sting in Conrad's phrasing: not that Sonnenfeld wanted authorship, but that he "had to" seize it. The line paints ego not as vanity but as compulsion, the kind of managerial reflex that turns collaboration into a turf war. Conrad frames the moment as a meeting-room confession, which matters. He isn't describing some on-set blowup or artistic breakthrough; he's describing power being asserted in the blandest corporate habitat possible, where movies often become less art than jurisdiction.
The subtext is an old Hollywood anxiety dressed in modern clothes: film is a medium that requires many hands, yet it still crowns one face as the "author". By quoting Sonnenfeld directly, Conrad implies that the impulse to stamp ownership on a project is less about improving it and more about being seen improving it. "Make it his film" reads like a warning label for a certain kind of directorly branding, where the signature style becomes an extraction process. The project doesn't just get guided; it gets re-possessed.
Conrad's intent feels twofold. He's critiquing Sonnenfeld's ego, yes, but he's also defending an alternate ethics of filmmaking: stewardship over conquest. Coming from someone identified here as a director, the complaint is especially pointed because it isn't anti-director; it's anti-empire. He suggests that the creative disaster (implied by "out of control") begins when a director confuses leadership with ownership, and treats the set like a referendum on their importance rather than the work's needs.
The subtext is an old Hollywood anxiety dressed in modern clothes: film is a medium that requires many hands, yet it still crowns one face as the "author". By quoting Sonnenfeld directly, Conrad implies that the impulse to stamp ownership on a project is less about improving it and more about being seen improving it. "Make it his film" reads like a warning label for a certain kind of directorly branding, where the signature style becomes an extraction process. The project doesn't just get guided; it gets re-possessed.
Conrad's intent feels twofold. He's critiquing Sonnenfeld's ego, yes, but he's also defending an alternate ethics of filmmaking: stewardship over conquest. Coming from someone identified here as a director, the complaint is especially pointed because it isn't anti-director; it's anti-empire. He suggests that the creative disaster (implied by "out of control") begins when a director confuses leadership with ownership, and treats the set like a referendum on their importance rather than the work's needs.
Quote Details
| Topic | Movie |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Robert
Add to List



