If a movie makes money, then it's a success.

I'm so critical, especially of the movies I do. If the movie flows and I buy it, that's important. Beyond it working, if I buy the character, especially if I'm close to the character.

The more we can put the camera in a better place, the more we can take the audience on a more extreme journey with that character.

I've always been very strong minded on character-based fights and character-based action. If you take the character out of the action and you just shoot it as an action sequence, the audience starts to lose connection.

I'd most likely be a helicopter pilot, or I'd own a really cool surf hotel somewhere on a beach.

I strive to be professional and to push myself always to do a better job.

Everything today is such a massive visual show. It's very rare to get a film where the characters are raw and real - and you can take people back to where they are watching live cinema. With character-driven action. Not visual-driven action.

The last thing you want is an injured actor. That, or having to use a stuntman too much.

Not every actor is a Tom Cruise. They are not all used to doing big action movies and doing sliding bikes and cars and fights. So you've got to take actors who have maybe not done that kind of stuff and get them through some proper training first.

That's filming. You pitch up, give your all, and see what the outcome is.

The way that you have cut the film, you can take the audience out of the action if it becomes evident that there is a stunt double doing it rather than the actor. I'd rather stay with the character and the story point behind the fight, rather than cutting to a wide angle of the fight.