These films however, have ambiguity built into them, because it's too easy in film to make a strident work of propaganda or advertising, which are really the same thing anyway, meaning the message is unmistakable.

It's not that we use technology, we live technology.

Having been an educator for so many years I know that all a good teacher can do is set a context, raise questions or enter into a kind of a dialogic relationship with their students.

In terms of the feeling of the piece, I cant think about what people are gonna think about it, what are the critics gonna say, I'm trying to bring some resolution, and realize that myself. It's a struggle; it's a process that gets us this.

Technology has become as ubiquitous as the air we breathe, so we are no longer conscious of its presence.

But in fact if you look at film as a metaphor, only through the negative can you have the positive print. What I'm trying to get to is the positive value of negation.

I think it's the tragedy of our time that we're not aware of the affect of the manner in which we've adopted tools. Those tools have become who we are.

Now having said that, I realize that releasing a film in the real world is like trying to get General Motors to release a handmade car.

In the order I was in, each brother takes five vows, one of which is teaching the poor gratuitously. As a young person I was seized by this idea of social justice and I wanted very much to follow my vow of teaching the poor gratuitously.

In effect, I feel like a blind, deaf, and illiterate person working through the sensibilities and multiple, real talents of other people. Everything I do is collaborative.

All tools have intrinsic politics and technology is the tool of now.

These films however, have ambiguity built into them, because it's too easy in film to make a strident work of propaganda or advertising, which are really the same thing anyway, meaning the message is unmistakable.

So to hope to be able to have peace, to be able to have justice and environmental balance, are consequences of our behavior, not just our intentions.

So, not for lack of love of language, but because I feel our language is in an enormous state of humiliation, I decided to make films without words.

I think it's naive to pray for world peace if we're not going to change the form in which we live.

It is very easy to make clear what you want a film to say, but I did not wish to engage in overt propaganda, even for the right cause. I wanted to create an experience through the films, something where people could have the freedom of their own response to them.

What I'm trying to do is to at least raise a flag to the blinding light of technology.

It's not just the effect of technology on the environment, on religion, on the economic structure, on society, on politics, etc. It's that everything now exists in technology to the point where technology is the new and comprehensive host of nature of life.

History has been the history of warfare.

The language of the moment or, as it were, the language of the order in which we live, is the image. I felt that if I wanted to commune with the public, I should best do so through the language of image. It's a conscious embrace of a contradiction.

Mystery is gone to the certainty of technological principles. So the real terror, the real aggression against life comes in the form of the pursuit of our technological happiness.

Technology is not neutral.

The only thing I can do is type. I learned that when I was 13.

I think there's an enormous value to being negative. The world we live in today, negativity is not permitted.

There is no such thing as a Mass Mind. The Mass Audience is made up of individuals, and good advertising is written always from one person to another. When it is aimed at millions it rarely moves anyone.

Religious advertising is undergoing a dramatic conversion.

In our factory, we make lipstick. In our advertising, we sell hope.

The simplest definition of advertising, and one that will probably meet the test of critical examination, is that advertising is selling in print.

In advertising, not to be different is virtual suicide.

It is not the purpose of the ad or commercial to make the reader or listener say, 'My what a clever ad.' It is the purpose of advertising to make the reader say, 'I believe I'll buy one when I'm shopping tomorrow'.

Young people are threatened... by the evil use of advertising techniques that stimulate the natural inclination to avoid hard work by promising the immediate satisfaction of every desire.

I saw a subliminal advertising executive, but only for a second.

I have learned that trying to guess what the boss or the client wants is the most debilitating of all influences in the creation of good advertising.

Advertising is totally unnecessary. Unless you hope to make money.

Advertising is the art of making whole lies out of half truths.

It is not unprofessional to give free legal advice, but advertising that the first visit will be free is a bit like a fox telling chickens he will not bite them until they cross the threshold of the hen house.

More traffic means more advertising dollars.

An advertising agency is 85 percent confusion and 15 percent commission.

Much of the messy advertising you see on television today is the product of committees. Committees can criticize advertisements, but they should never be allowed to create them.

In advertising, I was frustrated by having to deal with the client. It was the only time I really worked in a proper office, and I didn't like it-simple as that.

Magazines and advertising are flogging the idea that you have to keep changing things and get something new. I think that's balls - evil. But obviously that's your livelihood.

I can't say the advertising model is obsolete yet but it doesn't make a lot of sense in the long range.

Advertising says to people, 'Here's what we've got. Here's what it will do for you. Here's how to get it.'

The headline is the 'ticket on the meat.' Use it to flag down readers who are prospects for the kind of product you are advertising.

They say that Madison Avenue will only pay high dollars in advertising if they get the 18-35 age range.

I'm not in the advertising business, but I think it would be very nice if people went to see the film Hamlet, because it was made with love and integrity.

Why, I ask, isn't it possible that advertising as a whole is a fantastic fraud, presenting an image of America taken seriously by no one, least of all by the advertising men who create it?

Society drives people crazy with lust and calls it advertising.

A good basic selling idea, involvement and relevancy, of course, are as important as ever, but in the advertising din of today, unless you make yourself noticed and believed, you ain't got nothin'.