When I discovered cinema, there was a moment when I was only concerned with movies who had a real link between the reality of the director and the life they had. I was only interested in Truffaut, Godard, and Pialat—movies that existed because they were connected to their own lives. In my head I was thinking, okay, if I like the movie, if I like the idea of living in the movie, I can say to myself, this woman exists because it’s the world of the life of the director—which is a bit stupid and naive, but I loved the idea of autobiography. When I’d watch a movie and say to myself, okay it’s just imagination and it never happened, I was a bit disappointed. But if I could see a movie that was connected to reality, I was so happy. This was maybe because of the kind of movies my father was making. But then I was fascinated by the movie Magnolia. At the age of 29 years old, I can’t even imagine how a young man [Paul Thomas Anderson] could create so many characters so well and have it be so well done and so well painted, and from the imagination. So it all changed a little bit. But for example, Wes Anderson, when you start to think about it, he makes movies from some part of his life, and it’s also very joyful. The game is also to try and understand who he is. He doesn’t make documentaries about his life, he makes movies made about elements of his life.