[nabs-l] Fwd: Blindness - Movie Director Fernando Meirelles interview

[Corbb O'Connor]

In the interest of equal opportunity of opinion, I forward this  
interview to you.

-----
Corbb O'Connor
studying at the National University of Ireland, Galway

Begin forwarded message:

From: LPovinelli at aol.com
Date: November 19, 2008 10:06:23 PM GMT
Subject: Blindness - Movie Director Fernando Meirelles interview


Blindness - Fernando Meirelles interview


Interview by Rob Carnevale


FERNANDO Meirelles, the Brazilian director of City of God and The  
Constant Gardener, talks about his latest project Blindness, the  
controversy surrounding it and why Stevie Wonder was involved in one  
of the most expensive jokes he’s ever played.

He also relates how the film has become an overwhelming success in his  
own country even though American audiences turned their backs on it,  
and why author Jose Saramago was reduced to tears after seeing the film.

Q. When this came back to you after the success of your other movies,  
did it feel like kind of a reward for those successes?
Fernando Meirelles: You know, it had nothing to do with the success of  
my other movies because when [Jose] Saramago sold the rights to Niv  
Fichman, the Canadian, he didn’t know I was going to direct. They  
first developed the script and then they tried to think about the  
possible director. They said they thought about me first, but I don’t  
believe it. Saramago didn’t know I was going to do it. They just told  
him later.

Q. How disappointed were you not to get the rights initially?
Fernando Meirelles: I just moved on very quickly. There was another  
book that I was interested in, from the same publisher, which was City  
of God. So we talked about the other one and started negotiating about  
City of God. So, it wasn’t a big deal. At that point, I’d been doing  
commercials for nine years and I really wanted to move on because my  
life was very boring. So, I just bought City of God and started  
working on it.

Q. Did you talk to Saramago about the book?
Fernando Meirelles: Actually, after I signed on to the project I went  
to Lisbon to meet him and I had a lot of questions. We met for dinner  
and I thought he was going to answer them but he didn’t want to. He  
said: “It’s my book and this is your film, so let’s not mix them up…”  
I really wanted to know a lot of things but in the end I think he was  
right. If he’d told me something about specific characters or events  
in the film I would try to follow whatever he’d said and not what I  
was thinking. I would have been a bit divided. In the end, I was happy  
that he didn’t want to talk about his book.

Q. Did you mention any of your casting ideas, such as Julianne Moore?
Fernando Meirelles: No, not at that point. His idea for the doctor’s  
wife was Susan Sarandon, who was also on my list. But we wanted an  
actress who was a bit younger. We needed her to be 10 or 12 years  
younger. There were three things he asked us: one, that the film  
should be spoken in English, so it could be very international; he  
didn’t want the story to be set in a specific place, it should be very  
generic; and the dog with the tears, he said he wanted a big dog. So,  
we had a big dog but he hated it [laughs].

Q. Has he seen the film and does he like it?
Fernando Meirelles: He saw it right after Cannes. I took the film to  
Lisbon because he couldn’t come to Cannes. I showed him in a very bad  
cinema screen in Lisbon and when the film finished he wouldn’t say  
anything. He was sitting next to me and he wouldn’t talk! I was sure  
he hated the film and didn’t know how to tell me. But then the lights  
came on and he was crying. He said he was as happy to see the film as  
he was when he finished writing the book. Actually, my son was seated  
in front of us, so when the lights turned on he turned his little  
camera and then at night at the hotel he put this video on YouTube.  
So, if you go to YouTube and put in Saramago, Blindness and maybe my  
name, this is the first thing that pops up. There’s like 200,000 hits  
already. My son’s footage is more successful than mine! But it’s a  
very moving moment because I was so pathetically nervous next to him.  
I was sure he hated it. But then when he said he loved it, I kissed  
him. I don’t kiss people a lot. But I kissed his head because I was so  
moved.

Q. How did he feel the film worked compared to the book, because the  
book is more of an allegory and the film is more naturalistic?
Fernando Meirelles: He said he liked it. He said they were different,  
because they had to be as there were different sensibilities and  
different people telling the same story. But what he liked about it  
was that the spirit of the book was totally respected by the film. I  
came from Lisbon yesterday and the day before yesterday, we had dinner  
together and he presented the screening. I didn’t stay to see it but  
before I left I went by his house to say goodbye and he was so moved.  
He said: “Fernando, yesterday I watched it again and it’s a great  
film.” He talked about the violence in the film and he really loved  
the texture of the tension… Again, he was very, very happy, so that  
was good news for me. But, again, he didn’t like the dog. And that’s  
an important thing to me because I had read this interview and among  
all his characters that he’d written for this book, he was asked which  
was his favourite and he said: “I could kill all my characters but the  
dog of tears.” So, for him the dog was really important and that’s why  
it was the only character he had something to ask for. And I missed it!

Q. Did the criticism from blind groups in America take you by surprise?
Fernando Meirelles: It was not a surprise because when we were  
preparing the film and they read the story was going to be shot, they  
[The National Federation of the Blind] wrote to us and said they  
didn’t approve of the project and they’d only approve if we sent them  
the script so they could revise and correct it. They were very bossy.  
So, we politely answered that they could have their own opinion, etc,  
etc, but it was our film. So, as promised, before we released the film  
they told us they were going to demonstrate and they carried out  
demonstrations in front of 75 cinemas, which is quite a big thing. To  
be honest, they missed the point completely. They thought the film  
tells the audience that blind people can’t be adapted, that blind  
people can’t work because they’re stupid and aggressive and it has  
nothing to do with blind people. It’s about human nature. It’s about  
people just going blind and losing their humanity. It’s a totally  
different story.

Q. Did Stevie Wonder give you any feedback about it as you use one of  
his songs?
Fernando Meirelles: Well, that was actually a little joke that  
happened when we were shooting. We were waiting to shoot the scene  
where Gael [Garcia Bernal] was talking on the microphone to attract  
everyone’s attention. But before doing that, he had the microphone in  
his hand and so, for fun, started singing Stevie Wonder [I Just Called  
To Say I Love You]. I thought that was funny and maybe we could shoot  
it. I wasn’t sure I was going to use it but we were laughing a lot, so  
finally I decided to use the joke and we bought the rights. That was  
the most expensive joke in my life. They charged us $50,000! But we  
paid.

Q. You say the story in the book and the film is about human nature.  
So what does it say about the human nature of a group that protests  
against something before it’s been released?
Fernando Meirelles: Well, what we found out about this group is that  
this organisation don’t really work for blind people. It’s more like a  
PR organisation. They want to promote the idea that there is an  
organisation for blind people. Other organisations have training for  
blind people for adaptation or school. They don’t have that. It’s just  
a news agency and it’s about promoting the idea that blind people can  
adapt. That’s fair. But I think their decision to protest before  
seeing or hearing the film was really a mistake. Saramago’s reply was  
quite aggressive. He said something like, [with regards to human  
blindness] there’s some people who can see but are blind, and some  
blind people who are really blind but can see how stupid somebody can  
be.

Q. Is this the first film you’ve made that’s not been praised by the  
international press?
Fernando Meirelles: Everybody can have their opinion. We’ve had some  
good reviews. The Guardian here, and the LA Times gave us a good  
review. It was really divided. But it’s a difficult film. There’s  
people who love the book and those who can’t read it to the end. The  
good news is that the film in Brazil is doing really well. We did an  
investment to do 300,000 tickets because it is a hard film to sell.  
So, we did 95 prints and we thought we were going to do 300,000  
tickets. The Constant Gardener did 500,000 in Brazil, but this is a  
harder film so we thought that maybe it would do less. But now the  
film is now going to go to 900,000 and we might make a million. And  
that’s with no investment. It’s all word of mouth. We released eight  
weeks ago with 95 prints and still have 95 prints going on because the  
cinemas are still packed. So, audiences are responding very well… in  
Mexico as well.

But in the US the film didn’t work at all. I don’t know why. They  
released it four weeks ago and now we have only 80 prints left. The  
American audience wasn’t interested in seeing the story. They opened  
very wide and on the first weekend, the audience didn’t show up. They  
saw the trailer, saw the posters and decided they didn’t want to see a  
depressing film. So, they didn’t go. If the film hadn’t been so  
successful in Brazil or Mexico I’d say it was a problem with the film.  
But I’d say it’s a cultural thing. Maybe the election is really  
creating a tension. In this financial crisis, people are losing their  
jobs, losing their houses and losing their investments. It’s not a  
good moment for dark stories… because in the same week that we  
released Blindness, Beverly Hills Chihuahua opened on the same day and  
was a big hit!

Q. The blindness camps sounded like an interesting part of the  
process, which you took part in as well. What did you discover about  
yourself while doing that, because it makes you confront one of every  
person’s worst nightmares?
Fernando Meirelles: You know, we had groups where we blindfolded  
people for hours and did different exercises. In every group, there  
was always two or three people who, at some point after two or three  
hours, would sit down and cry. They really, really couldn’t go on –  
but we wouldn’t let them take off the blindfold. Somebody would go  
there and say: “No, let’s keep going.” But for me, it was the  
opposite. It was so comfortable and so cosy. I remember I did it  
twice. The first time we did a lot of things and we were taken to a  
restaurant, we were served and we had to eat while blindfolded. After  
lunch, the guy said we could remove our blindfolds but I didn’t want  
to. I think I stayed with the blindfold for another eight minutes. It  
was so pleasant being with myself. It’s so good because when you’re  
talking to people you don’t see their faces. When I’m talking to you  
[now] I have expressions, I’m trying to engage you. But if you can’t  
see, it’s much more free. It’s so liberating.

Another thing I’ve found, which is so interesting, is that when you’re  
blindfolded and you’re talking to somebody the conversation goes to  
places that it would never go if you could see the other person’s  
reaction. You start talking about very intimate things. It’s such an  
interesting experience. I recommend maybe Sunday morning and spending  
the day in a blindfold. It’s really, really interesting.

Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Stumbleupon
Quite apart from his incorrect characterization of our objections to  
his movie, Mr. Meirelles proves in this interview that he knows  
nothing about the National Federation of the Blind and what we do. We  
operate three model training centers in the United States that offer  
the best available rehabilitation training to help people adapt to  
blindness, and we are very involved in mentoring blind youth and  
encouraging them to participate in careers that are falsely thought to  
be closed to the blind. And those things are just the tip of the  
iceberg. In our sixty-eight years of existence, we have done more good  
for blind people than any single organization that claims to “work for  
the blind.” This is because we are an organization of blind people,  
and blind people are in the best position to know what blind people  
truly need. The biggest problem that blind people face is the public  
misconceptions and misunderstandings about blindness and blind people,  
so public education is a critically important part of our mission, but  
it is not true to say that we are simply a “PR organization.”


— Chris Danielsen    Nov 19    #






One site has it all. Your email accounts, your social networks, and  
the things you love. Try the new AOL.com today!