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

Thu Nov 20 14:13:03 UTC 2008

Ha, he has the male version of my name. lol Anyways...I had a friend
who read the book who is blind and he really didn't mind the book at
all. I don't know if he saw the film though. I think that Fernando's
perception of vision loss is clouded and confused. I mean, when people
loose vision, they don't loose their minds and all of a sudden become
completely helpless...I had a friend who I watch loose his sight, and
he is fine. He struggled and it was hard on the family, but he lived
with it and moved on. I think that he is just ignorant of blind people
and should maybe talk to some before jumping to conclusions. I mean,
I've seen children's shows that preserve blind people better than
this. They need to sit down and maybe study the behaviours of blind
people. Go to a school or camp for the blind and live in their shoes.
Then, after you gathered your information, make a film that makes
sense.

On 11/20/08, Sarah Jevnikar <sarah.jevnikar at utoronto.ca> wrote:
> His derision of the protests and NFB's reaction really hurts. NFB saw the
> movie before protesting, didn't it? And the interviewer was biased a little
> too. That makes me more humiliated than the prospect of the film did.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
> Of Corbb O'Connor
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 7:38 PM
> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list; vabs at nfbnet.org
> Subject: [nabs-l] Fwd: Blindness - Movie Director Fernando Meirelles
> interview
>
> 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!
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nabs-l:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/sarah.jevnikar%40uto
> ronto.ca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nabs-l:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/fantasyfanatic01%40gmail.com
>