• Caro Visitante, por que não gastar alguns segundos e criar uma Conta no Fórum Valinor? Desta forma, além de não ver este aviso novamente, poderá participar de nossa comunidade, inserir suas opiniões e sugestões, fazendo parte deste que é um maiores Fóruns de Discussão do Brasil! Aproveite e cadastre-se já!

J.K Rowling supõe que toda a saga teria sido loucura de Harry Potter

Tá, a mulher começa a mijar no prato em que comeu e fica lançando site pra cambada de fã ficar brincando de Harry Potter? Ela quer transformar a loucura particular do personagem dela em histeria coletiva? Uma boa tunda ia dar um jeito nessa mulher ¬¬
 
Eu ouvi falar que ela considerar o mundo dos bruxos uma loucura do Harry é erro de tradução. Enfim, essa idéia de ser tudo um sonho ou não do protagonista pode ser considerada, mas tem que ser minuciosamente trabalhada ( por exemplo: labirinto do fauno, que muitos lembraram aqui ;) ) Se for jogada assim, fica forçado, com a série toda concluída. E o mundo mágico não parece ter nenhum aspecto onírico, tem muitos aspectos que apresentam lógica extremamente verossímil . As matérias de Hogwarts, departamentos do ministério da magia, este mundo tem detalhes, alguns que podemos chamar de burocráticos à trama e isso, para mim, não tem nenhum aspecto de sonho.

P.s. : eu estou falando isso porque me lembrei do meu sonho que misturava elementos de HP e SdA. Tinha história, é claro, mas a lógica não era tão desenvolvida. Tinha furos bastante perceptíveis no meu estado alerta e não tinha tanta continuidade em alguns episódios. Acho que essas são as características dos sonhos e devaneios.
 
Última edição:
A culpa é de vocês (fãs) que deram corda pra ela. Nunca ouviram falar do conceito de "morte do autor"? "Obra aberta"? Como os fãs a tornaram o Dante de seu próprio texto, agora ela acha que pode dizer o que quiser, definir como bem lhe aprouver qualquer característica da saga. Agora aguentem as consequências. :lol:
 
Essa ideia, fake ou não, destruiu uma coisa para mim: a cena em que o Harry meio que "se despede" do armário no sétimo filme (sim, no livro é mais bonito e blá blá blá). Toda vez que eu vejo aquela cena, agora, eu penso: "você até pode ser um péssimo bruxo, que só escapa 'na sorte', mas que imaginação, hein? Cê num fez mais nada da vida a não ser imaginar um mundo onde os bruxos e os trouxas são ameaçados por um carinha sem nariz". Sério, sacam aquela coisa de Inception de IMPLANTAR a ideia? Pois é, essa ideia de "foi tudo coisa da cabeça do Harry" foi implantada e não dá para arrancar as raízes dela. Eu não gosto da ideia, eu não acredito nela, mas ela existe, e a existência dela me incomoda.
 
Seria interessante colocar essa ideia naquele tópico sobre possibilidades de interpretação em diferentes histórias, né?
 
Estratégia de marketing. A Meyer fez algo parecido ao declarar em entrevista cogitar a possibilidade de escrever mais continuações da Saga Crepúsculo exclusivamente para si, sem publicar tais continuações, privando assim os fãs de tais novidades/continuações. Mas é assim mesmo que o mercado incentiva. Fazer o que... :)
 
Já pensei em escrever um livro assim... onde todo o enredo seria um sonho da personagem principal. Mas nunca cheguei a terminar...

Seria interessante se a Rowling fizesse isso... XD
 
Pena eu não ter visto isso aqui antes. Vira e mexe alguém inventa um polêmica ABSURDA sobre Harry Potter. É triste. Ô esforço desse povo pra tentar desmerecer o trabalho dela...

Enfim, segue o que saiu no Potterish a respeito:

Esclarecendo a declaração de Jo sobre a loucura de Harry

Por Andre Wynne - domingo, 16 de setembro de 2012 às 01:28

Há quase duas semanas postamos aqui no Potterish o vídeo e a transcrição do trecho de uma conversa entre J.K. Rowling e o roteirista Steve Kloves, na qual ambos discutiram sobre a dura infância de Harry, incluindo a teoria de que o garoto teria enlouquecido e tudo o que aconteceu foi apenas fruto de sua imaginação.


Nos últimos dias temos recebido diversos e-mails e tweets pedindo nossa opinião sobre Harry ser esquizofrênico, ou pedindo a postagem do vídeo no qual Jo diz supor que Harry é louco. Antes de mais nada, vamos analisar a tradução divulgada aqui no site.

J.K. Rowling: Era uma imagem tão excelente, o exército quebrado.

Kloves: E ele costumava conversar com eles, e a ideia é que ele parecia um pouco louco, quando escrevi o primeiro rascunho. E então, quando Hagrid surgiu, ele, Harry, pensou que tudo vinha da sua imaginação por um minuto. Que ele tinha convocado esse cara –

Rowling: Acho que esta questão é fabulosa, dialoga perfeitamente com a verdade dos livros, porque me sugeriram isso mais de uma vez, que Harry enlouqueceu no armário debaixo da escada e que tudo que aconteceu depois disso foi uma vida de fantasia que ele inventou para se salvar.

Em outros sites, como é o caso da Gazeta do Povo, há a tradução incorreta que fez com que muitos fãs se descabelassem com a ideia de terem sido, de certa forma, enganados pela autora.

JK Rowling: Acho que esta questão é fabulosa e que conversa com perfeição com a verdade dos livros, porque eu sugeri mais de uma vez que, para mim, Harry enlouqueceu no armário debaixo da escada e que tudo que aconteceu subsequentemente foi algum tipo de vida fantasiosa que ele desenvolveu para se salvar

Diferente de traduções incorretas como esta e outras que estão circulando pela internet, Jo jamais disse que sugeriu a si mesma a ideia da loucura, mas sim que terceiros sugeriram isso a ela.

Não é dessa vez que os fãs farão coro com Pirraça: Ora, é o Potter Pirado!

Então... GENTE... não vamos viajar na maionese.

O roteirista Kloves se referia a uma cena que só existe NO FILME, em que Harry brinca e conversa com seus brinquedos, um mini exército. E que o próprio Harry, de tanto sofrer, achou que tinha ficado louco POR UM MINUTO quando Hagrid apareceu. Convenhamos, quem não acharia se alguém te dissesse que você é um bruxo? Ainda mais sendo um meio-gigante?
E porque passou pela cabeça, DO ROTEIRISTA, que Harry podia ter pirado um pouco mesmo, quando ele começou a escrever o RASCUNHO. E JK comenta que já escreveram a ela sugerindo isso. O que não quer dizer que seja verdade!

Levante a mão aí quem não falava com seus brinquedos quando era criança, que não fingia que eles falavam com você ou eram personagens... e quem não tinha amigos invisíveis. Principalmente as crianças que são solitárias, como no caso do Harry. E eu mesma passei por isso, por ser filha única.
 
Última edição por um moderador:
O roteirista Kloves se referia a uma cena que só existe NO FILME, em que Harry brinca e conversa com seus brinquedos, um mini exército. E que o próprio Harry, de tanto sofrer, achou que tinha ficado louco POR UM MINUTO quando Hagrid apareceu. Convenhamos, quem não acharia se alguém te dissesse que você é um bruxo? Ainda mais sendo um meio-gigante

O fato da cena dos brinquedos* ter apenas no filme só torna AINDA MAIS esquisito, inoportuno e fora de lugar a Rowling comentar que o episódio "dialoga com a verdade dos livros"** ( ainda mais quando uma aranha dentre os brinquedos do Harry tinha o nome de "Alastor" e , pior ainda, quando se considera o fato de que a cena foi escrita pelo Kloves que, aí nessa citação famosa, confessou "não ser fã de fantasia", o que, por si só, já é péssima referência, apesar do roteirista ter conquistado a confiança da Rowling ao ponto dela escrever um texto pra falar do relacionamento dos dois, o que, contextualmente, explica MUITO BEM a indulgência da JKR com ele ao ponto de ter dado essa mancada.

"Rowling: I think that’s a fabulous point, and that speaks so perfectly to the truth to the books, because I had it suggested that to me more than once that Harry actually did go mad in the cupboard, and that everything that happened subsequently was some sort of fantasy life he developed to save himself."

Interview with Steven Kloves, who wrote Harry Potter film scripts, Written By, 2001:

"I confessed to Jo right away that I wasn't a fan of fantasy," he says. "She said, 'Relax, neither am I.'"

Advanced Search
JKR by date
2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 Undated JKR's Website

JKR by topic
Characters Places Wizarding World Books 1-7 JKR

Audio/Video
Audio Video

Tools

Search
Contact
Newsblog
Translations
Hoaxes & rumours
HOME
McNamara, Mary. "When Steve Met Harry: If the magic works, Steve Kloves writes happily ever-after as Harry Potter's sorcerer and J.K. Rowlings' collaborator." Written By, November 2001.

It was the seventh item in the package, the last book synopsis in a stack Warner Bros. had sent to Steve Kloves on the unlikely chance that he would like one. Having just taken Michael Chabon's Wonder Boys to the screen, Kloves wasn't really looking for another novel to adapt. He wanted his next project to be an original work, something he had written, something he could direct. So it was a bit of a miracle that he even opened the package (he often didn't), and it was certainly remarkable that he actually read what was inside.

"I don't have a great history of reading coverage," Kloves says. "I have a tendency to throw them away." And indeed, as he flicked through the pile he thought, No, no, no, sigh, no.

But seven is an odd number, a charmed number, and when he came to the last little write-up, a British book he had never heard of, he was, in fact, oddly charmed. He called his agent, who was delighted. The book was apparently a bit of a thing in the UK, was becoming quite popular in the United States, although the title here was different. Philosopher had been replaced by Sorcerer, but everything else was essentially the same. He would certainly send Kloves a copy. Don't bother, Kloves said, he'd pick one up at the bookstore. And within an hour or so, he had.

And this is how Steve Kloves met Harry Potter.

Harry Potter, he of the lightning-bolt scar, who, with the aid of friends and fellow wizardry students Hermione and Ron, has repeatedly saved the world from the dastardly Lord Voldemort. Harry Potter, Quidditch-seeker supreme, who has sold more books and tie-in accoutrement--spectacles! candy! magic journals! Hogwarts sweatshirts!--than any character this side of Oz.

That Harry Potter.

"When I first read the book, if you had a child of a certain age, you probably knew who Harry Potter was," Kloves says. His two children, at the time six and three, were a bit too young. "Then if you had a child of any age, you knew who Harry Potter was. And a few months later, if you were alive on the planet, you knew who Harry Potter was. It was a bizarre thing to watch unfold, but it was good that I read the book when I did. I got a clean read."

Sometime between "child of a certain age" and "a child of any age," Kloves agreed to write the screenplay for Warner Bros.' production of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. At the time, he didn't realize the epic proportions of his decision. He did not realize he would be responsible for bringing to cinematic life the biggest thing to hit children's literature since E. Nesbit. He did not realize that Harry Potter was not so much a character as an alternate universe, that the Sorcerer's Stone was not so much a book as the beginning of an oeuvre.

"I thought at the time this would be a wonderful world to live in for a few months," he says, laughing. "That was two-and-a-half years ago."

And he's not even close to being done. Because somewhere between "a child of any age" and "alive on the planet," the studio decided to get moving on J.K. Rowling's next two books: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Akzaban. Kloves was asked to adapt them as well. The script for number two, he says, is in pretty good shape, and he's about to start on number three. He has said publicly that he would kill to do number four. At this rate, he should be done with Harry sometime before his oldest child enters high school. Of course, if the movies are as popular as the books are, well, we're back at that odd magical number again. Rowling has promised seven books, one for each year required before graduation from Hogwarts School of Wizardry and Witchcraft; she's at work on number five now.

"It's the only time I've ever been involved in a story without an ending," he says. "I don't know how the whole story ends yet, and that's a very strange thing."

A Boy's Life

Not quite as strange, perhaps, as his being involved at all. There is little in Kloves' career to suggest a Harry Potter predilection, save his seeming affection for movies about "boys." Nothing, certainly, to foreshadow a years-long commitment to the story of an 11-year-old who discovers that magic, of the flying-broomsticks-bubbling-caldron variety, is very real. Kloves belongs to the "small but critically acclaimed" category--Shoot the Moon, The Fabulous Baker Boys, Flesh and Bone--movies about adults, vividly real and often quite flawed adults, with no magic allowed save that of love and self-revelation. Wonder Boys was his first shot at adaptation and earned him an Oscar nomination, but the only mysterious thing about the film was its low box-office numbers, the only mystical aspect, the almost constant presence of marijuana. Yes, much of the story took place in an academic setting, but a small liberal arts college is nothing like Hogwarts--no annoying poltergeists of any type, no talking paintings, no dragons or unicorns lurking on the grounds, no three-headed dogs guarding the elixir of life, and certainly no Quidditch.


Steve Kloves
Photo by JIlly Wendell

(For the three people in the universe who remain unfamiliar with Rowling's work, Quidditch is the official game of magic academia. It is a bit like rugby, a bit like lacrosse, and it is played on broomsticks. It is one of the main reasons Rowlings has longed for the film version of the work; she too can hardly wait to see what a Quidditch match really looks like.)

The idea of otherwise ordinary kids attending a school for witches and wizards is rife for really nifty things--photographs that move, letters that scream, spells that go embarrassingly awry--but it wasn't anything whimsical that moved Kloves to accept the assignment. He did not nurse a secret lifelong love of fantasy, or even science fiction. Certainly, he believes in the existence of alternate universes--he had wanted to be a filmmaker since he was a watchful young thing in the growing suburban sprawl of what is now Silicon Valley--but his concept of "alternate" has been driven more by the psyche, less by a magical train. And that, he says, is where the book got him.

The most difficult thing about fantasy of any sort is to make the alternate world believable enough, the characters real enough, for the audience to connect with them, and through that connect to form a bridge between this world and that. The extraordinary success of the Harry Potter series is proof that Rowlings has done just that--her characters are realistic even in the most outlandish settings, her tone matter-of-fact whether describing Harry's reaction to learning about the death of his parents, his curriculum that includes levitation, or the developmental stages of a dragon. Rowlings' descriptions are never lavish; even her sentence structure is simple and to the point. It's just that what she is writing about happens to be fantastic. And the character of Harry is experiencing the unfolding of the fantasy just as the reader is, just as Kloves did--with no prior knowledge.

"I confessed to Jo right away that I wasn't a fan of fantasy," he says. "She said, 'Relax, neither am I.' I just really responded to it instantly, the same way everyone has. It is just such an imaginative world and so recognizable emotionally. Jo is so skilled at finding the exact proper detail to evoke a place or a feeling. The kids feel like real kids, who just happen to be witches and wizards. I was just blown away."

In hindsight, it would seem that adapting Harry Potter was simply a task no screenwriter in his right mind could turn down. As well-regarded as Kloves is as a filmmaker (and he is, enormously), it might seem to some that he was looking to crash out of the "good reviews, small numbers" box. Yet, as he began to work, the rest of the country fell to its knees in front of the character whose mind he was trying to decipher. Suggestions for casting and scenery, plot points and character shifts, filled the press and the Internet. It was as unsettling as it was satisfying. Certainly, Kloves is thrilled to be working on a project for which there is a built-in audience filled with anticipation, and the project's unbelievable marketing doesn't hurt either.

"Billboards," he says. "Imagine. No other film of mine has ever had billboards. And merchandising . . ." He shakes his head, looks at the ground. It seems a characteristic gesture. With a sideway glance that often as not drops to the floor, Kloves does not exactly exude toothy Hollywood self-promotion. He doesn't call you by your first name 700 times from the moment he meets you, nor does he seem to carry cell phone, beeper, global satellite system, or any other electronic accoutrement designed to make his connectedness instantly clear. He waits until a question has been asked before answering it and thinks for moment before he speaks. Even his smile is charmingly right-sized, a sly hitch of lip that's gone almost before it's there.

It isn't difficult to see the watchful boy in the man, even now. But it's hard to think of Kloves being part of Potter-mania.

But it's not called -mania for nothing, and with the hype has come hysteria, speculation over what the film may have left out, or added, or just mucked about with. People feel very strongly about Harry Potter, and not just people: children. With their infamous unwavering gaze and ability to spot the insincere, the imitation. It is the hardest audience to please. Kids don't put up with a dumb plot because it's nice to see Alan Rickman and Maggie Smith in just about anything or because the cinematography is breathtaking. A movie is either great, or it stinks. Just ask the folks with Atlantis jeans jackets tucked in their closets. And if Harry Potter stinks, forget the Warner Bros. suits. The kids are going to demand a head or two, and not just from John Cleese's character, the ghost Nearly Headless Nick.

This is one of the reasons Kloves' script has a security clearance somewhere between that of classified and for god's eyes only. No, he can't share it today, not even in the haven of the Writers Guild, where he is settling between a turkey sandwich and rolling tape recorder. No, not even a few pages. Maybe later, maybe the really unimportant ones. But for now, no script pages allowed.

"I'm sorry," he explains. "I know it's very weird, but it's very weird. There's so much expectation. People are obsessed. We don't want people making up their minds about it before they see it." That said, he hopes that everyone realizes that to include every single thing that made the book special would make the movie unbearable, and about 15 hours long. "It's always the hardest part: figuring out what to leave out."

The Sorcerer's Apprentice

Certainly Wonder Boys proved Kloves' ability to make fairly significant alterations to a narrative while remaining true-blue loyal to both characters and story. His admiration for novelist Michael Chabon seems limitless--"He's one of the best dialogue writers I've ever read, one of the best writers alive"--and Chabon was reportedly very happy with Kloves' script. Chabon has, however, chosen to adapt his own Pulitzer Prizewinning novel, The Amazing Adventures of Kavelier and Clay. Chabon learned the craft, he has said, by watching Kloves, a compliment that, like many compliments, Kloves has a hard time accepting. "Michael can do anything as a writer. He is just incredibly gifted. I'm just pissed off [by his decision] because I would love to adapt Michael's stuff forever."

Harry is, of course, the most difficult character to write. Although completely believable, he is an enigmatic young boy, hard to read, harder still to give voice to. The Sorcerer's Stone is almost completely his story, moving from the audience's discovery of this unusual orphaned boy who lives with his most objectionably "normal" aunt, uncle, and cousin, through his discovery that nothing, not even he, is what it seems.
The Wonder Boys script taught Kloves a lot about nature versus nurture, as it applies to a writer's feelings about characters. Although in an original script one conjures the characters from nothing, taking someone else's apparitions and making them live cinematically turns out to be not all that different, emotionally. "The loyalty is very much the same," he says. "Jo Rowling created these characters, this world, but I've been carrying Hogwarts in my head for the past two years, and I love [these kids] as much as if they were mine."

Like any love, this is both a gift and an Achille's heel. Pruning someone else's work, shifting plot or dialogue to suit the differing needs of a screenplay, turned out to be harder than dealing with creatures of his own invention. "You're killing someone's little darlings, someone else's little darlings," he says, "and that was harder somehow."

Not because he was afraid of Rowling's disapproval, but of his own. Rowling was his biggest asset, he says, available for any question, no matter how small, willing to read a draft, a page, a snip of dialogue. Not every screenwriter wants input from the author of the original book, especially when the author is still smack-dab in the middle of the creative process, still working with the characters and the themes, watching carefully their past as she propels them through their future, to their destiny. The only time Rowling said words like "don't" or "can't," Kloves says, is when he would tweak references made in book one to characters who would, or would not, appear in later stories.

"I would get these intuitions," he says, "about certain conversations between the characters, about things that might turn out to be very important. And sometimes I would drop things into the script. I had added one reference about the character Sirius Black; Jo said 'No, you can't do that because something's going to happen that will show that's not possible.' But she was always very helpful and her knowledge of her characters, of this world, is just amazing. I'd ask her any question, and she'd never miss a beat--she knows about the development of the broom over the centuries, or of Quidditch, and this is before she put out those little books for fun. What she knows goes to the center of the Earth. The books are just the surface."

As much as Rowlings would share, there is plenty she would not. No matter how hard he tried, no matter how many angles he approached it from, Kloves could not pry one hint, one breath of a hint about what's in store for the characters he has come to love so much.

"Oh, she knows," he says, laughing, "she knows already what's going to happen. Who's going to be left. After Goblet of Fire [in which a character dies] came out, she said, 'They've not seen anything yet.' And you would think she would tell me something, since I am writing it. But she won't. Nothing. And I've tried. I've been on the phone with her for hours talking about all sorts of things, and then I'll slip a question in about the future, and she'll say, 'Sorry, can't tell you that.' Very pleasant. With a smile. But maddening all the same."

Not maddening enough to make him turn down the adaptations for two and three, or make it clear he's up for four, however. "The first film was such a collaborative experience it seemed quite natural to continue on," he says. "And I loved the world so much that I didn't want to say goodbye. Of course," he adds, "now I'm so deep into it that someone at a party will ask me a question about Harry and I'm talking for 12 minutes while they're blinking and saying something like, 'Wow, you're really into this.'"

Character Possession

Harry is, of course, the most difficult character to write. Although completely believable, he is an enigmatic young boy, hard to read, harder still to give voice to. The Sorcerer's Stone is almost completely his story, moving from the audience's discovery of this unusual orphaned boy who lives with his most objectionably "normal" aunt, uncle, and cousin, through his discovery that nothing, not even he, is what it seems. His parents did not die in a car crash; they were a witch and wizard who were killed by an evil wizard-gone-bad, who died in his attempt to kill the infant Harry. Harry himself is a nascent wizard and now that he is 11 must begin his course of study at the internationally acclaimed Hogwarts.

"Harry goes from this essentially monochromatic world to one of such dazzling brilliance," says Kloves. "And Harry is difficult to know. He is a watcher. He doesn't speak all that much, but when he does, it's important. Maybe that's why I identify with him. Because as a writer, I am also a watcher."

Writing for children, he says, has been an extraordinary experience. "I don't know why, but there is something really wonderful about hearing lines you have written said by children. It was very liberating in that children don't edit themselves like adults. With my adult characters, particularly with the men, you have to think so much about what they don't say. Children edit themselves, but differently."

The success of the movie, he says, rests not on how well they have reproduced the sorting hat or even the Quidditch match, but on whether the audience identifies with Harry and his best friends, Hermione and Ron, characters as complicated and multilayered as any adult he's ever met.

"Children in general are just as deep and interesting as adults," he says. "I remember when I wrote Baker Boys, I was concerned that I had made the little girl too clever. Then I had children of my own, and I realized I hadn't made her clever enough. And these three are different in that they have a calling. They have been told what they are going to be. Even in these days of hyperconcerned parents, most kids are just being kids. And these kids are on a path. They're very serious."

That, more than Harry's watchfulness and reticence, might be the ultimate connection between the author of Flesh and Bone and the main character in Harry Potter: an early-born sense of purpose. Kloves dropped out of college in his sophomore year to pursue a screenwriting career--at 19, he already had a screenplay circulating through all the right hands. The story of a suburban housewife who is going slightly mad took the industry by surprise, not so much because of its topic but because of its author.

"They all expected it was written by some middle-aged woman," Kloves says. "So I think the hottest thing about it was it was written by a 19-year-old boy."

That script never made it into production, but it led to the highly acclaimed Race With the Moon, which made Kloves, who was 23 at the time of its release, a veritable wunderkind. Although he saw nothing but glowing reviews and open doors after the movie's release, he didn't exactly rush into the next project. No one thought of denying him the chance to write and direct his next two movies, and if it was six years between projects, then so be it.

And that is how he came to see himself, as a writer-director, whose projects required at least a three-year gestation period. This vision, he says now, kept him from recovering faster from the toll of the production and the disappointing reception of Flesh and Bone. "I needed a break, but I kept trying to develop something. If I had just consciously taken a break, it probably wouldn't have taken so long. I looked up and three, four years had slipped by. Then Wonder Boys landed on my desk, and it made me interested in writing again. But I told them I was only signing up for the writing."

Kloves toyed with the idea of directing as well, but it was not a good time, he says. His daughter was starting kindergarten, and he didn't feel compelled to direct. At the same time, he was loath to see the wrong person direct it, so he held onto the script a bit longer than he might have. When he finally met with Wonder Boys director Curtis Hanson, he knew he had made the right decision. And he felt the same way when he met with Chris Columbus, although he had never imagined himself directing Harry Potter.

"I've been lucky both times," he says, "because both [directors Curtis Hanson and Chris Columbus] are writers themselves, so they know how to talk to a writer. Chris has been willing to listen to any idea, and he doesn't think it's right until we both agree it's right, which is great. Even if we've both signed off on something, I can always call Chris and say, 'Wait,' and he'll listen."

So when changes had to be made during production, Kloves, who was not on the set of Harry Potter, says he felt completely comfortable with the idea that Columbus was making them. Still, he has definitely had the urge to direct again. "If it hadn't been for Harry, I probably would have, in the past year or two. I have always thought of myself directing an original work--the idea of writing an original work and having someone else direct it . . ." His voice trails off. "But I don't want to imprison myself. I always said I wouldn't do adaptation either."

Watching the movie grow from the ground up has expanded his idea of the type of film he could direct. "I am still drawn to the character film, which this town curiously calls 'small.' And my wife will tell you, I only write about places no one wants to go to--lounges in Holiday Inns and hot, dry towns in West Texas."

With Harry, at least he got to take his family to London, and his kids were able to poke around on the set before shooting began. But they are less than impressed by their father's involvement in what potentially could be the children's movie of the decade.

"We try to downplay the whole movie thing," he says. "And for a while, when I was in London a lot, my daughter just saw it as the thing that took Daddy away."

He was greatly encouraged, however, by his daughter's response the first time she saw the trailer for the film. "She really perked up. She turned to me and said, 'Hey, Dad, this could be pretty good.' Best thing I could have heard."

Source: http://www.wga.org/WrittenBy/1101/Kloves/Kloves.html

tem outra entrevista com o roteirista que acabou escrevendo todos os filmes do Potter menos a Ordem da Fênix.

É só isso que foi dito nesse thread na página anterior em dois dos meus posts para os quais vc deu os "fail", Elriowiel , e não mais, já tem um tempão, a noção de se levar a notícia divulgada em inglês*** ao pé da letra depois que ela foi desmentida. Se algumas pessoas continuaram a fazer isso por não terem lido as mensagens na íntegra aqui, já na segunda página do tópico, é uma dessas mazelas inevitáveis que a própria forma da mídia, fórum virtual, e a natureza humana criam que nâo têm, a essa altura, nada a ver com o conteúdo em si dos posts mencionados.

* Marca registrada e trope desse tipo de fantasia onde os brinquedos do protagonista aparecem transfigurados no universo fantástico do livro. "Onde Moram os Monstros" é o protótipo mais ilustre desse tropo aí, com coisas como Um Jogo de Você de Sandman e Joe, o Bárbaro do Grant Morrison, sendo exemplos mais recentes e conhecidos do público brasileiro, com o Labirinto do Fauno, Indomável Sonhadora e até a Vida de Pi sendo parentes bem próximos do gênero.

** E por que é "inoportuno"? Porque desde "Alice no País das Maravilhas" até "Onde Moram os Monstros" é uma vertente muita prolífica da literatura fantástica em inglês recorrer ao "sonho" e ao devaneio pra justificar enredo fantástico. Coisa que o JRRT desaprovava**** por fazer pouco da "subcriação" do autor. Então, quando um autor de fantasia como a Rowling mostra, sequer, simpatia pela idéia, nesse contexto, as comportas acabam se abrindo e esse tipo de especulação grassa rapidamente independente do autor querer ou não que isso aconteça.

Ela já devia saber disso quando fez o comentário endossando a liberdade criativa do roteirista ao inventar uma cena que não tem nos livros.Outros autores teriam ficado furiosos com esse tipo de iniciativa, justamente por dar razão a rumores assim. E por quê? Pelo seguinte:isso é uma coisa que não fica muito clara pra leitores brasileiros, mas existe uma tendência infeliz na crítica literária inglesa de só dar valor pra fantasia literária que contenha esse elemento que a torna uma representação alegórica de elementos da realidade e de denegrir ou negar o valor, justamente, do tipo de trabalho que JRRT e a própria JKR fizeram de forma tão bem sucedida.

A criação de uma realidade com regras e história própria alternativas em relação ao nosso mundo é vista por alguns como "fuga" da realidade e , portanto, desmerecedora de crédito ou legitimidade no "cânone literário". O gênero fantasia em inglês vive sob o sítio de críticos e teóricos com esse tipo de convicção, e sua sanha só é apaziguada quando, ironicamente, a PRÓPRIA HISTÓRIA questiona o seu senso de realidade literal, abrindo possibilidade pra entendimento alegórico ou psicologizante como em Alice, que é colocado num pedestal pela crítica literária mais ortodoxa.

*** por erro de transcrição da entrevista, erro que TODO MUNDO COMETEU, até mesmo em inglês, sinal de que não é o caso do boato ter sido, pura e simplesmente, "viagem na maionese", colocando o rumor exatamente na mesma categoria do comentário da biografia não-autorizada dela que, sem querer, deu a entender pras pessoas, erroneamente (inclusive pra própria Elriowiel), que a JKR só tinha lido o SdA quando estava na faculdade quando ela mesma falou, depois, que já o tinha lido pela primeira vez aos quatorze anos.

****
It is at any rate essential to a genuine fairy-story, as distinct from the employment of this form [that of fairy-tale] for lesser or debased purposes, that it should be presented as "true". The meaning of "true" in this connexion I will consider in a moment. But since the fairy-story deals with "marvels," it cannot tolerate any frame or machinery suggesting that the whole story in which they occur is a figment or illusion. The tale itself may, of course, be so good that one can ignore the frame. or it may be successful and amusing as a dream-story. So are Lewis Carroll's Alice stories, with their dream-frame and dream-transitions. For this (and other reasons) they are not fairy-stories.

Quanto às opiniões negativas de outros colegas escritores de fantasia* da Rowling a respeito do fato dela dizer coisas como "só percebi que estava escrevendo fantasia quando os unicórnios apareceram"** ( o que, convenhamos, considerando a pletora de coisas fantásticas que aconteceram antes, é um disparate), sinto muito se isso faz de mim portador de más notícias( é aquele negócio: pode-se matar o "mensageiro" quantas vezes quiser; a mensagem sempre permanecerá a despeito disso) e isso tenha feito meus posts mais merecedores dos fail a seus olhos, ( os únicos dados pra alguém postando nesse tópico). Eu, particularmente, não vejo problema nisso porque nunca censurei, omiti, ou releguei como coisa sem importância ou puro produto de uma conspiração difamatória as muitas críticas feitas às idiossincrasias do próprio Tolkien, [URL='http://forum.valinor.com.br/showthread.php?t=94287&p=2072951&viewfull=1#post2072951']inclusive o quirk "chiliquento" e pedante que ele tinha de negar/repudiar ou criticar as próprias fontes[/url], só por eu ser fã dele como sou, tratamento que também reservo pra Rowling.

*
Her credit to JK Rowling for giving the "whole fantasy field a boost" is tinged with regret. "I didn't feel she ripped me off, as some people did," she says quietly, "though she could have been more gracious about her predecessors. My incredulity was at the critics who found the first book wonderfully original. She has many virtues, but originality isn't one of them. That hurt." Savoured by adults and children, the Earthsea quartet, including The Tombs of Atuan (1971), The Farthest Shore (1973) and Tehanu (1990), has never been out of print, and was augmented in 2001 by Tales from Earthsea and the novel The Other Wind.

Writer Terry Pratchett has poked fun at Harry Potter author JK Rowling for saying she did not realise she was writing a fantasy novel.
He wrote to the Sunday Times:"I would have thought that the wizards, witches, trolls, unicorns, hidden worlds... would have given her a clue?"

**
From the Newsweek, 2000:

"In fact, I don't really like fantasy. It's not so much that I don't like it, I really haven't read a lot of it. <...> It didn't occur to me for quite a while that I was writing fantasy when I'd started "Harry Potter," because I'm a bit slow on the uptake about those things. I was so caught up in it. And I was about two thirds of the way through, and I suddenly thought, This has got unicorns in it. I'm writing fantasy!"

Q: Why did you focus on magic?

JKR: It chose me. I never really sat down & thought 'what shall I focus on' and in fact, I don't really read fantasy; it's not my favourite genre.

O fato de eu reconhecer o talento dela, gostar dos livros, "desconstruí-los" pra melhor compreendê-los, inclusive apontando suas lacunas e contradições( coisa que eu também faço com o próprio JRRT e todos os autores que leio), não me impede de divulgar críticas ou formular, eu mesmo, pareceres menos que apologéticos sobre o que ela diz ou escreve quando isso for pertinente ao assunto, o que foi, justamente, o caso aqui*.

E acho que quase todos os fãs de Potter aqui do fórum entenderam isso muito bem em todos os posts que eu escrevi na área Hogwarts.

*Se ela não tivesse feito esses comentários esnobes sobre a fantasia como gênero (pq, hoje em dia, graças ao Tolkien, ao Lewis e outros autores que ela leu o tipo de fantasia que predomina hoje é a "subcriativa") as pessoas não teriam tido a propensão de interpretar o que ela falou na entrevista mal-transcrita do jeito que interpretaram.

E, cá pra nós, "não ter lido muita fantasia" mas ter lido( e gostado como gostou) JUSTAMENTE de Narnia do C.S. Lewis e de Tolkien no SdA e no Hobbit, como ficou demonstrado em outras entrevistas, faz uma TREMENDA diferença, uma diferença que ela deveria ser a PRIMEIRA a reconhecer, coisa que nunca aconteceu.
 
Última edição:

Valinor 2023

Total arrecadado
R$2.404,79
Termina em:
Back
Topo