[HPFGU-Movie] (unknown)

[jazmyn]

oradork wrote:
> 
> Oh see, now I don't remember where exactly I got that from.  Maybe I
> made it up in my head. hehe. But I did look again and remember part
> of the idea from that webcase was when Columbus was talking and said
> she had a lot of input in regards to the script.  I have heard that
> in multiple interviews and I have one snippet below as an example,
> but my basic point was that you can't say that "such and such from
> the movie" was all the director's fault or the writer's fault.  Even
> if Jo had involvement in a whole 3 lines of the script, you don't
> know exactly which ones.  She didn't let them run totally rampant
> with her story, just (from what I can tell) how to portray her story
> with the camera.  ie Costumes, sets, directing, camera work, etc.
> Anyway, enough of my rambling.  I swear I've been doing it too much
> today.  Must be bored.  :)
> This one snip is from an interview with Kloves.  The whole shot you
> can find here:  http://www.wga.org/WrittenBy/1101/Kloves/Kloves.html
> 
> 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."


Thank you for posting this. Its close to the article I was trying to
find again to show people on the 'literary' list just how much input
Rowlings had in the script, thus proving that yes, the movie can be
considered 'canon' as the books, due to the author's input and how much
she has had to have told them for the actors to understand the
characters so well as to portray them so beautifully. 

Jazmyn