In my morning trawl of the online news, I came across this....
Little Harry Potter very obviously trying to show the world what a big man he is!
I know that between movies 2 and 3 of the saga there was some talk of Radcliff dropping out of the filming of the Harry Potter movies due to him not wanting to be forever known as the one character, but this is a bit tacky.
His rep has been quoted as saying "Daniel does not want to step away from Harry Potter but he does want to show he is a rounded actor capable of … diverse roles."
Diverse is right! From little boy wonder to on stage porn star. That certainly is diverse. I wonder who on earth gave him permission to do this though. He is still only 17, so I assumed his parents would have to have some say in his choice of role for the time being. Are they actually okay with this??
Also there is the issue of his fan site. There have been a couple of quotes used from their forums, very obviously written by very young girls. For instance "When I saw it I couldn't breathe for a moment. I was shocked. But [the] pictures are very cool and very good. I like it ... They're awesome!" He is corrupting young girls all over the world!!! Introducing sexuality to girls who probably hadn't given it a terribly large amount of thought until they saw "Harry Potter" with a half naked girl standing in front of him. One of the promo pics has a naked girl on top of him from what I gather. Is that what we want little girls to think of when they see the next 3 Harry Potter films??
This email from a concerned parent pretty much sums up how I would feel if I saw my 9 year old looking up Radcliff's new project
"We as parents feel Daniel should not appear nude. Our nine-year-old son looks up to him as a role model. We are very disappointed and will avoid the future movies he makes,"
I just think its highly inappropriate, considering his position in the lime light at the moment, to jump onto a stage and do numerous sex scenes in a controversial play just to prove his worth as an actor.
Ill be very curious to see what "diverse" acting jobs come out of this move.
In my morning trawl of the online news, I came across this....
Little Harry Potter very obviously trying to show the world what a big man he is!
I know that between movies 2 and 3 of the saga there was some talk of Radcliff dropping out of the filming of the Harry Potter movies due to him not wanting to be forever known as the one character, but this is a bit tacky.
His rep has been quoted as saying "Daniel does not want to step away from Harry Potter but he does want to show he is a rounded actor capable of … diverse roles."
Diverse is right! From little boy wonder to on stage porn star. That certainly is diverse. I wonder who on earth gave him permission to do this though. He is still only 17, so I assumed his parents would have to have some say in his choice of role for the time being. Are they actually okay with this??
Also there is the issue of his fan site. There have been a couple of quotes used from their forums, very obviously written by very young girls. For instance "When I saw it I couldn't breathe for a moment. I was shocked. But [the] pictures are very cool and very good. I like it ... They're awesome!" He is corrupting young girls all over the world!!! Introducing sexuality to girls who probably hadn't given it a terribly large amount of thought until they saw "Harry Potter" with a half naked girl standing in front of him. One of the promo pics has a naked girl on top of him from what I gather. Is that what we want little girls to think of when they see the next 3 Harry Potter films??
This email from a concerned parent pretty much sums up how I would feel if I saw my 9 year old looking up Radcliff's new project
"We as parents feel Daniel should not appear nude. Our nine-year-old son looks up to him as a role model. We are very disappointed and will avoid the future movies he makes,"
I just think its highly inappropriate, considering his position in the lime light at the moment, to jump onto a stage and do numerous sex scenes in a controversial play just to prove his worth as an actor.
Ill be very curious to see what "diverse" acting jobs come out of this move.
Proving his "diversity"
In my morning trawl of the online news, I came across this....
Little Harry Potter very obviously trying to show the world what a big man he is!
I know that between movies 2 and 3 of the saga there was some talk of Radcliff dropping out of the filming of the Harry Potter movies due to him not wanting to be forever known as the one character, but this is a bit tacky.
His rep has been quoted as saying "Daniel does not want to step away from Harry Potter but he does want to show he is a rounded actor capable of … diverse roles."
Diverse is right! From little boy wonder to on stage porn star. That certainly is diverse. I wonder who on earth gave him permission to do this though. He is still only 17, so I assumed his parents would have to have some say in his choice of role for the time being. Are they actually okay with this??
Also there is the issue of his fan site. There have been a couple of quotes used from their forums, very obviously written by very young girls. For instance "When I saw it I couldn't breathe for a moment. I was shocked. But [the] pictures are very cool and very good. I like it ... They're awesome!" He is corrupting young girls all over the world!!! Introducing sexuality to girls who probably hadn't given it a terribly large amount of thought until they saw "Harry Potter" with a half naked girl standing in front of him. One of the promo pics has a naked girl on top of him from what I gather. Is that what we want little girls to think of when they see the next 3 Harry Potter films??
This email from a concerned parent pretty much sums up how I would feel if I saw my 9 year old looking up Radcliff's new project
"We as parents feel Daniel should not appear nude. Our nine-year-old son looks up to him as a role model. We are very disappointed and will avoid the future movies he makes,"
I just think its highly inappropriate, considering his position in the lime light at the moment, to jump onto a stage and do numerous sex scenes in a controversial play just to prove his worth as an actor.
Ill be very curious to see what "diverse" acting jobs come out of this move.
10 comments:
-
I'm with you Chazz "tacky" indeed!
Sorta disappointing too, it will certainly tarnish his image I reckon.
Diversifacation is all well and good. But stupidity is something else.
This is certainly taking it to the extreme.
A case of too much too soon. He is after all as you point out still only 17! -
From now on we shall call him Lolito.
Actually, scratch that. A Lolita has to be hot. Bumfluffy gangly teen chic doesn't cut it. -
Well said James old mate!
-
I trust that, now his parents have almost certainly found out about this, Daniel will be sooo seriously grounded.
And welcome to the blogosphere, Chazz!! -
BTW - Jacob is the "Goat Friday" (TM) man about the blogsphere. FYI.
Yes, he's all buff (no, no, NOT Jacob!), but that's not real difficult for a 17 year old lad and a few sessions in the gym.
The thing that bothered me about this was the fact that he has around SIXTY YEARS ahead of him to be "A MAN".
Other child actors do make the transition to adult roles successfully, not always, but the hit rate is at least 50%. This struck me as a move reflecting lack of confidence and faith in himself to make that transition. He's making a BIG statement by doing this, which smells too much of desperation. Sometimes smaller moves and quiet success, particularly in acting, and particularly for a child actor, are the wiser choices.
The thought of all of his cast mates being "captivated" and perving on his little 17 year old boy / man body was a bit creepy. -
Buff? Sure, he's got a flat stomach - but isn't that the default setting at his age? Soon he'll discover beer and that'll be the end of that.
And that collar bone could have your eye out.
Buff he ain't. I stand by 'gangly'. -
I have to agree with gangly... I dont like any guy with a waist smaller than mine!
-
Well, in the end, this is either very astute or very bad management by his agent.
Sorry, but I can't be more precise at this time. -
Okay, so he's gangly, in an entirely predictable 17 year old way.
Fair points James.
The thing that occurs to me is this: if it was a 17 year old actress, and papers were writing that her cast mates couldn't keep their eyes off her (which is what they've written about whats-his-name), and if they noted that everyone was amazed at how she had suddenly blossomed into a woman, and had, like, THE best tits for perving on ...
Well, no one would blink before being outraged by such inappropriate comments about a young girl. It's the boring old double standard.
I think talking about him as if he is suddenly a grown-up just because he takes his clothes off is misguided, and not helpful to him either. -
He is a minor. I can't believe his parents allowed this. It borders on child pornography & not high theatre/art. The pervs are laughing all the way to the show.
BTW I'm here via Caz's blog.
10 comments:
I'm with you Chazz "tacky" indeed!
Sorta disappointing too, it will certainly tarnish his image I reckon.
Diversifacation is all well and good. But stupidity is something else.
This is certainly taking it to the extreme.
A case of too much too soon. He is after all as you point out still only 17!
From now on we shall call him Lolito.
Actually, scratch that. A Lolita has to be hot. Bumfluffy gangly teen chic doesn't cut it.
Well said James old mate!
I trust that, now his parents have almost certainly found out about this, Daniel will be sooo seriously grounded.
And welcome to the blogosphere, Chazz!!
BTW - Jacob is the "Goat Friday" (TM) man about the blogsphere. FYI.
Yes, he's all buff (no, no, NOT Jacob!), but that's not real difficult for a 17 year old lad and a few sessions in the gym.
The thing that bothered me about this was the fact that he has around SIXTY YEARS ahead of him to be "A MAN".
Other child actors do make the transition to adult roles successfully, not always, but the hit rate is at least 50%. This struck me as a move reflecting lack of confidence and faith in himself to make that transition. He's making a BIG statement by doing this, which smells too much of desperation. Sometimes smaller moves and quiet success, particularly in acting, and particularly for a child actor, are the wiser choices.
The thought of all of his cast mates being "captivated" and perving on his little 17 year old boy / man body was a bit creepy.
Buff? Sure, he's got a flat stomach - but isn't that the default setting at his age? Soon he'll discover beer and that'll be the end of that.
And that collar bone could have your eye out.
Buff he ain't. I stand by 'gangly'.
I have to agree with gangly... I dont like any guy with a waist smaller than mine!
Well, in the end, this is either very astute or very bad management by his agent.
Sorry, but I can't be more precise at this time.
Okay, so he's gangly, in an entirely predictable 17 year old way.
Fair points James.
The thing that occurs to me is this: if it was a 17 year old actress, and papers were writing that her cast mates couldn't keep their eyes off her (which is what they've written about whats-his-name), and if they noted that everyone was amazed at how she had suddenly blossomed into a woman, and had, like, THE best tits for perving on ...
Well, no one would blink before being outraged by such inappropriate comments about a young girl. It's the boring old double standard.
I think talking about him as if he is suddenly a grown-up just because he takes his clothes off is misguided, and not helpful to him either.
He is a minor. I can't believe his parents allowed this. It borders on child pornography & not high theatre/art. The pervs are laughing all the way to the show.
BTW I'm here via Caz's blog.