Dan Radcliffe: “We’re the French Resistance”

202

May 06, 2007

Posted by SueTLC
Uncategorized

The L.A. Times has a brand new interview with actor Dan Radcliffe about working on the set of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. In this lengthy new feature on the fifth Harry Potter film, which also contains new quotes from director David Yates confirming again his return to the helm of the Half-Blood Prince movie, as well as quips from actress Emma Watson and producer David Heyman, Dan Radcliffe talks about the pivotal battle in the ministry between Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) and Albus Dumbledore (Michael Gambon)

As these two great wizards parry and thrust their dueling wands, shooting out spells and, for now, imaginary rivers of fire that will meet and crash together like sparking electrical currents, off-camera wind machines blast and tug at their robes. Cowering to one side, Daniel Radcliffe’s terrified, ashen-faced Harry Potter recoils from the pyrotechnics exploding above his head, smaller, tributary spells that rat-a-tat-tat the walls like machine-gun fire.

“It’s a very intense scene,” says Radcliffe during a break in filming the sequence, part of the climax to “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix,” which premieres July 11. “Harry’s so out of his depth, he’s emotionally pretty much destroyed by this point and given up all hope.”

The political under themes of the movie are on the mind of the cast and crew, but producer David Heyman says while it is present, its not the entire focus of the movie, noting “”There’s no question there are political aspects to this story.” I don’t want to give the impression it’s a political film. It’s an entertainment.” However Dan Radcliffe and David Yates have a bit more to say on the nature of the politics found in the fifth movie.

“We’re the French Resistance,” he explains of Dumbledore’s Army, “and Voldemort and the Death Eaters are the Nazis. Obviously, in a magical context.” Not that his analogies end there. “Harry’s like a Vietnam veteran,” he says. “He’s seen awful things and come back into a society that’s rejected him. That’s the main parallel I’ve been drawing on.” Fudge, meanwhile, he equates to Britain’s prime minister, Tony Blair.

“Dan’s absolutely right,” says Yates several months later in his Soho office. “What Fudge does is he spins everything all the time. He’s a great manipulator of information, and there is a bit of Blair about Fudge.”

Finally, as reported previously this week, David Yates again mentions his return to direct the sixth film, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, as he says

“I know Alfonso and Mike, when they came out, they were kind of shredded, but I’ve come out feeling invigorated,” Yates says. “And I don’t think I’m quite done with this world yet. These can be great films about childhood. The next one’s full of sexual politics, and the kids are getting better as actors, and I want to push them even more. This one’s quite lyrical and intense. The next one is more fun.”

He grins. “I’ve had more fun in the last two years than I’ve had making anything. The whole thing’s slightly addictive. It’s difficult to let go.”





167 Responses to Dan Radcliffe: “We’re the French Resistance”

Avatar Image says: Well, David Yates, if you bring back John Williams I will love you 100 percent! And that's saying something!Avatar Image says: I love that he enjoyed making the movie so much! Barring the special effects, the political tones in this one wouldhave been just up his alley. Can't wait!Avatar Image says: True ! Bring back John Williams, at least for the last movie ! His score is part of the movie magic !Avatar Image says: Dan's comparison of Harry o Vietnam Vets was, for the most part, appropriate. I don't think he was degrading or lessening the horrors or trauma of the Vietnam War because he was just comparing it in the sense of overall public reaction (I hope that I'm making sense! XP). It took a while for many to welcome and respect the vets with open arms but it surely didn't happen right after they returned. It may be a wee bit of a stretch but I understood it perfectly. And he IS right about the Death Eaters/Nazi comparison. Anyway, I'm VERY offended by Hanibal calling the Vietnam Vets Death Eaters. That's just rediculous and absolutely absurd and you clearly DO NOT know the real grit and history of the Vietnam War. Go and educate yourself, please for the sake of everyone else. And have you ever once considered the fact that many of the young men drafted into the war didn't want to be there and kill people? Go visit some vets at the VA hospital and find out for yourself. Avatar Image says: Wow! Equating Tony Blair to Corneilus Fudge ... I cannot imagine Mr. Blair's supporters (apparently they are few and far between) being any to happy with THAT comparison! :-PAvatar Image says: sexual politics?Avatar Image says: Actually, Tony Blair loves the Harry Potter books and has himself remarked that his administration will probably be most notable for having been the one satirized in Rowling's novels. Avatar Image says: "Well, David Yates, if you bring back John Williams I will love you 100 percent! And that's saying something! " Why shouldn't David Yates be allowed to have a composer of his choosing? He has worked with Nicholas Hooper for many years,they know how each other works, and Hooper has won many awards for his work over the years. Yes, John Williams has done some wonderful work, and he got the HP films off to a great start with his music, but contrary to what many people seem to think, he is not the only talented composer in the music world. I wouldn't be against him coming back again but let's give the new guy a chance ok? As for Yates, sounds like he'd love to direct Deathly Hallows as well. Avatar Image says: LOL Fudge=Tony Blair? No, no, no. A far better comparison would be that Tony Blair and President Bush are Dumbledore/Harry, wheras the Democrats and deniers of the danger of having not gone to/and/or leaving Iraq are the Fudge and Umbridges. How assinine. Why can't the people who provide me entertainment refrain from tainting their stuff (which is very good stuff) by shutting their mouths about politics?Avatar Image says: Comparing Fudge to Neville Chamberlain would be more appropriate and closer to the Résistance movements that existed in all of the Nazie occupied contries. I will be curious to see where the lightness is in the sixth film, if I read properly. I have not read the interviews, yet. I'll be back!Avatar Image says: I think the kid's acting has improved and I'm glad that Yates has pushed them! There are going to be political underthemes to this movie because of Fudge's actions. I do believe that this movie will be the best one yet of all the HP movies and I can't wait to see it! Thanks, Leaky, for the terrific interview!Avatar Image says: Ashton, you are putting words into their mouth that they have not said. They are not saying why they compare them or talking about any specific subject, Yates just talks about manipulation of information, you are the one doing too quickly assumptions. Fudge has been deying the true, and Tony Blair has admitted he has lied many times, about many things, so I can totally see the similarities. Like KneazleLover says, Blair is the fisrt one who has said he feels these books are like a metaphor of his governement. And people are free to give their opinions, just because you think you don't agree it doesn't mean they have to shut up. They have not even given their opinion about what you are talking about, they are just doing general comparitions. Jo herself has said many times how Voldemort is like Hitler. It's really sad you can not read an interview without prejudging and respeting. I think it's a very interesting interview, and I like how the writer describes how they were shooting the scenes. It's so true what they say about Harry, at the end he even asks Dumbledore to kill him, he just don't care anymore.Avatar Image says: What does he mean by sexual politics ??Avatar Image says: Ian, very good response to a not very well thought out remark.I totally agree. And isn't the UK a free country anyway for freedom of speech, opinion and thoughts. I loved the way they were giving their opinions and comparisons. Even if I may not totaly agree with everything they said.It is their right to say it. GREAT interview!I learned all lot from it in only a few pharagraphes. I am SOOOOOOO glad to hear and read David Yares is coming back for HBP!!! Bravo!! [[He may be wanting DH as well (and I would love that), but I think Alfonso wants it too,it's the one Alfonso is holding out for]]Avatar Image says: Congrats David! You are now one of my 3 favorite directors! The other two: Peter Jackson and Alfonso Cauron. Number one is still Peter, but maybe after OOTP, who knows. And now WB only has to make it official. Avatar Image says: Anyone mind to explain what he means by "sexual politics"? It's not like Lavender was trying to get an office from Ron and Ginny was spying for Scrimgoeur. Maybe he meant Merope...? That's insane.Avatar Image says: It upsets me that anyone who has not seen war can try to draw feelings as a veteran and what they went through! Yes, Vietnam was a controversial war, just like what is going on right now, but for DR to say "Harry's like a Vietnam veteran," is outrageous! My husband's experiences as a Vietnam veteran can never be compared to this book series!! DR's remarks have caused me to lose further respect for him.Avatar Image says: Yeah...er...'sexual politics?' What in the world does he mean by that?? Avatar Image says: T'as raison, Serge. I've always thought of OotP as a statement on Allied appeasement in the 1930s. Nazi Germany rearming with obvious expansionist goals, and Allied countries denying that Hitler was going to war. All the signs were there, but people and countries barely recovering from the First World War preferred to ignore them. I think sexual politics means all of the mind games teenagers (and grown ups too…) play in relation to sexuality. For example, Hermione going out with McLaggen to make Ron jealous; Ron going out with Lavender to show everyone he is mature, etc.Avatar Image says: Yates is right, there is sexual politics in HBP - think of Ron trying to "protect" Ginny from having boyfriends, because he thinks that a girl having a couple of boyfriends over two years makes her a "scarlet woman" - all of which is driven by his own jealousy, and the fact that he hasn't got a girlfriend yet.Avatar Image says: I think it's ludicrous that yates and radcliffe compare fudge to tony blair. Comments like those really make me hate hollywood (or other equally famous) actors. Save the politics for the dinner table, keep them out of the movies. another point lost for dan in my book.Avatar Image says: I think its good that Yates is coming back for HBP and thats even before seeing OOTP and I will most likely be happy with him doing deathly hallows too. At least then we might see some continuity between films rather than each director putting his stamp on the one they do.Avatar Image says: I know, Luna. They'd better not include that "Scaly Green Chest Monster" reference either... Wait. How would that even work??? lmao sound effects?? nyeh, I'd rather the film didn't focus on the fluff. unless, its the Draco/Myrtle stuff lol. Hint's of it is good i guess. And the Ginny kiss is a must I suppose... Harry propsitioning girl!Crabbe (or was it goyle?) was what had me in stitches at one point. But... I wasn't really into the *serious* relationships stuff. Avatar Image says: Tony Blair only became PM in 1st May 1997 and Philosopher's Stone was completed in 1996 (according to JK Rowling's web site) and published in July 1997 so if anything Fudge can't be compared to Tony Blair as he wasn't our PM at the time. I think he is more of John Major type :P Hell let's compare him to Margaret Thatcher as after all this it's the 25th Anniversary of the Falklands War this year. (My apologies, I'm not being serious)Avatar Image says: Sexual Politics: All the intensive shipping throughout the book. Ron, Lavender, Hermione, Ginny, Dean, Harry Fleur and Bill Tonks and Lupin Even Malfoy and Panzy to some extent And then there's the bit with Crabbe and Goyle spending most of the book as young girls...but we won't go into that.Avatar Image says: Well said Sarah! I loved how the 1st two films you could see they belonged to each other, then it kept changing, but now the 5th and 6th (and possibly 7) will do the same thing as 1 and 2, so that's pretty exciting. I just wish John Williams would come back! Then I would be satisfied! I'm sorry, I'm on a John Williams mourning day *tear*Avatar Image says: I cannot understand a boy of jewish offspring speaks so easily such a nonsens.Avatar Image says: So since HBP is pretty much set, who do you think is going to be cast as Narcissa? I mean, they are pretty much required to cast her. One of the first scenes at Spinner's End is important to the plot and you can't exactly have Bellatrix making the unbreakable vow :p Only thing that sucks is they should have introduced her earlier on in the series, perhaps in GoF, so people who haven't read the books will know who she is and not just some random blond chick.Avatar Image says: Although Dan may, for all I know, have jewish ancestry, he is not Jewsish and does not see himself as such. That said, what he has said is correct and is in no way disrespectful to the Jews. The terrible things the Nazis did are clearly condemned, so what he is saying is sensitive and in no way disrespectful. The Second World War was primarily a territorial war between democracy and non democracy. The holocaust (which I condemn and do not seek to minimise) was not the main focus of World War Two, but was an attendent and connected tragedy which was truly terrible, evil and unforgiveable. The main element of the war though was territorial and ideological - so Dan is in no way out of line with his Nazi reference. The wicked death eaters in Harry Potter are a perfect analogy for Nazis.Avatar Image says: I think there is some similarity between the aftermath of what the Vietnam vets faced and what Dan faced. Feelings of being ostracized, feelings of hurt, flashbacks from the war that you may or may not talk about. Harry confronts these horrors in book 5. Now while Harry Potter didn't just come back from a gruesome war, there is some validity in what Dan is saying. The experiences are not the same but I understand how Dan could consider them similar and use it for his acting. Politcs and entertainment. When to keep separate?? I honestly don't think you always can. And in books as politically charged as HP--defying authority, doing what is right v. easy, etc. it is hard to not think of politics. Avatar Image says: I have to smile. This is not a political film, says Yates. Then goes on to compare Fudge to Tony Blair. Right. Let's do actually keep it above board, Yates. Blair has supporters too, you know.Avatar Image says: If Yates is surely coming back for HBP, then why wouldn't WB issue an official statement?! And I really don't like comparing HP to politics, I really hate politics, and I don't want to hate HP!Avatar Image says: Oh, Yates. You just made me love you with the "sexual politics" phrase. Someone who sees HBP beyond the darn shipping! I love you. No, really I do.Avatar Image says: Wonderful set report - thank you LA Times! I think it is interesting that people are so upset about the historical references being made by the people working on this (or any) film. Aren't we supposed to learn from history? Aren't creative people, especially actors, supposed to make their portrayals authentic? Doesn't that mean looking outside one's own experience (especially one as young as Dan is) to find resources and references? Meanwhile, who the heck is Timothy West, and what happened to Robert Hardy????? Is this a mistake made by the L.A. Times? Hardy is still listed as Fudge on iMdb.Avatar Image says: I agree with Jordan's response to Granny. Dan's comments were supportive of vietnam vet's. They fought a war and did their job and were treated very badly for doing so when they returned to the States. This is similar to Harry's situation after the death of Cedric and the disrespect he receives during year 5. Also, the idea that you have to have been in a war to portray or draw upon the feeling of a soldier is a bit bizarre. You have just dismissed just about every war movies from John Wayne through to Tom Hanks. Although I do agree that not having served in a war, draft dodgers like Dick Cheney and George Bush did make the declaration of war easier. But I think that's just because they lack any type of empathy or imagination.Avatar Image says: I believe Dan compared himself to a Viet Nam veteran only in the sense that they were not regarded as heros who fought for democracy or freedom. The Viet Nam veterans never have received the recognition of the second world war veterans. I do not think there is more to it than that absence of recognition and thankfulness or gratitude from the population as a whole.Avatar Image says: I love his comment "the whole thing's slighlty addictive." Ha! Truer words were never spoken. I have no idea to be happy about his return for HBP or not. Since I haven't seen OotP, I am withholding my judgement on him as a director. It amazes me how it seems like the majority of fandom has declared either their love or hate of the 5th movie based only on 7 minutes of carefully edited footage contained in promotional trailers. I want to be happy about the fact that we will once again have some continuity in the movies but I am remaining cautiously optimistic.Avatar Image says: Granny, the problem I see is I think you have not read well what they are saying. He is not saying he knows how they feel, he is saying Harry's situation is similar to their situation, because the Wizard community give the back to Harry like our socety gave the back to many soldiers after they returned. In Harry's case, he even has to deal with their jokes, with them saying he is liying, and even a trial and a maniatic-pink-obsessed who sends dementors to kill him. All they are saying makes perfect sense to me. Like when OotP was released and Jo talked about it. Also, maybe you would like to know, Dan will play a WWI soldier in a new movie. He always prepares his roles very well, so you shouldn't be surprised if he has speak with real soldiers too. Also, a grief counselor treats soldiers too, so we don't know if they talked about those expiriences too. I think the problem is some people read something about war, soldiers or politics and they jump, sometimes even before reading what they are saying. why can not we talk about these things without jumping over the neck of the other person? And some people are jsut bashers searrching too hard for a way to criticize.Avatar Image says: Agree with happyfeet. Granny, just because I wasn't in the Vietnam war or WW2 doesn't mean I can't emphasize and sympathize with what happened. I have read that vietnam vets coming back felt ignored and even shunned? In any event, it was unlike the reception ww2 soldiers coming home got. No ticker tape parades,etc for the Vietnam vets, right? That's how Dan was relating to how Harry felt, upon returning to the magic world, when he found out nobody believed him or Dumbledore when they were trying to warn them. We and Dan don't have to live daily with the memories that the vets faced, nor is HP ever as serious as real war (life) events but that doesn't mean I can't draw upon their experiences and not use them to help make me a better person or in this case, to be able to use it to relay a story. I don't wish to subject anybody with more pain, but why such critism for such a simple explanation for what he/they used for inspiration is beyond me. Avatar Image says: Jason Isaacs and Helena Bonham Carter: "Voldemort's leather-clad agents of evil." !! Avatar Image says: July 11th?Avatar Image says: Errr... how could they compare what happened in Vietnam to what's happening with Harry?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What the US did to Vietnam it was totally unfair, USA was trying to rob the Vietnameses their land and their natural resourse, it was an evil unfair war against a country that they have no business with! How can any of this have anything to do with what's happening in HP! What? Is Harry now robbing voldy something? Maybe next they'll start saying that USA was doing the right thing to Vietnam!!! *roll eyes*Avatar Image says: Eliza-- It's the article's mistake. Robert Hardy still play Fudge in OOTP. You can see him in the international trailer.Avatar Image says: I cant wait fpr the movie, of course there will be vague relative comparisons made about any work of fiction, it is all well put together I oersonally am hoping for a great memorable film.Avatar Image says: You're right Liln, but really I think that the underlying motivation for book 6 is sexual in nature. Harry has finally found his equal and for most of the book is fighting that tension. It's great because Jo seems to be writing each of her books on two different levels: one about life in general and the other about Harry's relationship to Voldemort. The drama comes from the everyday portions of Harry's tenure at Hogwarts, and the epic mythology comes out of the series as a whole of Harry's quest to destroy Voldemort. So in order for the movie to work as a whole, Yates must exploit sexual politics...I don't think it's a stretch to say that Narcissa had planned on asking Severus to do the unbreakable vow, but moreover, as an actor, having such a succinct focus on what Yates intends to play up this early on is going to help the actors give a very cohesive performance. How interesting it would be to keep to see everyone playing their part, hiding their secrets if it were to either protect their relationship with someone or that person. That's why Myrtle protected Malfoy, he confided in her as only a lover would. That could even be why Snape is all around so snarky...he is still punishing himself for whatever inadvertent harm he may have caused to someone he loved...not to mention having to kill Dumbledore. So I think it's really exciting to hear this from David because I always wondered if this franchise could find someone to give it the focus each movie needed to stand on its own, while at the same time giving the series cohesiveness; I think Mr. Yates is the perfect fit. Hopefully he'll be back for Deathly Hallows! Avatar Image says: Well... when you put it like that, Demeatreus... it sounds extremely, extremley intriguing. You're quite right, now that I think about it. Even Voldemort's story had a sexual-political origin: with Merope pining for Riddle and then procuring him with a love potion. If Yates can manage to pull off that absolute *depth* of meaning instead of bringing out the usual shippiness- then the film would *really* be something to behold. And then- of course- *absolutely* bring on the sexual nature of the story- Just as long as it doesn't end up resembling a platter of cheese. You bring up a good point. I really like the one concerning Myrtles attatchment to Draco. Avatar Image says: Easy granny, my mother went through WWII and I have seen it through her eyes. Heck she was in Germany living it. I find no slam from DR. You seem to have a bone to pick with him and would find fault in anything he says.Avatar Image says: I think HBP could probably be the easist book to translate to film because compared to the likes of OotP it's a much smaller scale story, with almost eveything excluding the Penesive and the ending happening in Hogwarts and being very character focused. Like Yates said it's all about sexual politics... well actually I guess it's more about politics of relationships, including those between Slughorn and his students and Riddle and Dumbledore. I just hope it doesn't turn into Hogwarts 90210...Avatar Image says: "Sexual Politics" is a really good way to describe HBP. And, David Yates seems so cool. So into the story. That makes me feel even more excited. I mean, it's like having one of us direct it almost. He seems so happy doing it.Avatar Image says: I don't think Dan's statement re: Vietnam vets was a "for or against" kind of comment. I think both sides can acknowledge that the soldiers who went weren't treated very well by some when they returned. I'm not an American, and I don't think Vietnam was a worthwhile cause, but I can recognize that soldiers are soldiers, regardless of politics, and that many felt shunned. As for DR's views on Harry overall, well, he's drawing analogies to help him situate his character's thoughts and feelings. Nothing wrong there, and as far as I can see, the reference to the Resistance is a good one and in keeping with Jo's take on things (as others have said). These books are full of policital and social satire. If they weren't, would people, especially adults, care so much? In any event, a 17 year old knows some events and speaks articulately. There are worse things he could say. Avatar Image says: Some people seem to be forgetting something quite important. If you sign up for the army then you are in the army to fight for your country. You cannot then turn around and say I don't want to fight as I don't agree with what we are fighting for/against. Avatar Image says: Oh Lordy...it's AlWAYS politics, is it not? Personally I can't stand how people argue over this stuff. I don't see any problem with connected OotP to WWII, there are obvious similarities. Now I don't pretend to be an expert of the Vietnam War or British politics. But the rest just makes me want to roll my eyes. I know free speech blah blah blah, but it's a little juvenille if you ask me. As someone else stated, save it for the dinner table, and leave Harry Potter to be something we can all agree on. Avatar Image says: Relationships do seem to make up the main focus of HBP, don't they? I was thinking it was just H/G R/Hr. (And was starting to get a little edgy about it). But Snape's ability to love making him different from Voldemort... I think thats what Jo said... everyone is redeemable apart from Voldemort because they have the ability to love. Snape, Narcissa, Draco (who was doing it to protect his family), theres also Harry and his incomparable ability to love/ forgive. the trio's frienship... erk, there's loads of things emerging now. Manipulation of relationships, over protectiveness; the urge to protect the ones you love. wow. I need to re-read the book again.Avatar Image says: Im sorry Steve K, but I still can't see your point clearly. Or maybe not convinced. I'm not sure ... What's the logic of putting more fire into the opened hells already? What I know though, is that the world has been devided into strong forces that overtake the weak "rich" nations. You spoke a little while ago of the middle east like they were all a bunch of terrorists, but did you know that terrorism mainly exist(ed)/was born in Afghanistan? And that most of those terrorism groups were financed originally by the USA givernment over decades ago as a tool against the Soviet Russia? Did you know that a certain middle east country's president (Egypt to be specific) was the first one to warn the USA government that those groups would be the first to turn against US? Do you know that the number of followers of those terrorism groups in any middle east country is not much more than those who exist in any other country? So, you see, whether in a direct way or not, Strong forces usually are the reasons for what's happening in weakers nations. Most of the civil wars that you speak of in Rwanda and other african countries, is because of hunger and ignorance, and guess who's responsible for burdening those poor countries with debts over debts since they were under their occupation? Loyalty is such a good value, but when it starts overcoming "Fairness", then the world turns into such a savege place where any strong entity would overtake the weaker ones under whatever claims. Ah, now I'm depressed :(Avatar Image says: oh my godAvatar Image says: Why couldn't a soldier refuse to go to war? Its not like they are going to carry you out phyically to the war. If I war a soldier, I wouldn't fight immoral wars. I would refuse to go and deal with the conseqence of it instead of committing murders. I believe anyone who kills anything other than self defense is a murderer. But then I wouldn't join any army now since no country goes to war for self defense and its all about economic war. That is why have don't respect soldiers and just roll my eyes at this all thing of support our troops. This is not their choice. Everyone has a choice. Avatar Image says: "Sexual politics" is a great way to describe HBP. The book does focus heavily on romance, and it'll be exciting to see Yates and the cast have fun with it.Avatar Image says: "If you sign up for the army then you are in the army to fight for your country. You cannot then turn around and say I don't want to fight as I don't agree with what we are fighting for/against." Conscription (aka "the draft"). The soldiers we currently have in Iraq and Afghanistan had a choice, those in Vietnam and WWII (in Germany, that is) did not. And I agree with others that Dan was not being disrespectful at all.Avatar Image says: Hannibal (and a few others): It's not a matter of opinion whether the Vietnam veterans were treated badly or not, it's a fact that they were. What you think about the war itself really doesn't change that. Aimee, Cinderella: You know, politics, religion and whatever other ways we use to define our societies *will* find its way into our art. That's what art is for. If you don't want to see it, don't look for it. But please don't try to stop the rest of us from enjoying these elements in this story.Avatar Image says: What the hell is Harry WEARING in that clip from the film? It looks like a stripey babygrow suit. It looks AWFUL.Avatar Image says: I'm glad he wants to direct again - just from the trailer this movie looks amazing. I actually like that the directors have changed throughout. It has added a more transitional feel to the movies. My only problems with the movies is I feel like, the best directors have had the worst scripts, and the worst directors have the best scripts. The first and second movies aren't that visually impressive - but they follow the books very closely compared to the other two. So far Cuaron is my favorite in terms of visual representation -although the POA script was practically butchered - especially the climax. GOF obviously needed cuts somewhere and its hard to say where they should be, it just feels like something is missing. I'm rereading that one right now - so maybe I'll catch what I feel is missing. OOTP looks like it has included the vast majority of scenarios and characters, so that will be exciting. The visual effects look better than any of the other movies just from the trailer. Avatar Image says: Luna, people join the army for all sorts of reasons, and many young people join because they need money for college or have no other way to go in their lives and join the military to reform. Many also do it for pride of their country but for you to act as though becoming involved in a war is such a simplified process (especially on a moral level) shows a bit of ignorance. And when it comes to Vietnam, the war Dan was referring to, there was a draft and even though not everyone who was drafted went to Vietnam, some did, and to assume that they all wanted to kill everyone in sight and didn't care about it is rediculous. Unless you are a conscientious objecter, you either become involved in the war or get jailed. Of course, there were plenty of draft dodgers (like my dad was) but many of them did have to go and fight in the war for something they didn't necessarily support 100%. And sorry but most wars have always been about the economy, not purely self defense. I find lack of respect for people willing to risk they lives everyday even if the war is unjustified (like the one we're in now!) as pretty cold hearted.Avatar Image says: I take offense at all of the statements by the people in the interviews that even tangentially relate to a very important personal experience or political opinion of mine. The fact that these creative people have taken touchstones from real life to assist them in creatively interpreting their work for the screen is an abomination, and they should keep all such things away from my perfect little personal issue. That they dare to speak of anything that is of a different opinion than my own, or even for that matter are obviously belittling my SUPER IMPORTANT POLITICAL ISSUE and my SUPER IMPORTANT LIFE ISSUE WHICH I REFLEXIVELY TAKE OFFENSE TO WHENEVER BROUGHT UP is shameful. I have therefore lost all respect I had for these individuals, as they clearly should have no right to impinge in any way upon my SUPER IMPORTANT PERSONAL ISSUE, even though they are doing so to better understand the creative work and interpret that work onto the screen. The NERVE, I say! (In other words, cut out the whining and leave your personal offenses aside, you poor insulted Blair supporters and Vietnam Victim Brigade.)Avatar Image says: I guess what maybe makes Dan's answers feel a bit immature and somewhat disrespectful is the way he just lumps together elements of different wars that had nothing in common with eachother into his analogies. I personally didn't see anything wrong with it, but I can see how blending up generic accounts on different historic issues can make some people think he's not seriour about what he's saying. Still, I think it's great that he's starting to draw from resources like that.Avatar Image says: I didn't like HBP much because of the romances and how they were written and done. I the only thing I liked was tom's history and snape/draco plot. I really hope that they don't focus on the romance in this movie at the expense of these other important plots. I know when hollywood sense romance and stuff, they go overboard with it. HBP should be made a serious movie and not teenage romance tangle. Avatar Image says: He had to say "French", didn't he. As if the American Right Wing needs another excuse to try to ban these books. lol Avatar Image says: *sigh* I don't want to get into this political arguments, but Ashley, perhaps the difference, is that the soliers lose their lives with their own choice (supposedly anyway), that they are the ones attacking, but the weak innocent who got killed by them didn't have any choice, didn't start the attack? For example: Is an american soldier dying in Iraq, equates an innocent child murdered and maimed there (by that american soldier) without having any choice or even any means of defending themselves?Avatar Image says: When I think of the Vietnam war I am always reminded of that famous photograph taken by Nick Ut of the naked little girl running away from a napalm attack with her back all horribly burnt. For some reason that picture always gives me the horn.Avatar Image says: Wow, you can really tell that he enjoyed working in the OotP by the things he says. I seriously hope he does justice to HBP, and I'm sure he will. :DAvatar Image says: Entertainers draw from history all the time to put their roles into perspective. They don't do it to cheapen the suffering of people who actually participated in those historical events or to demean them, only to attempt to reach the emotional depths required of them for the roles they are playing, and certainly not to offend peeople. As fans, we should be glad that they work so hard on their craft to make the movie experience better for all of us and remember that even if they are drawing political comparisons to their roles, they are NOT political people themselves. Just actors, directors, writers whose goal is to entertain us in the best way they can. I am sure Dan and David would be appalled to see how their comments have been misconstrued and taken out of context and probably horrified to think they'd hurt anyone by them. Having said that, as an HP fan who enjoys coming here for HP discussion and debate, I would appreciate the debate over this topic not being turned into an excuse to bash America or our troops. Whether you agree with the mission in Iraq (or anywhere else) or not, they are men and women, boys and girls, just like you and me, who are in daily peril. They have families and friends who grieve for them, worry about them, who will care for the gravely injured for the rest of their lives, and they deserve compassion. A great many may very well be fellow HP fans and visitors here, and I certainly would not want to be part of adding to their suffering by having them read some of the truly terrible things being written here, which have nothing to do with HP at all.Avatar Image says: Nowadays whenever someone who worked on the films offers their opinion on the story or the characters, obsessives will leap in to "correct" them every time. Remember that these press interviews don't assume that the reader has memorized the books. They talk about the story in broad strokes and soundbites. That's the context and that needs to be understood. If you want to tear it apart, show us not only that you can read the HP books, but that you can read everyday journalism and know what it's about.Avatar Image says: I usually come to leaky expecting intelligent conversation, but this one seems to have failed that standard. On one side, we have a wife of a Vietnam veteran angry at Dan for comparing Harry to what her husband went through, despite the fact that he was actually saying that he respected the kind of suffering that soldiers had to go through when they came home from Vietnam. On the other we have a number of people spewing hateful language at people who fought, died or were injured in Vietnam. Some of what they are saying is patently false: "greedy dirty goals in Vietnam." (Vietnam wasn't related to money at all.) I won't defend the actual reasons that Vietnam was fought for, but I will defend the people who answered their country's call, risked their lives, and suffered greatly. Luna, while I respect your principled stand, can you be sure that innocent people would not be killed if the U.S. had not invaded, or was not currently involved in Iraq? In Rwanda, millions of people were killed, because no one would step in to stop the violence. In Darfur, there is killing going on everyday. In the middle east, hatred and oppression were allowed to fester and now terrorism has sprung up that can reach around the world. In World War II, Chamberlain was afraid of fighting Germany and refused to do so for so long that almost all of Europe had fallen, before England did something about it. At the same time, there are clearly times when wars make things worse. I am not a smart enough man to make the distinction between when a war is necessary and when it is "immoral", but I do respect those who are willing to fight for their country when they are asked. The world is not a perfect place. Maybe it should be, but I don't think that war can be "black and white". In fact, I think that HP shows that. Fudge is an example of a person who is afraid to stand up to evil, while Scrimgeour is willing to throw innocent people in jail just to make himself look good. I respect and share your discomfort and disgust with all the killing and destruction that war can bring. But at the same time, I don't believe that a war of words is the answer either. Maybe there is no answer.Avatar Image says: I thought the theme of the Harry Potter world was suppose to do with courage and love, not politics. They aren't rebelling, they are doing what they have to do to survive. I think this whole politics "0H My GaWd We r T3h Fr3nCh R3beLlio0n" stuff is just ludicrous. I'm sick of seeing these movies get worse and worse by the year!Avatar Image says: Many men who were soldiers in the Vietnam War were *drafted*, meaning they were sent to war against their will on threat of arrest, and most of them didn't want to be there. I don't know how anyone can say their deaths were more deserved than the deaths of the civilians in Vietnam. The fault lies with the government, not with the soldiers. As for Dan's comment, I see what he's saying, but the way he said it didn't really ring right for me. But he's young, and might not have articulated what he meant properly. I think there can be a parallel between Harry and a soldier returning from the Vietnam War. Harry went to battle and returned to a society that was totally against him and completely hostile. He also didn't choose to go into that battle. Of course the Vietnam war is real and more serious, but I have no problem with actors drawing on real events to help with their character. What about actors who play soldiers? They themselves are not soldiers, is it wrong for them to draw on the experiences of real life soldiers? At this point in the books it is a war, and Dan can't very well ask a wizard what it's like to be in a wizard war, so why shouldn't he try to put himself into the shoes of a soldier who was in a "muggle" war?Avatar Image says: Well he would say French in that example as the French Civilian Resistance against Nazi occupation in World War Two has traditionally been admired here in the UK, where many TV series have fictionalised and covered the stories - and the French are generally admired by the British!Avatar Image says: Well now, hold on now. Let's not start saying that ALL the drafted men of Vietnam were innocent either. Many of them WERE at fault for doing things far wose than what they were ordered to do: such as was the case with the Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse. Let's try to be a little more fair and unbiased.Avatar Image says: I am sorry that some of you have such strong negative feelings toward soldiers whose primary duty is to defend our freedoms and way of life. If we follow the statement that we should never go into another country to right what we feel is a wrong, then the United States should have never fought against Hitler - after all, he never set foot on American soil. As Pat Benatar sang "There's so much worth dying for, so little worth killing over". Sometimes you have to step in to protect the innocent from dictators. Rant over.Avatar Image says: "War should be black and white. " Sorry, it's not, Luna. Nothing in this world is. Even murder isn't always black and white. "They are losing their lifes regardless and for nothing. " Sorry, but if you really supported the end of the Iraq war, you'd have the same stance for the American soldiers who are there. The troops need as much support as they can get. Supporting the troops doesn't mean supporting the war, Luna. Avatar Image says: I wonder if Dan will someday realise that no matter what he says, some people will tear him apart for saying it. Poor kid can't say a word without controversy erupting in one way or another. At this rate, he may soon decide to stop doing interviews altogether, and then people will criticise him for being a stuck-up snob. I lived through the return of the Vietnam veterans--for years they came home to find no welcome. Regardless of the politics of the time, they didn't deserve to be treated the way they were. It was an outrage. But though my father was one of those veterans, I take no offense at what Dan said. He was simply trying to come up with an analogy for Harry's situation. If thinking of how the veterans of Vietnam must have felt, if trying to understand how alone and alienated they must have been, helped Dan to give a good performance in Order of the Phoenix, then good for him. I'm sure he meant no disrespect by it. In fact, he probably GAINED a lot of respect for those veterans. We need to stop criticising every word that comes out of the mouths of these actors before we understand what they really mean.Avatar Image says: Glenn- was about to say everything you just said to explain the politics of HBP. No need I guess haha Anyway, I thought it was a good article, and an interesting insight as to what David Yates might do for the next film! :) At least he's read the books. And as for the whole Vietnam veteran thing people are freaking/criticizing about- well, Harry is, pretty much, a soldier if you think about it. In this film especially- I mean, "Dumbledore's ARMY". I think it'll come in handy in Book 7 when they'll probably have an actual wizard-creature war! I think Harry has gone through enough to be considered a pro at fighting crime and winning over evil- but the story shows that there are always casualties, consequences, and that revenge is the sickest form of evil. I think HP shouldn't be underestimated- it IS adult now, and it IS about the truth of war and sacrifice and love. Can't wait for this film, and for HBP I'm really intrigued!! :)Avatar Image says: Forget the "sexual politics" in HBP. I want Yates to concentrate on the pensieve memories; of Tom Riddles early life. Diagon alley again- Fred and Georges WWW! Madame malkin etc. I want more focus on Spinners end. Narcissa *must* be cast. *Must* Unbreakable Vow has to be *emphasized*. Tom Felton to get more screen time. SECTUMSEMPRA! Moaning Myrtle Female!Crabbe&Goyle plz! Snape Slughorn! felix felices! One of Slughorns parties has to be present. (Luna!) Sanguini! FTW! Quidditch matches are not necessary except to display Harry's captaining skills or the fact that Malfoy is not there. locked room of requirement The Potions textbook Levicorpus! Fenrir Greyback *I'll be okay with bits of H/G ness* *I'll be good with hints of R/Hr/Lav/Cormac* Thanks.Avatar Image says: "War should be black and white." My brother was a soldier in Yugoslavia. Believe me, it isn't.Avatar Image says: OK, I'm going to step in here for a moment. I understand that political views are always going to be different, and that finding a way to respect each other's differences is a hard meeting of the minds to come to. I will say this: if you want to post here, you will respect each other. Period. We have a strict "no flaming" policy here, and if you want to participate in the discussion, you will abide by that rule. That being said, I don't think that Dan Radcliffe or David Yates meant ANY sort of disrespect to Tony Blair, Vietnam Veterans or WWII survivors. All they were saying is that those markers in our world's history were natural places to draw from when creating the tension and chaos that Order of the Phoenix required. And, I think it is reasonable to say that, you can study something and not necessarily have to live through it to have a good understanding of the emotion of that time. All that is being said is that they used REAL history to inspire them to achieve REAL feeling. And, for that, I applaud them.Avatar Image says: I think, based on what Yates says about HBP, that he'll do a great job with HBP. It is more fun, and full of sexual tension as the teens grow up. Plus, with 5 and, I suspect, 7 being so intense 6 needs to be a bit lighter. I can't wait! Avatar Image says: Cinderella- I think we actually agree. I did not mean to lump in everyone in the middle east, but only to say that we ignored the plight of people in the middle east, and Afganistan (I was trying to not complicate things, and I am sorry for stereotyping) and that oppression, to which we were unknowing, but happy partners, has fed the roots of terrorism which threatens us now. Perhaps, we didn't confront those regimes, because we didn't want to risk war or hostility with those oppressors, or just as often it wasn't economically wise. My point is that there is no road map, or fail-safe guide that always results in peace and fairness. In one situation, to stay out of the affairs of another country leads to genocide or oppression and violence, maybe terrorism. In another, getting involved leads to exactly the same things. I am saying that things are complicated, and that we need people to act courageously when they see the choice between what is right and what is easy. Sometimes those choices are only clear to the person who is making it, and might be the exact opposite of the same choice made by someone else, yet in the end I hope they result in a good that no one could expect. I hope this is true, because my other option is to believe that there is no good that comes from anything.Avatar Image says: I agree with Steve K. War is not "black and white." Should we only fight wars with pure, altruistic motivations? At what point do you ignore the autonomy (rights of a nation) to fight on behalf of its people that are suffering? What kind of precedent does that set? As a country, you are helping a set of oppressed people but you are ignoring the governments right to sovreignty. Which one is right? Whose to say which type of regime works best for what group of people? Who is to say that the oppressed want a particular nation's help? Is it the nation's responsbility to step in anyway? The questions have contradicting and confusing answers. The professors in the Government dpt. at my school all have different suggestions, beliefs, and answers that are similar but not the same. The lens through which you see a perceive a situation is not how everyone else will and the trouble comes when you assume that everyone else will agree with you and you leave zero room for compromise. And about choice when it comes to fight. There is a choice. Fight or be heavily penalized (sometimes court marshalled). For some the choice between what is right and easy is clear...be court marshalled. But when you are a soldier with a family to take care of, an education to pay for, or a lifetime ahead of you, "right and easy" kind of goes out the door. I think Dan was just trying to draw upon the experiences of the Vets (not the war itself) so that he could get a better handle on Harry in book 5. Even for the soldiers that came back to supportive audiences had a hard time b/c they couldn't relate to the WWII vets. Supportive audiences didn't want to hear about the "bad" things and the unsupportive audiences didn't want to hear about the "good" things they had achieved. In Book 5, Harry is struggling to find a sympathetic audience. The Vet's experience (at the time) was unique and the American people and gov't didn't know how to handle it. Well, same reaction with the Ministry and the students at Hogwarts. Similar experiences...not same.Avatar Image says: WOW! Dan and the other's have come a long way in thier talents both on and off the screen and I am so proud to have been able to witness it all! Second, for a Director of my most loved books to feel what I feel everday and ever film (It's going to be difficult to let go) I can only feel that he will also continue to give me/us what we most yearn for MORE AND THE BEST HARRY POTTER FILMS, WHILE STAYING TRUE THE BOOKS. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE, ALL OF YOU!Avatar Image says: I think that perhaps we are looking at two things. One, Daniel probably should not have interjected am interpretation of the present times into a fantasy. At best, fantasy works when the writers tell the story and allow the people reading to interpret. Two, who knows what the kid really said? Journalists have a way of picking and choosing out of context. That said, I cannot see the Tony Blair comparison as he was the one wanting to face the terrorists and Sadam, while Fudge was pretending the problem did not exist. Whether you like Blair or not, it is difficult to see him as a man pretending there are not evils to be faced. One may disagreee with how he has faced the problems of our times, but he has never put his head in the sand.Avatar Image says: YAY!!!! "The next ones a bit more fun" heheh OMG these are aqesome....kinda scary with the whole war references .... ^^ but COOL!!!Avatar Image says: I think I'm done with the war talk. I think we all said our views, and as natural, not everyone is going to agree. Its been good debate, and I'm glad it didn't got into name calling. If we can be civil when we are debating about war, why can't we be civil with shipping debates. :)Avatar Image says: I think, Steve K, that "unfairness" starts when innocent weak people, civil people, children, women, and elders are killded, tortured and maimed without having anything to do with anything. And if such vital things like life and death and fairness could have different opinions, then how many innocent people should be killed and tortured before we reach a decision? Or may be that's it? And the world has already turned into a bloody savage garden? With no morals? With no respect for life, justice and reason? And we'll go on and on like this untill all strong finish all the weak, and then start on each other? Now, I guess you know why I don't like politics, don't you? *sigh*Avatar Image says: *whistles innocently* --So. Uh.. Some article, eh? :)Avatar Image says: "Forget the "sexual politics" in HBP. I want Yates to concentrate on the pensieve memories; of Tom Riddles early life. " I think David Yates is quite capable of managing both. If he doesn't focus on Harry falling in love he can't emphasis the essential difference between Harry and Voldemort - that Harry has chosen to love and Voldemort chose not to. Yes, Harry's love isn't just about falling for Ginny, it's about for his friends and his parents as well, but that sort of love is important as well. "If Yates is surely coming back for HBP, then why wouldn't WB issue an official statement?!" They obviously have their reasons, and I suspect we will hear more about it when they hit the road for the publicity blitz from June onwards. "And I really don't like comparing HP to politics, I really hate politics, and I don't want to hate HP! " Well that's a shame because Jo has laced all six books with politics, and it makes them all the more interesting for me. Avatar Image says: Seriously? People support Blair? Blimey. I knew there was a reason I left England for Spain.Avatar Image says: "It upsets me that anyone who has not seen war can try to draw feelings as a veteran and what they went through! Yes, Vietnam was a controversial war, just like what is going on right now, but for DR to say "Harry's like a Vietnam veteran," is outrageous! My husband's experiences as a Vietnam veteran can never be compared to this book series!! DR's remarks have caused me to lose further respect for him." ********************** How can you lose respect for a seventeen year old actor who is trying to find something to base his character's emotional situation on? He wasn't saying anything disrespectful. Why would you get so bent out of shape for something that was only an analytical statement?Avatar Image says: WOW. Thats awsome! He actually thinks that making a Potter film has been the funnest he's ever had. Thats saying somthing, he has quite the career! That somehow makes me proud as a Potter fan. What can I say about Dan. He is so cute the way he talks and draws on current inspirations, like the art of spinning polotics. He's just adorable.Avatar Image says: Very well said Steve K. Very well said indeed!!!Avatar Image says: Jumppin'gehosafat! When I read this intereview I thought . OH! I LOVE the fact that there is another person who not only understands what kind of disgrace the Viet Nam Veterans went thru but champions them as well and understands they were not being respected , as they "should" have been by their country they fought for and suffered for. I remember when in the 1980's Bruce Springsteen wrote the song"Born in the USA" most people thought it was just a way to say how great my country is no matter what else. But the song itself is written about thosewho fought for their contry returned home to a country who showed them know respect , even redicule, and disbelief in them.[[disgracfull]] Bruce Springsteen was never in a war either but he knew and understood what he SAW! in those who returned and what THEY had to deal with. In Dan's case what he read and listened to from the solders themselves.He is well known for his love of history and I'm sure he studid this part of history. Would that everyone would maybe there wouldn't be as many misstakes made over and over by those who send people to war and have little to loss themselves. Anyway, I think some people did NOT really understand what he was trying to say and just jumped to conclutions. I don't understand how his statements could be twisted so much ,he was basically saying the men returning from that war were not treated as they SHOULD have been. Avatar Image says: This response was awhile back but someone responded to me and I thought I would clarify. First of all, I'm not a basher. I actually like Dan and think he's a fantastic actor. I just hate it when actors have to drag politics into everything. I understand that Vietnam comment, in fact I actually liked that comparison. It shows his strength as an actor and ability that he can draw strength from an inspiration. I've never heard Jo compare Voldemort to Hitler but that's not a bad comparison. They're both evil murderers, you see. I was just commenting that I think it's dumb that Tony Blair is being compared to Fudge. I can see where people may make the comparison at some points, but it jsut seemed to me more like an anti-blair cry than having a relation to the movie or his acting. That being said, I still like dan, as well as all the other actors, but I think they should leave politics at the dinner table. Avatar Image says: People are all over the map here, and many have got the wrong end of the stick. Comparisons to Nazis are indeed relevant, particularly because Rowling wrote explicitly that Voldemort’s and the Deatheaters’ evil stem from ‘racially’ based prejudice. Have people here forgotten about purebloods and mudbloods? Rowling was writing OOTP at a time marked by the political climate post 11-Sep-2001. She may not have been writing about Bush and Blair in Iraq, but for just one example, she was certainly writing about folly in the erosion of civil liberties for the sake of what’s perceived as increased security, i.e., Benjamin Franklin’s dictum: ‘Those who would give up ESSENTIAL LIBERTY to purchase a little TEMPORARY SAFETY, deserve neither LIBERTY nor SAFETY.’ I fail to see how people can deny there is a bit of Blair in Fudge, or that contemporary politics play a part in OOTP. Avatar Image says: I had the impression that "sexual politics" meant on a smaller scale, interpersonally, in the daily lives of the characters, rather than the politics of, say, running a country. One definition of politics is "social relations involving authority or power", which certainly applies a lot in HBP.Avatar Image says: I thorougly enjoyed this debate, although there could have been little less "Granny"-bashing, I'm sure anything relating to Vietnam is a sizable sore spot for her and she may loose all reason when the subject comes up. On the whole I have to consede that Steve K has probably put his points accross better than anyone. As far as the comments made by David Yates regarding Blair - I thought the comparison was made in respect to manipulation of information and not his views and actions regarding the war in Iraq. Avatar Image says: "Seriously? People support Blair?" Have you seen the opposition? To be honest, I don't support either Blair or Cameron and I think you'd be nuts to vote for either of them. And Danilo, you're right on the money, as usual.Avatar Image says: Why on earth should entertainment and politics be kept separate? And who's to decide? That's an absolutely ridiculous assertion. And seriously, don't those of you who are offended by DR's comments on identifying with Vietnam Vets know anything about finding motivation in acting? To act well you need to root your performance in real emotion, and it seems that this is an intelligent and thoughtful choice. My dad was in Vietnam and I'm not the least bit bothered; in fact, I think it shows that Dan is really maturing as an actor that he would put such contemplation into his performance.Avatar Image says: Dan's political analogies seem to be strange for people to accept. I suppose that kind of depth must be surprising to see in a 17 year old teenager. I wholeheartedly agree with the Harry-Vietnam war veteran comparison. Many of those who joined that war came back ostracized by their own countrymen who joined rallies and Vietnam war protests, safe in their own bellyaching while these soldiers faced death on a daily basis. That kind of biterness must be what Dan is referring to. As for that shot at Blair, lol, what's the uproar? Lots of showbiz folks are into politics. just because they're in the entertainment business doesn't mean they're airheads when it comes to politics. And just like any citizen, they have their own political leanings.Avatar Image says: I totally agree with Chloe. I don't see why anyone would have a problem with comparing real people and events to fictional people/events. It’s only a comparaison. There is nothing more to it than a comparaison in what Harry and these people went through. Daniel may have enough information about that war, these people; he may have read books, seen movies about it. So if he thought he could draw from that stuff for his portrayal of Harry, good for him. I don’t see anything detrimental to the real people in this.Avatar Image says: Great article, possibly the best article I've read about this film. I can't wait to see OOTP, it's going to be brilliant. I completely agree with what Dan and David Yates said and From what I've seen so far, Dan has done a great job acting and Yates has done a great job directing. I'm glad Yates is going to direct HBP. I'm sure he will do a great job.Avatar Image says: "I agree that it's much smaller story, but I don't find it any easier to adapt.". But when they started to film OotP, people used to say the same, fans said it was not an easy book to adapt... it wouldn't work well on screen... And now after reading the first reviews and watching the trailer, everyone says OotP is one of the best HP books to make a movie. So maybe at the moment people don't see how they will manage it with HBP, but wait and I'm sure we will end thinking the same we think now about OotP. In my opinion OotP was much more difficult so if they managed it, they can do it with HBP too. I just hope the old scriptwriter doesn't return...and they will keep OotP scriptwriter or someone new. Dome, I've just read your comment, and I think it's more about feelings than the reasons why they fought. The reasons why they were fighting is not important here, how they felt after they returned is what is related with Harry and what Dan is talking about. I think it's a very interesting and good comparision the one Dan is doing, and I'm sure it has helped him, everyone talks about how good Dan is in this movie. I've seen many interviews with soldiers, no matter what war they were fighting or the reasons, a lot of them felt like Harry feels after his battle, they felt how their society forgot about them in many ways. Harry is like a soldier returning for the battle who finds the magical world doesn't believe him and not only that, they are against him. I'm proud Dan has grown to be an actor that is able to do what great experienced actors do, they try to search papallels and inspiration in real stories to show those feelings on screen. No matter what it is, if it helps them, I think it's perfect. And it makes me very happy they treat this story like it deserves, like a serious story and not just a fairy tail. We should be proud he is not just a child actor who read a script, Yates and Dan try to understand how this character feels and to show it how this story deserves. If someone knows Harry well (with Jo of course) that's Daniel. Some people here have started talking about war, but I've read the interview and they have not talked about the war itself, so maybe people have not read the interview well or they are way over analyze it. About manipulation of information, it's something Blair has said himself, about several subjects, so it's not an opinion, it's a fact. Fudge does the same so of course it's comparable. They don't say more, they only talk about WWII, and that's a comparision many of us have done many times with these books, Jo has said it many times too. The Death Eaters are like the Nazis who want to finish with everyone who is not pure blood,. The way they think it's the same, and they way the DA members and the OotP think is the same way French and British people felt. I'm glad they compare them so people who have not read the book will understand these are more than children books and movies and will take them more seriously.Avatar Image says: I think danilo said everything about all of this just perfectly. Thanks danilo ---for putting all of it into it's proper persective. David Yates is going to be the perfect choice for HBP.It is not going to be an easy book to film, even harder than any of the rest, because of what occurs in the book and the suttleties of the characters.But he is THE person they needed as he is so very good with close up relations with people[it has also surprised me how well he handles action ,excellently] within their relating to each other.His previous work shows this to be so true. I'm looking forward to hearing who they choose for the new roles,should become very interesting.:o)Avatar Image says: Someone commented long ago about the date of release. Thinking internationally, it is really July 11th, since it's the day it will be released in france and some other countries.Avatar Image says: "Isn't Dan doing a WWI soldier role after Equus?" Oh dear, does that mean another naff haircut?Avatar Image says: I a quite ignorant about British politics actually polictics in genreal) but can someone elaborate on the Blair-Fudge analogy? Is it in context of the Iraq war? or are there some domestic stories that I non-British netizens like me might be unaware of. Avatar Image says: ...and a proper Edwardian moustache...Avatar Image says: Wow, what an astute and worldly young man he is. Aww.Avatar Image says: Re: the spin comment, no it's not specifically about the Iraq war as such. A key criticism levelled at the Blair government throughout its past decade has been the way in which it has handled media relations and promoted its public image. I think the best analogy for it is actually the point in HBP where Rufus Scrimgeour asks Harry to support them by "popping in and out of the Ministry". I won't get into the rights and wrongs of the Blair approach but Fudge, who is more concerned about the way the Ministry appears than the reality of the situation, seems to caricature elements of various people (particularly including Alastair Campbell, Blair's former director of communications and strategy). I like David Yates's comments - I'm getting more and more enthusiastic about him as a director, hopefully the film will bear this out!Avatar Image says: OJ, Thanks for the explanation. I get the idea. Avatar Image says: I don't think the Franklin quote is being used in the correct context. It was made (long story short!) in reference to protection for the colony of Pennsylvania and funding for arms. The Governor felt that the colonial Assembly was not providing him with the powers to establish a Militia to defend the colony. The colonial Assembly did not have the funds to support a Militia, or to trade with the Indians, and wanted, instead, for Penn's heirs in England to provide the funds. Meanwhile, the French had armed the Deleware and Shawanese, telling them it was to help restore them to their rightful country. So, the arms race begins. "Those who would"...refers to the colonists who believe the Governor would protect them and that more powers should be given to the Governor - aka English authority - rather than the Assembly. Franklin was talking about not being too quick to turn over complete control to Britain and therefore lose too much automony for the colonial Assembly. Avatar Image says: No, it means that he did not want the colonists to give up their right or responsibility to arm and defend themslelves to the British just because it was the quick and easy fix.

Write a Reply or Comment

Finding Hogwarts

The Leaky Cauldron is not associated with J.K. Rowling, Warner Bros., or any of the individuals or companies associated with producing and publishing Harry Potter books and films.