Kellie DDLs statement meant that his boys WOULD take him seriously now that he had been photographed with Dan. So not a dig at all.
Yes POA is my favourite film, both as a film and as far as Dan’s hair is concerned (which is all I was saying really). But I think Dan has come a long long way in his acting with each HP film he has done and I agree with bebe, adults that I know of tend to rate Dan highly as an actor.
I also agree with bebe’s assessment of My Boy Jack. I thought it was great, and Dan gave John Kipling such a humanity in a matter of only a few minutes and made the death scene so heartrending that the grief afterwards was all the more believable. It felt as a viewer that I had lost a son/brother too. That’s great acting. I think the majority of reviewers of the film thought the same way if you check imdb.
I’ve seen Equus too. Enough has already been said about how good Dan was in that. In fact that, underlined by My Boy Jack are the reason why Dan is taken seriously by his fellow actors now.
In those two productions he is nothing like Harry, nor is he like himself and that’s pretty impressive going for an 18 year old.
Indeed BEBE Cuaron and Day-Lewis rock! Have you seen Children of Men? its like sooo good lol. And have you had a chance to see “There will be Blood” i’m dying to see it. I love Paul Dano too! Talk about amazing acting! Anyways,I dunno, from all the Harry Potter films and the speaches at awards he gives, i just don’t think Daniel Radcliffe is full of talent. Thats just my personal opinion. I’ve never really beleived Dan was the Harry I know from the books when he’s on-screen. Harry’s meant to be this toruted soul with a scarcastic bitter sense of humour and when they try and portray that on-screen it just comes out really badly. When he tries to act angry I end up laughing (no offence) because its just so fake. You have to agree that Daniel is not playing the Harry we know from the books, Its not all his fault though, i’m sure. The scripts aren’t geat either so that makes an actor seem worse then they really are. And i’m a big enough person to admit that he has gotten better in the last couple of years but still…i still ended up laughing in OOTP when he was angry at Ron. I just pray to God the script and acting are better for Deathly Hallows because i could not bare it if that movie was ruined, it would be a travesty. They need to take more actual dialogue from the books instead of making up their own lines. Even if Daniel Radcliffe is an ok actor there are a million other actors who could do a better job i’m sure, would you not agree that keeping Daniel on for all 7 films was a bad idea? He was ok in the first 3 but (to me) after that it was like…eh no more please.
Oh g! How tall is Daniel Day Lewis??? How short is Daniel Radcliffe???! (nice air though..) And how extremely gorgeous is Julie Christie ?
?!
Anne: I have seen My Boy Jack and i swear to God i was so embarrassed for Daniel in that film. The mutache was absolutley terrible looking and i had to change the channel when he was doing the scene where he was talking to one of his men saying that his feet were important, it was sooo awfull. That being said however I thought Daniel did an impressive death scene when he got shot so there ya have it. I think Daniel will be good at the death scene in DH and walking to his death will be good but i don’t hold my breath for the rest of DH, i don’t expect him to be able to pull off the fight with Lupin or the fight with Ron which is a shame because David Thewlis is a fine actor and Rupert is a good enough actor too and is quite good at angry fight scenes (see Driving Lessons for proof) but i don’t think Dan is good at acting angry so those scenes won’t be good in my opinion.
With respect to Dan, I don’t agree with you on any front, Kerrie. He’s my Harry, sorry. One thing, I don’t understand is why you find his portrayal of anger funny – unless you find adolescent anger funny (which can be the case!!). Also, you contradicted yourself . You say he’s gotten better over the years, but after the first three, you thought he was &?%.
And Anne, you said it well – Dan only had a short time on screen in My Boy Jack, and yet he gave the role a very real humanity. You saw the boy transform into a man (in spite of his visual shortcomings, he made the most of his situation and earned his men’s respect) and so it made the ending that much tougher. The production was excellent too, and the writing top-notch. I also thought he was very good in December Boys; I didn’t see Equus though.
Yes, I have seen Children of Men and I loved it (if you can love something so disturbing) and I thought Y Tu Mama Tambien was brilliant (I hope he comes back for 7). I haven’t seen There will be Blood because I’m afraid it’s going to be overly violent (I need to look into that). In fact, I haven’t seen DDL in anything in quite a while because he doesn’t do many films and what he does do seems uber-violent (Gangs of New York springs to mind). I keep meaning to check out the Ballad of Jack and Rose. But I was hooked on him from the Unbearable Lightness of Being onward and watched the films he made in the 90s. Loved him in In the Name of the Father.
Sorry, I’ve been rambling. I’ve just never liked it when people post things about the young actors’ physical appearance or clothing styles, or their abilities etc.
erm Kerrie (sorry, I got your name wrong before) you are embarrassed because Dan was wearing a moustache like the real life character he was playing did LOL?? He actually looked more like John Kipling than David Haig did, which is saying something. Seriously, I think you’ve misunderstood the film if you can’t accept a moustache and can’t understand the meaning of the trench foot scene, ie that life in the trenches was horrible and trench foot could result in amputation, hence it was important the soldier looked after his feet. Glad we agree on the death scene. Personally I was awake half the night thinking about it.
I thought the angry at Ron bit (are you talking about the dormitory scene?) was great, just like how I’d expect him to be, snappy. I also really liked the ‘trying not to have a rant’ at Grimmauld Place if that’s the scene you meant. I wish they’d made Harry properly angry like in the book but I thought Dan did that scene really well, sort of gritting his teeth because really he wanted to yell, trying to be grown up and restrained but dying to throw things around.
Your criticism about the humour is the fault of the scriptwriters, who cut ALL of Harry’s sarcasm out of the films (because they want Ron to be the funny one). It’s not that Dan messes up the portrayal, it’s that he isn’t given the chance. Ron is the ‘funny’ one and Harry is the ‘heroic’ one.
Other than that Dan gets the emotionally cut off aspect of Harry just right (incidentally the internalized nature of everything Harry sees and feels in the books is incredibly difficult to get across on screen without altering Harry’s character, if you really think about it). I think Dan does a great job. Anyway, filmmakers can never please everyone especially with a character as iconic as Harry, who everyone is going to have an opinion about, how he should be on screen etc.
hehe sorry i know i contradicted myself there but its weird… even though Dan’s gotten better at acting i still prefer the first 3 films to the last two films. That probably has to do with the fact that soo much was left out of OOTP, (that really annoyed me) and the cheezy awful dialogue at times. Its like ok people this isn’t a film for 5 year olds haha make it more mature. oh well they won’t be able to get away with that crap in Deathly Hallows. They’ll have to follow the dialogue of the book and not leave anything out in Deathly Hallows because every little thing is important in that book and at times every sentence is important. I really hope they do this movie justice and make it a 4 hour movie with an intermission. OOTP was only 2 hours and 20 mintues!! Thats way too short for a 700 page book!
Yes Anne i will agree that its not all Dans fault (even though i still think his anger is nothing like Harry’s anger and that is due to his acting ability). The script writers leave so much out that Dan doesn’t really have the proper tools to play Harry correctly e.g. dialogue and script. In the books Harry and Ron are equally funny, but Harry is more bitter and scarcastic about it, this isn’t portrayed at all in the films, which kinda sucks because Harry’s sarcastic bitter humour is like 50% of his character, its what makes him Harry. The other 50% of Harry is him being a stuborn hero who wont’ listen to other peoples advice when he thinks he’s right which to be fair they got that right in OOTP.
Hello, I dont believe that Dan is the worlds best actor, also sometimes to me his anger seems a little fake. However, as a person he seems kind and unpretentious. I think the casting of Rupert and Emma was brilliant, they capture their characters brilliantly. I personally preferred Dan’s hair longer, although in all honesty he’s not really my cup of tea either way. I think that inevitably people become a little defensive over any negative comments concerning Dan simply because of their attatchment to Harry and their love for the story he’s portraying. Although, I agree, there is no purpose in being nasty.
Kerrie: if you have the opportunity, go to see Equus on Broadway. Then you will understand all you said doesn’t make sense, if there is someone who can do those angry scenes perfectly well that’s Daniel Radcliffe. I loved My Boy Jack, all the actors including Dan did a great work, and all the critics agree. The film have already been nominated and won several awards. If you can not even understand the moustache is what everyone at that used to have, then you are not watching and understanding the movie in the right way. About OotP, there was only one scene the director and scriptwriter included were Harry was angry, and Dan did it great, it’s not his fault if they cut so much from the book. It’s the scene where he tells DD to look at him, his voice is broken, and that’s really fine acting, it’s a pity some people who has never acted can not understand this. Dan has been able to play many different characters and to play them all very well, that’s a real actor. Someone who has just played two characters in all his life and they were not very different is not an actor yet. Plus, Dan has done theatre, that’s where people show they can act, movies are nothing compared with theatre, in movies the director can cut things and make an actor or actress look good, when maybe that person didn’t even learned 2 full lines at the same time… Movie directors can do the contrary too, they can edit a scene and not show how good was that person in one scene. After seeing Equus and his other movies, it’s obvious HP directors are not using all Dan’s potencial. One of the problems is Kloves is so biased towards others characters, he doesn’t give Harry what a main character deserves.
Katie, Emma and Rupert only played his characters right in the first movie, after that they are playing two different characters who have nothing to do with Hermione and Ron. Ron is a unsecure person, Rupert never shows that, and Ron’s humor is very different of the stupid faces he puts, that’s not Ron’s kind of humor. He makes Ron looks stupid and sometimes he makes Ron looks “too cool”. Ron is neither of those. Hermione is not a person who cares more about her looks than her studies, and he is not a super power ranger or obssesed with her clothes… which is all Hermione from the movies is. And don’t tell me it is the script or director because they have changed the scriptswriters and directors many times and they still don’t do it right. Daniel have always played his character right, just like the books describe him, with Harry’s good things and with Harry’s defects too, which is something the other actors don’t do, it looks like they always want to make their characters look cool. What I like about Dan is he shows the dark and not so good side of Harry too, not just the good things. And even Jo talked about this after she watched OotP, she said Dan did a great work with Harry’s darker side. In my opinion Daniel is really underrated, he has always been constant since the first movie, doing a good job, and he keeps getting better and better, while all the other actors are changeable and some of them are worse with each new movie. And Radcliffe does all that without the help of the scripts, because they never give Harry many lines, and sometimes they change things so much that if it wasn’t because Daniel does a great work they would destroy the basis of the character. He has carried all the weight of these blockbusters huge movies during half of his life, and he has done it without becoming a little brat or big headed person. I give him a lot of credit for that and also because after all this years he keeps his passion and enthusiams for these books and mvoes. Because when I see interviews with some of the other actors they look bored and like if they didn’t care to be there, and ungrateful for what they have. It’s not easy the work Radcliffe does, he does many more interviews than the rest and he does a great job promoting these movies in all of them, which I can not say about others. So I find it very strbge and ungrateful than some fans don’t appreciate all he does for HP. Maybe some people have not stopped to think that if it wasn’t because of him, maybe HP wouldn’t be a franchise and name than everyone considers healthy, familiar… if it would have been another young actor being the face of all this, it could have been disastrous for HP world.
For the record, I don’t think I was defensive (she tries to say, non-defensively!). I like Dan; I like all of the kids. Believe me, I don’t go near the posts when there is a story about Emma. I think many of the comments about her are disgraceful.
Anyhoo, I just called out someone for being unnecessarily nasty in her post and she backed off, to her credit. I think it would appear that we’ve agreed to disagree about some things and that’s perfectly civilized.
However, would it be possible, just once in a while, to discuss an actor without resorting to a criticism being one of “his hair is all wrong”? We finally got rid of “the eyes are the wrong colour.” And the pink hoodie has gone into hibernation (for a while).
As for anger, I know my age is really going to show, but I think some younger people find acting anger embarrassing and so they laugh. I remember seeing movies, excellent movies, when I was a teen that featured a lot of anger or grief on the part of young actors and cringing and (worse) giggling in the theatre. I’m thinking of one film in particular. Whenever I’ve watched it since I appreciate how good the actor actually was and how young I was when I saw it. Just a thought….
And Carlos, I’ve heard it said that many an Oscar-winning actor owes the statuette to a good editor! It’s hard to trust what you see on film sometimes.
Snape, did that feel good to get off your chest? ‘He is not a super power ranger’...what are you talking about? You mentioned Jo talking about Dan well she has also expressed her opinion positively on Rupert too. Although I also do think that in the films Ron is made out to be a bit too stupid. As for Dan’s acting… I havent seen anything else other then the Harry Potter films that he has been in so I have absolutely no opinion on the quality of his acting in anything else. And in certain parts of the HP films I thinks he’s great but in others not so. Also, bebe, Im in my twenties definately not young enough to giggle or cringe when watching an actor act angry (well, most of the time!)
hehehe, well I will always get defensive over people saying Dan’s a bad actor, because I’ve seen him do things that show he’s a good actor. I mean, I was GOBSMACKED when I first saw him interviewed and saw how different he is from Harry. That’s when I realised he can act. Add to that Alan Strang another very(!!) different character and not a hint of Harry or Dan on stage. I agree with Carlos that Dan’s underrated as an actor and also that some of the fault must lie with the filmmakers who don’t make the most of him.
I also think (and I’ve said over and over and over again …..) that the role of Harry is so large and complicated for a teenager that it just isn’t possible for Dan to have been spot on all the time at the age at which he has been expected to play those particular scenes, all the emotional stuff for instance. A VERY different kettle of fish from even the next biggest teenage parts, Ron and Hermione, who at the moment are just playing teenagers at school and are tiny compared to the part of Harry.
But Dan gets away with his faults less than the other teenagers because he takes up so much screen time. THAT’s why he gets criticized more, THAT’s why he makes more mistakes, and THAT’s why I must always defend him. Sorry, I had to put those ‘that’s’ in caps because the line reminded me of Hermione in PS THAT’s what Snape wants. THAT’s what’s hidden under the trapdoor :)
Whatever your intent was, you sounded nasty. Please reread your comments.
Opinions are wonderful, but I think they should be based on something other than how a person feels at a given moment. Of course, everyone has a right to one, blah, blah, blah.
I totally disagree with your assessment of OOTP and My Boy Jack, by the way. There’s my opinion, and it’s based on what I felt were convincing performances. And many of the people I know, who are adults and not squeeing teens or Dan R. fanatics, thought the same way.
I don’t agree that the HP movies are “bad.” Flawed, maybe, but not bad. Know what? That opinion was not based on the length of anyone’s hair either.
However, we do agree on POA (Cuaron, at least) and Day-Lewis. So that’s something!