Dan Radcliffe on Deathly Hallows, Cutting of SubPlots and Working with Michael Gambon


Jul 02, 2009

Posted by SueTLC

Dan Radcliffe is the subject of a new profile in the New Zealand Herald. In this run up to the release of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, we hear from the Harry Potter actor again on the dark material contained in the sixth film, as well as the lighter moments (There are huge opportunities for comedy in the sixth film and we use
all of them, even though my natural inclination is not towards that. I
love watching comedy but doing it is something else.”) Dan also speaks very positively about working with acclaimed actor Michael Gambon, who portrays Professor Albus Dumbledore and has such an important role in HBP.

“I’ve always loved working with Mike, but I’d never had any big,
in-depth scenes with him. It was exciting, knowing we were going to get
a good run at those scenes. For the first four months it was just me
and him, which was great. Actually when the rest of the cast finally
came along, I thought, ‘I don’t like this’. I’d gotten so used to it
being just me and Mike, who by the way is one of the best actors I’ve
ever worked with, and probably the least professional. Which makes him
an absolute joy to be around.
He takes nothing seriously, is always having a laugh, yet somehow seems
to turn it on the moment the cameras start rolling. Because of our
lengthy time together it meant we had the chance to build up a great
relationship off camera and hopefully that translated on to the screen.”

Of interest are new remarks about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, which is currently in production in England. Dan speaks about the decision in the past to cut certain subplots from earlier Harry Potter films, and notes that with two parts of Deathly Hallows, there will be very little that has to be omitted. Quotage:

I’m very happy that the seventh book is being made as two films,” notes
Radcliffe, “because I was worried they would have to cut important
scenes. For example in the fourth film you could cut out the house elf
sub-plot and it doesn’t affect the main story in any way. In the second
film they cut out the Nearly Headless Nick Death Day Party. In fact
that whole character has fallen by the wayside. The problem with doing
that with the final book is that there is nothing that doesn’t relate
to the main story or drive it forward. There’s not much you could cut.
So we’ve given ourselves the room and opportunity to do it justice.”

Thanks HPANA!

42 Responses to Dan Radcliffe on Deathly Hallows, Cutting of SubPlots and Working with Michael Gambon

Avatar Imageacciodiana says: That was a great read. It kind of seems wierd that he said that at first he didn't like having the whole cast there. I wonder... But anyway, I love all of this Deathly Hallow talk. I can't wait! Thanks Sue, for always keeping us informed! You're such a Hufflepuff, an amazing hard-worker. :DAvatar Imagepottershrink says: perhaps Dan could use his influence to persuade Gambon to read a certain few books??!Avatar Imageoldenoughtoknowbetter says: sound very wonderful!Avatar Imagefionadee says: dtz great 2 hear... awsum!! x] Avatar Imagekiwimuggle says: Oh, cool, July 9 for the release down here:)Avatar Imagesimos says: Well, I don't agree that all DH subplots are important to the main story. The deathly hallows and dumbledore's past are both irrelevant, but they can't cut them as the book is named after them ! Yet I am happy that they're including everything in.Avatar ImageWitchlover says: It makes me happy that the actors are all grateful that the film is being made into 2 parts. Not only does it show how much they love working on the films but that they care about it to a point where they want to "do it justice". Good job Dan!Avatar ImageGraymayne says: A very mature interview, not many twenty-year-olds have this self confidence and clarity about their future. His experience in Equus seems to have been an opportunity to judge himself in the real world outside of the comfortable ethos of the Potterverse.Avatar Imageginnyshiel says: He seems to know already what is important in life because he doen't just consume everything like most teenagers but he reflects on a lot of things!Avatar ImageJoRowlingRocks says: simos, how are the Hallows irrelevant?! Without them Voldemort wouldn't have died... Dumbledore's past isn't irrelevant either.Avatar Imageginnyshiel says: By simos (WBM) "Well, I don’t agree that all DH subplots are important to the main story. The deathly hallows and dumbledore’s past are both irrelevant, but they can’t cut them as the book is named after them !" It seems you don't understand the book. The deathly hollows are especially import to explain the story of the Elder Wand and why Harry can win against Voldemort. And Dumbledore's past is important to understand why Harry has doubts about Dumledore and the way he showed him. If he should better look for the Elder Wand or the Horcruxes. Avatar Imageforgetmenot_007 says: I really appriciate the decision of making two movies out of the book. A very interesting interview,thanks Dan!Avatar Imageascendancy33 says: Awesome news!!! Go Dan and Mike!!!Avatar ImageRavenclaw98 says: I cant beilive it is almost over!!Avatar ImageLindsayC14 says: yayAvatar Imagerhadamenthes says: Thanks for the interview. It's excellent to hear that DH will have very few cuts. I just got done reading DH for the 4th time and read it as though I was seeing the movie. Trying to figure out what they would be cutting. I'm excited as it sounds like there won't be nearly as many cuts of the subplots as we've come to expect from the films. The concern now goes back to how they are changing the story line to fit into the subplots cut from other films (i.e. Tonks/Lupin wedding being shown instead of Fleur/Bill's wedding).Avatar ImageHagrid 713 says: Good interview - I've always admired Michael Gambon as an actor and have seen him in some fine stuff, but I just haven't been able to like him as much as Richard Harris.....sorry, I just keep thinking how Harris would have handled some of the scenes and I think it would have been truer to the way I interpert Jo's books. Alas...earwaxAvatar Imagebookishgal says: Great interview!Avatar ImageKirsikka says: Wow, it is unbeliaveble that we got to DH already...I don't know what I'm gonna do after all this is over >:Avatar Imagebadger666 says: Very interesting. Good to know someone likes Michael Gambon's acting, lol.Avatar ImageCatherine says: yeah hardlu any cutting!!!Avatar ImageWON_TWO says: Good interview...Avatar Imageelaphantluv34 says: The Boston Globe did an interview with him. It was published in this Sunday's paper (6/28....I think). It was really neat.Avatar Imagehermyone08 says: yes, i can't wait for those scenes! :)Avatar Imageravensmith says: AWESOME, it give me real hope for HP7 when the actors make remarks like this!Avatar Imagedeadtree says: Dan always has interesting interviews. He has a lot of personal flair. Avatar ImageHermione Elizabeth says: Good interview! :)Avatar Imagegirlatty1 says: Bring it on already!Avatar Imagejrivas1284 says: AWwwwwwwwwwwwwwwAvatar ImageLillylove says: Loved Dan's comments about working with Michael Gambon. Avatar ImageDiamondWings says: Great Interview ILD!!!Avatar ImageDiamondWings says: Great Interview ILD!!!Avatar ImageBroomsnitch says: I'm glad Dan made the point that they did cut out some significant points in the book due to restrictions on the length of films. I'm thrilled that they are at least making an attempt to include all of book 7 into the two final films! I'm so excited to see them...!Avatar Imagebudgie says: I am glad to see the new interview releases. Only two weeks left now. Squeee!Avatar Imagejain says: i think Gambon is the perfect Dumbledore. For the first two films when Harry was very young and his headmaster was somesort of elder statesman, then Harris play the part to perfection. As Harry has got closer to Dumbledore, the relationship has mellowed. Harris could not have done that, not because he wasn't a great actor, but because of his age. I know Gambon is in his 70s, but hes a spritly 70. And he is a faboulous actor, who's taken over Harrris's mantle very well. In fact, truth be told i can't really conjour up Harris in the role anymore. Gambon has made it his own.Hopefully, with time all the doubters who can't see past the books will appreciate what a fine actor he isAvatar Imagestarlesswinter says: Simos, I agree with you on DD's story and the Hallows being pretty irrelevant, although I wouldn't say COMPLETELY so. Irrelevance aside, I think both subplots are utterly stupid. For one thing, it's almost insulting for Jo to ask her readers to suddenly see Dumbledore as some three-dimensional and complex person when he has acted for six books as nothing more than an entertainting, endearing, but generic mentor figure. (I can't wait to see how movies seven and eight try to pull this off, since they've done an even worse job at setting things up for the future.) We all loved Dumbledore, but the warmth we feel for him is no excuse for actual depth to his character. Hints about socks in front of the mirror of Erised are not enough to clue us in on his true nature. The idea that Harry would doubt Dumbledore after years of trust is fantastic, but then Harry goes right around in the end and blindly follows Dumbledore's plan; he doesn't even question it. I actually liked Dumbledore's story on its own, but it came so late in the story and was so disconnected to the plot of the series as a whole that it sort of made me angry. Not to mention that the series' only outed gay character is basically asexual for the majority of his life. As for the Hallows, they are relevant because they are symbols and because they eventually help in the defeat of Voldemort. I think it's telling of that nature of this novel that the keys to helping defeat the Dark Lord are only introduced in the LAST half of the LAST book, having never been mentioned at all beforehand. This certainly doesn't help fuel the "I-planned-it-out-all-beforehand" legend of the series; you'd think that the Hallows, if you had to choose anything in the series, would be one of the most important to hint at. So, I wouldn't say that these things are exactly irrelevant...just that they are badly handled. I do think Jo had some things in the last book planned, because there are moments you can tell she has been dying to write for years. On the other hand, I think she too vaguely plotted the ending. While the depth and detail of the series had shifted beyond her control, she kept the headings and subheadings of her outline when they no longer fit just right...hence all the forced connections to early books. On another note, I don't think anyone appreciates being told that they "don't understand" the book or the series. Isn't a story supposed to be open to interpretation? Ever since book six, I think that the series has taken a turn toward absolutes (even to Dumbledore analyzing Merope's backstory and making unfounded thematic and plot-based assumptions based on it that all turn out to be true) that are not really necessary, and so interpretation has taken a back seat to just listening to how the author explains things. By book seven, we had any thematic subtlety thrown away, and by Beedle the Bard the morals and themes of the story were blatantly forced upon the viewer by Dumbledore's commentary. Isn't this series supposed to NOT spoonfeed? Avatar Imagegirlatty1 says: Bring it on already!Avatar ImageethanHP says: From the HBP clips I've seen so far, it looks like Gambon has done a great job, so don't prejudge him so much, wait to watch the film. It looks like in the HP fandom it's uncool to speak well of Michael Gambon. He is one of the finest British actors, I wonder if most of you have actually seen him in anything else or you are just talking without knowing him at all.Avatar ImageDiamondWings says: Great Interview ILD!!!Avatar Imagecheeserpleaser says: The maturity and wisdom with which he conducts himself is impressive, coming from such a young actor. All of his colleagues in the film industry at a similar age should try to emulate his style, because he acts wise beyond his years. That said, I appreciate his thoughts on the prudence behind separating the Deathly Hallows into two films: there is little material in the story that a screenwriter could remove, as everything is absolutely critical.Avatar ImageDolemite says: problem is they cut so much backstory from earlier films it'll be odd to the non-readers.Avatar ImageKC Nox says: im so glad they decided to make two movies instead of cutting stuff

Write a Reply or Comment

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.