By Matthew
What’s to become of the fella?
The poll is there on the right side bar.
New Poll: The Fate of Daniel Radcliffe
Previous post: Hog’s Head PubCast #58: Movies, Books, and Culture
Next post: August Giveaway Vote
Harry Potter News and Commentary
Networking
-
Search The Hog's Head
Custom Search -
Recent Comments
Joivre on Tell Us a Story
Red Rocker on Tell Us a Story
Aaron Alford on Tell Us a Story
Arabella Figg on Tell Us a Story
korg20000bc on Tell Us a Story
Travis Prinzi on Tell Us a Story
PotterMom05 on Tell Us a Story
Polls
Loading ...-
Deathly Hallows Read Through!
Half-Blood Prince Read Through!
{ 12 comments… read them below or add one }
If Dan Radcliffe never does another thing in his life besides HP, I will weep every time I think of him & his 20 million or more pounds in the bank.
Mainly I’ll weep because I don’t have the same amount of money.
What, no “Who cares?” option?
I pick: none of the above.
By all accounts, Radcliffe is seriously trying to learn his craft. And chances are, may become a competent actor.
Problem is, the world is not interested in him as a competent actor. They see him as Harry Potter. They will try to milk him for all of his “Harry Potterness” until he’s squeezed dry. At that point, he may get roles in plays which don’t get national notice and in movies which may or may not make it to the theatres. Whether he’ll persevere as an actor when it come to that will be a test of his drive – and character. As revgeorge indicates, above, he’s got enough money that he doesn’t have to act unless he wants to.
His eventual dilemma reminds of several others. Prince Charming, in Shrek the Third, reduced to self-parody because that’s all he had left to sell; Leonard Nimoy after Star Trek; Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher after Star Wars. I’m also thinking of the ones who did go on to be successful after unprecedented early glory: Johnny Depp, Mark Wahlberg, Harrison Ford, Jodie Foster. Does Radcliffe have what it takes to overcome Potter? Does JKR, for that matter?
Radcliffe is a guy who certainly demonstrates some talent, and he’s been smart enough to attach himself to something beyond Harry Potter.
The trick will be can he find something that allows him to stretch beyond Harry Potter. Let’s not forget that many people who have had one great pivotal role and then flamed out did so because they had trouble getting casting directors to see them as someone else.
Johnny Depp accepted the fate/challenge (and reveled in it) of taking on beyond-bizarre roles. Radcliffe strikes me as the type who is at least willing to try that route. Whether he’s got Johnny Depp’s chops is another question.
Rupert Grint presents a more interesting challenge to me. I sometimes get the sense that he is woefully underused in the films, and by all accounts he’s a wonderfully quirky guy.
He’s only 19! And he’s done some remarkable work. Even if “Harry Potter” is the main thing he’s ever known for, I can’t see him letting it limit him. And I don’t understand why anyone thinks it should depress him. He’s had a wonderful time, earned a lot of money, and learned a craft. What blessings! By all accounts, he’s an intelligent young man interested in a lot of things. I could easily see him becoming a director or a screenwriter even if he doesn’t stay an actor.
I think Radcliffe will do just fine. He may not ever be in anything as big as HP again, but he seems to have the desire & drive to continue acting, whether in film or theatre.
Now, I’m not sure I could ever see Evanna Lynch as anybody but Luna.
I think Red Rocker’s got a much better question, will JKR even be able to overcome HP? Talk about being too successful for your own good!
Of course, it remains to be seen. But I think she’s got a pretty hard row to hoe.
yeah, JKR does have her work cut out for her. But then she’s got an advantage: she’s got the same kind of talent that made men in New York wait at the docks for the boat from England so they could find out what happened to Little Nell. She’s a story-teller, my friends. And that can’t be denied.
I think he’s heading for a career in British acting.
I think that Dan will do just fine as an actor–he’s already made some movies (and done a play) that aren’t just a rehash of Harry Potter. And he seems genuinely interested in either continuing to act or to eventually directing.
I agree that Rupert Grint has been underused. I could see him going more the route of Johnny Depp, taking really quirky parts to show that he isn’t only capable of being Ron. Of course, he doesn’t look like Depp, and I think that was the reason Depp took such off-beat parts–to show that he was more than a pretty face. But the idea is the same–any actor has to vary the parts they accept or they end up being pigeon holed.
Best example? Alan Rickman. It would have been so easy for him to always play the villain, but he’s only played a few. He’s been in just about every kind of movie, except horror, and I hope he continues to skip that one–and he’s shown that he can play all those different genres.
Pat
Had to go back awhiles to find – and resuscitate – this thread.
Just read a review of Equus on Broadway, starring Radcliffe, by a serious theatre critic – not a fanboy. The words used to describe Radcliffe were “clearly a stage actor” and “opaque intensity” and “more Voldemort than Potter” and the possibility raised that he’d make a good stab at Hamlet by and by.
Sounds promising.