Happylittlegreensquirrel Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 App Warner Bros are pizzed off, 'cos it's ruining his sweet boy image They think parents won't want their kids to see him in HP after doing the play. Is it just me, or won't most kids not know/realise/care that it's the same person? have Warner Bros forgotten he is an actor and if they are lucky enough to get lots of work they do tend to play different characters ( unless they are Hugh Grant and all the characters are the same ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Femme_Pires Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 I agree that at 17 he can make up his own mind. He cannot live as Harry Potter forever and there was bound to be some time when he did something 'controversial'. Oh and he is also gorgeous but i've been saying that for ages and feeling quite wrong for it too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanishPastry Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 ( unless they are Hugh Grant and all the characters are the same ) Too true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K9Fran Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 Warner Brothers can't be too worried, because Sarah Kennedy was saying Daniel has signed up for the last two HP films. (and yes, I think he's worryingly phooooooarr too!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotslass Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 I think he's too young for me to get the hots over. Not sure about the moral side of it. Just seems creepy to me, but then so did the adult women drooling over whatsisface out of POTC (the young effeminate one). Not judging anyone by saying that, just not my cup of tea. I prefer them post puberty *lmao*. Edited to add: Orlando Bloom, that's the one. He's older than Britney was when adult men started drooling over her, or Billie Piper back in her pop days. Doesn't do it for me though He's younger than my children, so I'm afraid I just feel that someone should make him put his shirt on, and possibly his jumper too. I feel pretty uncomfortable about men of 40-odd ogling 17 year old girls, I have to say, so for me, there's no difference. I hope people don't go to see Equus just for a look at a boy's bottom - and if this lad is a decent actor with a future, he'll be hoping the same thing. As boosboss pointed out, the character is suppose to be having a breakdown - if the audience is only there for the view, Radcliffe is not succeeding in the role. Liz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Femme_Pires Posted March 1, 2007 Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 I feel pretty uncomfortable about men of 40-odd ogling 17 year old girls, I have to say, so for me, there's no difference. I'm only 25 though... It still feels slightly wrong though even though I am still quite young but then its only looking isn't it. I do hope that people don't go to the play just for the DR bum factor because that not only takes away from the production but also his acting ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimthecat Posted March 1, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2007 There was an article about his first night in the mail today. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/fema...in_page_id=1879 Did anyone see the film? I couldn't watch anything like this because I wouldnt be able to stop thinking of the horses he blinded. Alison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Canis-Equus~ Posted March 6, 2007 Report Share Posted March 6, 2007 From what ive read of the film - i think anyone going to see it PURELY for DR's botty would quite probably be in for a bit of a shock, its NOT about a 'nice' subject at ALL. Yes...... tis wrong and foul and mucky to consider the prospect of rudery and Harry Potter........... Ill say no more :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yena Posted March 6, 2007 Report Share Posted March 6, 2007 To me he's HP, if I want to see it I'd be sat waiting for him to get his wand out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pottydotty Posted March 6, 2007 Report Share Posted March 6, 2007 I prefer a man, not a child - when Daniel has finished growing, then I'll take a peek! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K9Fran Posted March 6, 2007 Report Share Posted March 6, 2007 The pics I've seen ain't of no boy!! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yena Posted March 6, 2007 Report Share Posted March 6, 2007 The pics I've seen ain't of no boy!! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pottydotty Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 The pics I've seen ain't of no boy!! ;) Oh my Well just think, he still has some growing to do, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonniebird Posted March 9, 2007 Report Share Posted March 9, 2007 Lets put it this way, you don`t only see his bum He runs around the stage naked for about 10 minutes. You see everything. As Joe said, anyone who finds the scene erotic, well, I wouldn`t. It is very harrowing and you are so engrossed in the play, therefore seeing him and the girl buck naked is not erotic or a turn on in any sense of the word. Daniel Radcliffe, in my opinion as a huge Harry Potter fan, is "wooden" as Potter. But wow, did he surprise me in the play. What a fabulous actor. He really gives it his all. As for him being expoited, nah Has he got a fit little body? Yes is the answer. He`s very attractive as young men go he does have some growing to do though sorry Daniel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merledogs Posted March 10, 2007 Report Share Posted March 10, 2007 Let's face it, men's dicks are ugly. I find a topless man far more sexy than a naked one anyway (and I prefer a man to a boy like Daniel Radcliffe) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts