http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...05/nequus05.xml

Personally as an adult I think it is a bold move, for him to be in the play at all. I say good for him. If I lived in London I would have bought tickets by now..Only because this is one of my favorite plays. (I had to do an evaluation /thesis-type paper on it in High School) But on the other hand..I wonder just how much it might hurt him in his relationship with the Harry Potter franchise. I know his younger fans will probably stick by him, it's their parents who might decide this is one step too far. I think it's a shame that it might come to that. I put much less emphasis on the play's so-called controversal scenes than others might, but people have to do what they think is right for their families. Particularly their children.

I agree with you all the way. Personally, I would not take my kids to the play due to the nude scenes, but also I don't think that they would understand that Dan is not Harry, he just plays him on screen.

It's good that Dan is chartering his course to be independent of Harry Potter series. Like you said, Dan is not Harry Potter, he's just an actor who plays Harry Potter and does a fantastic job of that. He cannot afford to let himself be stereotyped as Harry Potter, because what's going to happen to him after all the seven movies have been made? There have been many examples in past, where artists failed to outgrow their characters and ended up with promising careers cut short. I believe, Dan realises that getting stereotyped would be the worst thing that can happen to him and Harry Potter series as good as it might be, should not mark the end of his acting career.

I suppose it could, especially with parents of younger children. I don't think he cares that much, though, on the whole. I know he loves doing Harry Potter, and he has a relationship with the character, but I'm betting that he'd rather have an acting career that meant something, even if it meant turning some fans from him.

To tell the truth, I think the reason he chose this play was to make sure he broke free of the Harry stigma entirely. He could have done something less controversial, but the Harry Potter hype is so huge that it would take something considerable to shake it off. He couldn't have made a better choice, and at a better time, when the HP movies themselves are starting to get scarier.

That's if he pulls it off. I hope that he does, because if not, it could backfire in a nasty way. No doubt he'll be spoken of as the boy who couldn't do anything else but Harry Potter. He's done some smaller things, but even Julie Andrews, who is a brilliant actress, couldn't shake off the singing nanny stigma. She was very good in The Americanization of Emily, but audiences didn't bite on her being a serious actress. It's important that he does something out there.

I suppose he has so many fans that he won't miss a few thousand. I'm serious, though. There are larger things at stake, and he couldn't have made it more obvious where he's trying to go. Good for him!

It seems to me that it would be very difficult for a movie actor to debut on stage. Though Dan is rather experienced actor already, I'm not sure he'll be able to impress public in theatre. He even has no right to be simply “good”, he must be brilliant there. But if he’ll overcome difficulties and would prove his actor’s talent, he will earn the deepest respect of mine, and, of course, not only mine. So good luck, Dan!

Exactly! I just hope he can get good reviews. I know a lot of regular theater goers are already touting him as nothing more than a cash cow meant to bring attention back to the West End. While still others are saying the play will not be worth seeing because the minute he drops trou any teenage girls who managed to get their parent's premission to see the show will be all gasps and giggles. I hope this is not the case..I believe that Dan deserves a fair chance to explore his talent. He will not be Harry Potter forever, he will not be a teeange boy forever, but he will be an actor forever even if he never gets another role. It's only fair to let him be the actor he wants to be..

Ewan McGregor is my favorite actor, so I clearly have no problem with male nudity ::giggle::
Seriously though, I have nothing but well wishes for Daniel. He clearly loves playing Harry Potter, and is greatful for all the things it has brought him. Also he seems well ajdusted and mature, compairing him to other teenagers who have been in the spotlight. Nothing but drugs, boze and crazy sex most of them. And this is a very brave thing to do, he's still a teen, and most teens are all insacure about their bodies, and if people think that he didn't do absoultly brillantly, he'll only be seen as a kid who's just doing something radical to sake off his image.
I think of something Hayden Christansan said, that actors don't get type casted as often as they used to because there's like 5 big movies a year, verse one big movie every 5 years. Also he doesn't mind being most remembered as Vader because he loved being a part of Star Wars. I assume Daniel feels the same way.

I think it's great that he's taken this role in Equus. It seems to me he is trying to grow and stretch himself in his career and that's admirable. Live theatre in any capacity is daunting, but to try his hand at a well-known mature role that calls for more than a little exposure is brave.

I think he'll pull it off and I hope he does.

So many child stars get pigeon-holed early. To clamber out from under something as HUGE as the Harry Potter role is no small undertaking. I think he is a fine young actor and getting better all the time.

I'm sure we will hear more hullabaloo about the nudity factor, but I think Dan will weather it well. He - and many of the other young stars of HP - seems to have a good head on his shoulder. That's so refreshing to see in the entertainment industry.

This may not be the correct place for this post, but I felt the need to put it up.

First of all I congratulate Dan for being cast in the lead in Equus. This is a great play. I saw it in 1980 in New York with Anthony Perkins as the Psychiatrist. It is thoroughly engaging, and requires a great deal of "suspension of disbelief". That is, if the play is staged the same way. The set was very minimalist, so that various rooms from the Psychiatrist's office to the stable, to open fields, all had to be imagined.

What did not have to be imagined was the Nudity. Central to the plot both the leading actor (Played by Dan Radcliffe) and the leading lady get completely nude. (Or as I think they say in UK "Starkers".) To elaborate might be considered a spoiler for those unfamiliar with the plot. Fair Warning, just because Harry Potter is in the cast, does not mean that the play is "safe" for children, if a movie, it would properly be "R" rated.

I think, that most parents with an ounce of sense would realise that Dan is not playing a Harry type role and due to the nude scenes (some of us Brits still say nude) will not even consider taking our children to see the play.

However, Equus is I believe still part of the secondary school syllabus that is taught to 11 to 18 year olds. Any youngsters of that age taken to see the play I am sure would already be aware of the inclusion of nudity.

Actually, the nude scene is such a small part of the play rather than central to it's plot and is being hyped up no end. In another thread discussing this topic, Aethonon said and I quote



I think her words were eloquent and precisely to the point.

As a guy, same age as Dan, I think fair play to him, he appears to me to love the role of Harry Potter and has always expressed his gratitude for being given the role. He obviously needs to widen his image in the public eye though, and if truth be told, what better way to do that than by getting it out on stage.

If I was Dan, I would have definetly done the same thing, I think it'll work out great for his career, and I doubt it'll effect his performances as Harry Potter.

I agree, Killian. Being in a very similar position as Dan (though sadly, not fame and money wise ), at the start of life as an adult, I can understand his desire to spread his wings.

I say great for him. And if he lost the Harry Potter role, I still think he wins. He can't be Harry Potter for the rest of his life, but he can be a serious actor, and like you said, what better way than this!

I agree that it's not the most ideal thing ever to have your teenage kid watch live nudity, but I don't think I'm in a position to judge people's decisions on that. I haven't experienced it myself, so if people watch it and learn something, I think it's fine. MTV disgusts me anyway, and if you want to see mind numbing fleshy footage that just goes on and on, spend a day in front of the TV. Sure, the medium is different, but a stage performance is like a breath of air - it's there and then it's gone. And it's a good play.

I actually picked up the paper today at my school and he was front page news!!!!!
I agree with some of you that he isn't Harry, so he should have a fair chance at exploring his opportunity, but isn't he a bit young. I mean, i don't know the age restriction in Europe, but isn't he ONLY 17 years of age? Isn't that a bit young to perform nude on stage. I'm amazed that there hasn't been anything about what his family has to say to his decision. Personally, i believe this would definitely ruin his career with the Harry Potter franchise and i don't think he should do it. I mean, aren't there many other plays out there that can get him started without him starring nude. I don't know about you guys, but i think the parents have a point!

I think it is good for him to chart new territory. I was surprised when I heard he was in a play nude. The new photos that were released were so explicit. I mean, i didn't mind but still. It was a tad surprising. I remember when he was in Sorceror's stone.

How is it that everyone is so, ah, concerned about Dan appearing for a few moments nude but not about the content of the play? The play was fairly graphic in its description of the violence. If Dan were cast in the remake of a Termninator movie or the latest Saw flick, I doubt anyone would care. But let him flash a little skin ...

My favorite episode of South Park sort of touched on this. Yes, I do watch South Park, and I'm only embarressed when it makes me laugh or I find myself quoting it, like now.

EliasOsiris made a good point. God forbid, Mr. Radcliffe shows some skin. It's an art form, for crying out loud. He's not doing this for the sole pleasure of however many people will be viewing the performance on a given night. It's a good play. I liked it. Weird, in my opinion. But still good.

I don't know if this has been posted but an American morning news has already covered the controversy. I think this is just the beginning of all the parents who'll go "Whoa" when they catch wind of this.

I love it when the reporter called Dan Radcliffe "asexual" hahaha.

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/scp_v3/viewer...92&src=news

The play isn't for children. Daniel Radcliffe isn't a child, though yeah... some of his fans are. But he's hardly responsible for what they're exposed to. As someone said above, the plays psycological content is far more unsuitable for younger HP fans than seeing a perfectly natural and normal human body unclothed *sigh*. And unless it hasn't been made clear, Dan is also not 'Peter Pan'. He IS growing up, and that is normal too.

The publicity can only be good for him though in the end.

I am young myself, but I think the cast director made a good choice...to choose Daniel, he's obviously growing into his acting skills!
It shows how Daniel can do many movies besides Harry Potter and will continue when the series end (sad)...but I know he will be busy as if he is doing some other movies too!
How can anyone not give him gratitude (KUDOS!)...for this is a big step, it also shows he can do anything and prove to himself and others!
I think this was his choice and probably thought a lot about this, but I'm sure he believe this can benefit him and his carrer (sorry can't spell that word!).

~Theresa!

This morning in our local newspaper in South Africa, they had a really large article about Dan performing in Equus. Now I gushed and gurgled over the hot pics of Dan (though it was quite unsettling to see his "stomach hair" grow right round his belly button ), but I didn't like the fact that he was involved, and I quote, in "a lengthy nude sex scene...".

I know some of you say it's good that he's spreading his wings and to prove he can do something else other than Harry Potter, and I agree, but I have to agree with pheonix_phawkes on the nudity thing and being too young. He should maybe rather have gone with the option that EliasOsiris mentioned: being cast for the remake of a Termninator movie or the latest Saw flick.
That would have also been a huge change from being the heroic Harry Potter, to a murderous psychopath-- the total opposite to his most beloved character.

He should have maybe done this when he was much older and appeared in a more variety of films. All that he did now was take one giant step into a total different genre of acting. It would have been easier if he worked his was way up to this big, brave role. Because it really is big and brave appearing in a nude sex scene-- while you are still filming the rest of the Potter series.

Now I know I will not be able to watch this play, but if I were to, it would seriously make me look at Harry in a more different kind of way. A weird way. Because I'm used to him as Harry, and I know thats the whole point why he is doing this, to get away from the whole Potter image, but if he were to do it after the Potter films were over and done with, then it would be okay, becuase he'd then be free to tackle other roles in other films/plays with different genres.

I really do hope he will not be totally naked from head to toe, becuase thats just not right, especially at his age. Appearing topless is cool, but errr... doing a nude sex scene......... He's still so fresh in our minds as Harry Potter, and doing this then returning back to HP will not quite do the trick (no pun intended )

I think it's great he's trying to enhance his acting skills, but I'm afraid he chose the wrong route to do it.

Okay, he's seventeen - not even able to drink in Australia and just able to have sex legally as well - but he isn't a child either. He doesn't want to be Harry Potter anymore and is willing to get nude to do it - oh so brave.

I think it may be a going a tad to far with the sex scene but it will definitley rubb off the Harry Potter image.

Good on him for getting out there!

How can he not want to be Harry Potter anymore when he still has 2 more HP films to do?
He must decide what he wants to do. Either stick and wait till HP is done, or do this and don't go back to HP. He can't rub of an image, then try and recover it again.
He also can't say: "Look, I'm not Harry Potter anymore! I can do this now!" When back at the ranch, his next movie will be HP. Again. And then once again after that... if he lives that long, that is... and doesn't quit.. which I don't think he will.

He can do other movies still between HP, but he must not try to shake the HP image off.

I don't think he is trying to "rub off" the Harry Potter image - he is just trying to show everyone that he can act other characters that are completely different and more mature than a children's series. He just wants to show that he isnt a one series wonder who then become a nobody.

It is a big step for daniel and i can see where the controversy is coming from. Parents have been saying their children idolise daniel but what they do not see is that it is not daniel they idolise in the films - its harry potter! little ten year old boys and girls are not going to research daniel's background on wikipedia and such and then idolise him!

All the articles say in Australia is things such as "Hunky Harry Goes Nude" or whatever. It is NOT harry potter going nude! It is DANIEL RADCLIFFE going nude. So why is it such a big deal? Its like people are thinking its going to happen in Harry Potter as well! It is his choice and if he wants to do that, then i respect that. And by the way, is it even a sex scene they are performing? I just heard it was daniel 'simulating' while on a horse.

I agree with you on It's Not Harry Potter Going Nude-- It's Daniel Radcliffe Going Nude!.

But thats the reason why people say he's trying to rub off the HP image becuase everybody is idolizing HP rather than DR. He wants to show them that he's not just a beloved book character that took the world by storm, but that he is also someone that can practice other roles-- like having live nude sex on stage at age 17. But it's wrong of him to do that. Can't he just wait till HP is over and the shake the image off properly? Rather than shaking it off with this then returning back to HP all over again.

And what's stopping Dan from continuing acting after HP? I think he's jumping the gun too fast.

Oh and yes, in our newspaper it said he was involved in a lengthy nude sex scene and he has been practicing it for a week now with his partner, Joanne Christie . I was shocked to read this, as I was also under the impression that Dan will be 'stimulating' while riding a horse naked. >_<

Personally. I think everyone should give him credit for what he is doing, as its really gutsy and not many other people would do this. Also it was his decision, he obviously feels like he wanted to do this role. I think that some news productions are blowing this out of preportion a little. Like the newscast that Dae Lunae posted. He is growing up this was going to happen sooner or later he can't be Harry Potter forever.It was on the morining news in America, no one really knew about it until the pictures were released now its this world newsbreak. Its pretty funny. It was on the Soup and Best Week ever last night also. I will try to find clips. Definantly rated pg13-14 as it says on the show if i can find any. The soup and Best Week Ever are comedy-esque shows that make fun of celebrity gossip. And Daniel Radcliffe was aparently having the best week ever! lol

ok cant find them. sorry.

Daniel shouldn't get this job. Although he wants to get rid of the image of Harry Potter. It's a good thought. However, is it suitable to change his acting style in this way? I don't think he needs to take off his clothes since he is very popular now.

Also, the photos are really ....i don't know what to say about the photos. The worst thing is his image in this play and his partner. That woman is nude, I can see. She hugs Dan without any clothes! Dan is only 17 and he has a good image before the release of these photos. I am afraid that everyone also finds him to play this type of play or film after this play. Eventually, he can only play this type of film or play. That narrows the range of his acting styles but not to expense the range of acting styles. I hope he can think about it carefully. Does he want to act this type of story in the future?

Isn't there a touch of hypocrisy in all of this "should Daniel Radcliff be in Equus"?

Here we have a play that was written in the early 1970's and first performed in 1973 (1974 for American audiences). Probably many, if not most of the people reading this haven't even seen this play and yet feel free to condemn it (or more precisely Dan's appearence in it) based on what someone else told them. Isn't what that Mallory woman in Georgia is doing? Didn't she base her entire campaign on getting HP ousted from the Georgia public school system based on someone else's opinions of the books? Since when has the news media actually reported, the news? Seems to me that a headline screaming that Daniel Radcliffe will appear nude will generate more sales than Daniel Radcliffe portrays a mentally disturbed young man who mutilated several horses with a hoofpick. Now just why is that?

I did have the opportunity to see this play when it opened on Broadway, and believe me, there is no way my mother would have taken me to see a play with a lengthy nude sex scene. Unless this play has undergone some serious transformations, anyone attending it for the sole purpose of getting a good long look at Daniel in the all together, or for the lengthy sex scene, is going to be seriously disappointed. Read the book, watch the play, rent the movie, and remember, what you're seeing in the media is spin, not news.

Hey everybody

Do you think Dans new picks are two racy? I personally love them and think they are tottally hot. What do you think. Flames and Cheers are wecolme.

LLB

View Pic 1
View pic 2
View Pic 3
View Pic 4
View Pic 5

I'm a guy lol so no I don't think they're hot. However, I am really annoyed at all this commotion. Here a lot of people are critisizing him, and I reckon it's all stupid, I think good on him. Daniel isn't just Harry Potter, and he's doing a serious play, sometimes nudity is required, who cares?? Good on him!

Hiya! I'm merging these two posts with the existing Equus thread, just to keep things together.

As for the pics, I've mentioned already that I think it's a great career move for Dan. He needs to shake off the Harry Potter thing while he still can, and this is the best thing he could have done. The pics aren't too racy if you keep in mind that it's an adult play. It must be weird to see Harry Potter looking like that, but it isn't him, and people should be careful to separate the two things - they're very different.

He doesn't want to be just 'Harry Potter', that's all. He wants to show everyone he can act and isn't just good at one genre. Instead of being 'just Harry Potter' he'll be something different and people will respect him as a proper actor. He said he liked playing Harry Potter and it was still a challenge but Equus was so different and alot more challeging and he wanted to show he could do other things than just Harry Potter. He won't ever loose Harry Potter, but won't be just Harry Potter.

I completely argree with Capricorn. It's a great career move - best thing he could have done to get rid of 'The Boy Who Lived' image.

Yes I understand, but why get rid of the image now when he still has 2 more Harry Potter films to do where he still has to live up to the 'Boy Who Lived' image? I can understand if he's trying to get rid of the common and conventional young 'teenage boy' image, but he may not, because some say he's trying to shake off the whole Harry Potter image altogether.
But, if he's not trying to shake off Harry Potter, then he should do something more subtle than this blatant nude sex scene, because he then has nothing to prove to anybody. He won't also be just Harry Potter if he continues acting afterwards. He can then show the world that he can do 'experienced adult' acting too. Just not now, when he is still amidst the HP series.

Miss_Dobby,

Why is it that its okay for Dan to play a shallow psychotic killer in a B grade horror movie, yet not a complex human being in a well known and celebrated play?

As for your opinion that he should wait until he has completed the HP series before taking roles that are more shocking than HP, well maybe you should re-read the books. The only difference I can see is the fact that Dan has to appear a-la-natural for a scene or two. (Instead of what has been considered okay when he bared his upper half.)

The HP books have become necessarily more adult as they have progressed. (If you haven't noticed.) They're not phenomenally successful for nothing. There is just as much underlying psychological angst contained in the text as in the play you object to.

Nudity in a play such as Equus is storytelling and appropriate. It is insightful, thought provoking and poignant. Not sensationalism. (Or that other word that sums up certain types of published nudity which I cannot print here.)

And while I'm here; its just possible that the actor may have chosen this play on the merits of the story and the production team - not to mention (though, of course, I have ) that its a hugely sought after part - rather than the whole 'he's only doing it because it is something very different to HP' thing that people have latched on to.

I'm heartened to see that there are other posters above who seem to 'get it'.

Let me reiterate something here, Equus is more than just a play. It is considered one of the greatest plays in modern history. This is partially due to the way it has been staged. When I saw the play in New York, on Broadway, the entire set consisted of a raised square. The square was fenced by wrought iron, with entrances left on all 4 sides. Each of the 4 sides had a wrought iron bench that pivoted so as to be extended out, or folded up next to the wall. The "horses" were in fact characters played by humans. The actors wore solid black, and had Wire sculpture horse heads placed on their shoulders. They had horse shoes on their feet that were attached with rods.

Just as you are invited to see through into the main character's "mania," you literally see through every element of the set. Forget the nudity for a second, the play itself is quite a marvel. When Richard Burton did a film version, they ruined it by using real houses, real horses etc.

This is not "just another" nude role that Daniel has chosen to play, it is a classic. And believe me if his acting abillity is not up to it, HE WILL GET CANNED. And the play will continue on its own merits.

A lot of "child actors" never do movies again, because of the type casting. Some, were able to find jobs in the "real" theater, because if they stink it up, they can be replaced easily, with no one the wiser. So I say more power to Dan!

I find it interesting - and highly telling - that people who are upset over Radcliffe's choice of role in Equus are more upset by the nudity than the fact that he is playing a highly disturbed and violent individual. If I were walking down the street, I'd rather happen upon a nude man than a man given to blinding living creatures with stakes. In today's world, for reasons unfathomable to me, we are more upset by nudity/sexuality than we are by violence and mental illness.

I would also like to piggyback on other posters who have pointed out that Equus is an extraordinary piece of work, and the role Radcliffe has undertaken, an enormously complex one. He should be praised for his courage. If he fails to bring this character off, it will be up close and personal in front of God and everybody and his critics will be merciless.

A number of the actors who portray characters in the Harry Potter films have performed in the nude in other works. Radcliffe is not Harry Potter - he just plays him in the movies. If he is as talented as I suspect he is, he will have the opportunity to play many other characters during the course of his career. I look forward to following him.

I think you're right... kids shouldn't see this play

But we know that Dan is an ACTOR, for goodness sake. All the actors have to take chances, and if it didn't work out, try again 'til you make it big.

He's not just Harry Potter... he was David Copperfield, he appeared in the Tailor of Panama, he has made lots of movies. He's millionaire!! I mean, he's not gonna live as Harry Potter all his life right?

So I think it's ridiculous... not your topic, the ridiculous thing here is people's opinion... If they dont want their kids to watch the play, just don't take them to watch it... you don0t have to make a big drama or something

I don't think people are ridiculous if that is their opinion, Ani, it is the way they feel. They don't have to go to it, they don't have to take their kids. But it's OK for them to have an opinion, and it isn't ridiclous because it differs from yours and mine.

I thought this article quite good, even though the title is complete rubbish:

Equus Article

There's a fairly lengthy interview with Dan about his feelings about the role and the risk. Sounds pretty spot on to me!

I saw on tv that Daniel Radcliffe was going to be naked at a play and well...it kind of shocked me. It always does when i find out that an actor will appear naked on a movie/play, it is something really unfamiliar to me. I agree with the whole "want-to-get-rid-of-the-harry-potter-image" idea but it seems such a huge step to me...Like he is going way too fast, he is not even out of age yet...
I read the article Aethonon linked, it was quite interesting. I could not help notice that he is still just a teenager, he doesn't go out very often, he can't drink, drive, he probably likes staying at home with friends and all, and now he acts as an adult palying such a tough part. Equus seemed to me a very complicated story, by reading its synopsis, is he mature enough to be in that play? And isn't it like a commercial thing saying "Daniel Radcliffe naked"? It seems unfair to me, as if he is being used...

Well, the role he plays in Equus IS of a 17-year-old boy and that's Radcliffe's age. So I don't think he's too young to play his age! Daniel seems obviously mature enough to handle the role and the play - I think most 17-year-olds could handle the play.

Two American cable programs “The Soup” and “Best Week Ever” mocked Dan’s venture last week. "The Soup" held up the Equus poster with the comment of ‘too soon in the career for a nudie’ the second named Dan as winner of ‘having the best week ever’ while the humorists made lewd comments of congratulation. It may be a serious play, but the American media is laughing.

Sorry to say, but so is the Australian media. When it came out the news, daily telegraphs and all the other newspapers made unnecessary mockeries of Daniel. They referred to him as "Harry" and made him sound like he was 12 years old again trying to be an adult. Parents wrote in that they were disgusted by this.
It truly upset me because if it was any other actor trying to make a big name for themselves, it would probably be okay. But its "Harry Potter" we're talking about here and it even made the front page. Maybe its was Daniel's intention to do something controversial that would gain so much media attention, i don't know. But truly, it was cruel.
Yet I don't understand what it so bad about nudity and sexuality. We all go nude in some stages in our lives (e.g. when you have a shower) and even people in the past walked around nude coz there was no such thing as clothes. And as for sexuality...uh if there was no such thing, we wouldnt be alive if you get what i mean. So why is it such as offensive subject? In some plays (perhaps such as this, i haven't read it), nudity and sexuality is about celebrating beauty. Maybe that's how Daniel saw it. Not as a way to be seen as an object of desire for the audience.

Media worldwide are going to have a field day with this and try to turn it into Harry Potter nudity because that's what sells. But what sells and what is reality are often two very different things.

If Radcliffe pulls the Equus role off, he will have the respect of the people who matter. But we will continue to read leering headlines and hear jokes because that catches the attention of more eyeballs and that's what the media cares about.

It reminds me of Brokeback Mountain. That was also an amazing and serious film, but it was ripe for the picking in terms of joking and salacious comments. Equus with Daniel Radcliffe is the same way.

I think it's a shame that the media is playing this out as something to joke about. I'm really happy for Daniel that he found something he wanted to take part in and I say good for him for going for it. If he wants to do it, he should be allowed to without having to suffer from ridicule from people who think of him just as simply Harry Potter. He, obviously, can not play Harry Potter for the rest of his life, and as a professional actor it's time for him to start exploring other things he can do with his career, especially since there are now only 2 more HP movies to film. It's good for him to get into other things now so that when the HP movies are over, he'll have something to fall back on, instead of finding himself with no more opportunities and resorting to the same future as some other child stars have such as drugs, alcohol, etc. Like I said, I'm happy for Daniel and I only wish I'd be able to see the play and support his him in his role. But alas, I am stuck here in USA.

Not all round.

The first current affairs program I watched that reported this story was actually in favour of what Dan is doing in Equus. They only included positive comments from random interviews with people. The second current affairs show however did the opposite. They only included interviews with people who made negative comments. The way they conduct interviews with more often than not clueless people, asking leading questions to get the story the reporter wants sensationalised so as it makes it onto the eveing program is laughable. Negative or positive, both shows re-affirmed the reason I don't watch TV anymore. *I specifically turned the set on so I could see the two stories because of my interest in HP* Current affairs programs are often the worst. They're dressed up as indepth news presentations when they're no more truthful and valid than The National Enquirer.

Back on topic though - Hopefully Dan is shrugging it all off with his usual flair. I'd imagine the plays producers are grinning from ear to ear.

I agree. I love Dan .I wish him well.

Mod Edit: Hi there and welcome to the forums! You'll receive an Owl from a Head Auror soon, so please check your inbox for Owls waiting!

I love both the Soup and Best Week Ever, the jobs of the people on those shows is to make fun of famous people! To look for news without jokes, look toward more series media outlets. I understand pointing the finger at what's suppose to be the "news" but don't give joke programs more weight than they're worth.
And how do you define "kids"? When I was 14 I saw Trainspotting which has a ton of sex and drugs in it, and I thought then, and still do now, that its brillant. I didn't giggle like some preteen though the movie. In a lot of cases age can only be a number.
I think the reason Dan is doing this play is not to get attention, or shake of his Harry Potter image, but because he wants to be an actor. Wheter on not he's going about that the right way is a differnt thing all together. It seems to me like he's taking on a bit to much to fast, but if he pulls it off, I'll be proud to call myself a fan of his.

Early indications are that Dan's pulled it off big time!

Kiff posted this blog comment on the homepage comments concerning the preview tonight:

Cut and paste from a UK theatre blog:
(written two hours ago - though not by me)
Kiff.


(Expletive) fantastic!

I went to this with a sense of trepidation. I am not a fan of Peter
Shaffer (especially after the terrible revival of Royal Hunt at the NT
last year). I certainly am no advocator of the Daniel Radcliffe fan-base
either (can the boy actually act?). Richard Griffiths usually leaves me
cold too.

What I have experienced this evening is everything that is right about
theatre. A stunningly relevant and modern text is illuminated by an
intense and visceral staging. The performances are outstanding and
Richard Griffiths deserves the highest accolade for his performance: He
is the most exquisite actor and his narration drew me into the play from
the outset.

Daniel Radcliffe gives an assured stage debut. I appreciate this was his
first night onstage in front of a full house. He performed admirably.
Considering he is only 17, there were no signs of any nerves. He
captured the frustration and angst of his role accurately. I think we
will see much to come from this young man.

The rest of the cast all offer excellent support: in particular the
roles of the mother and father were notable.

Staging was always going to be the tough one. The genius of John Napier
has not faded. I must point out I was sitting on a "stage" seat (these
are situated above the back of the stage, behind the actors). This
unique vantage point did take some getting used to, but the unique
position affords an unprecendented view of the action (and of a naked
Daniel Radcliffe!). There are some problems with the audibility of the
dialogue at a few point and the lighting is somewhat noisy, but this is
a small price to pay for the experience.

The set itself is simplicity redesigned. Four boxes and an elevated
platform serve as all. The lighting adds the rest.

Mention must also go to the horses. I am never convinced by actors
masquerading as animals. Here (if you suspend your imagination enough)
the desired affect is obtained.

The finale of the play remains as shocking as ever. I am sure that every
parent and teenager will be able to relate to the issues that arise
during the course of Equus. The standing ovation at the end was never
more well-deserved (including Peter Shaffer himself).

My final comments must be directed to the director Thea Sharrock. For
someone so young, yet so talented, I can only wait to see her next piece
of stage work.

Go and see, I urge you!

A pretty impressive review from someone who seemed to go in with idea that they'd hate it. Yay!

I'm not at all surprised that Dan got a rave review, nor that he made the reviewer cry. His performance in Goblet of Fire as a teenager who mostly wants a normal life, but has the weight of the world on his shoulders makes me cry.
I think that the people who are HP fans and think that Dan should have waited to perform something like Equus till after he's done with the HP movies should think about how this expands his range greatly, and this will make for a greater performance in the last two Harry Potter movies. I have little doubt that he won't do the last two. Did everyone hear that JK Rowling will come to one of the performances? And I don't think that wrong to guess that a sizable amount of cast and crew members from the Harry Potter movies will see it as well. It must be very reassuring to have that kind of support for Dan. By the looks of the extra on the GoF special feature disk "reflections on the Forth Movie” they’re a family. It reminds me of a quote from Jonathon Franks, "it's only cheesy because it's true; it's great to work with the family again." He was talk about his experience directing and acting in Star Trek: First Contact.

So, I think Dan is doing a great job of advancing his acting career. I have not read or seen Equus, but from what I understand it is an amazing piece. I think the only reason parents are in a huff about the nudity and sex is because their children are looking up to Harry Potter (a good wholesome boy) which leads them to think that the kids are looking up to Daniel Radcliffe (also a good wholesome boy). Trouble is, Daniel Radcliffe really isn't a boy any more is he? It's time for him to start moving on to roles more appropriate to his age and maturity level.

Of course I want him to finish the HP series. Besides JK, I think Dan knows Harry best. To bring in someone new for the last movie or two would be a horrible idea. I do not think the movies would have the same feel, flavor, or any other adjective starting with F. It just wouldn't be the same. If they replaced Dan or any of the cast we have grown to know and love it would be like a bunch of random teenagers got together to re-enact the books for Video/Media Class..... with a much bigger budget. It worries me that WB said that Dan's role in Equus could lead to him getting replaced. I think they need to not be so uptight about it.

Good news for American fans - it looks like the producers of this London production of Equus are looking to bring it to Broadway in the Fall of 2007. No details of exactly when but there is more information at this link:

http://broadwayworld.com/viewcolumn.cfm?colid=16039

I've been listening to all the hooha all the way over here in Australia about 'Harry Potter going nude". And how all his young fans will be dissapointed in him. Well all I can say is Daniel is an actor . He is bound to be playing the part of someone else other than HP some time along the track.

I don't expect to see him in this play as I am not too fussed in seeing Daniel in anything other than HP. He has made a movie here last year that I might see one day but Im not rushing out to catch it.

All I can say is let him make his own mind up on what he does in his professional life. HP, JK Rowlings and WB do not own Daniel. Just the character HP.

Mrs Hagrid