2007-02-11 16:15:40 · 9 answers · asked by JAZZY 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Theater & Acting
No, I think he wasn't too young. Too many people think he's so young because of the Harry Potter movies. I think he needed to do something drastic like this in order for people to realize he isn't just Harry Potter, he's an actor.
2007-02-11 16:19:38 · answer #1 · answered by Libby R 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is a great role for Daniel Radcliffe to do at 17. I was just about that age, myself, when I got to see Tom Hulce perform the same role in Equus. (And this was in the U.S., where nudity is a bigger deal.) As I recall, the lighting for the nude scene was rather dark. But in any case, pulling off such a stage role is going to be absolute proof that he's got the acting chops. The stage can't in any way be compared to film roles (where you can create the illusion of full nudity without making the child actors be stark naked). On the stage, there are no multiple takes to get a scene right. And Equus is a powerful story. Kudos to Radcliffe for going after this part!
2007-02-11 17:38:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is about the 1,000th question on this topic...frankly, I'm getting tired of them.
Have you even read the play "Equus"? If not, that should probably be your first stop. If/when you do, you'll see that Radcliffe is actually the perfect age to playing Alan Strang, and you'll also see that the nude scene is indispensible to the development of the plot.
Radcliffe is in the process of attempting to prove that he's REALLY an actor. Leave him be.
2007-02-12 01:52:37 · answer #3 · answered by shkspr 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What he needs is to do diverse issues. the youngster is 17 or 18 years old (do not quote me reason i do not recognize) enable him do what he needs. everybody receives bare. it truly is somewhat of artwork that purely so occurs to operate nudity. If he were starring in porno or posing bare with children or some thing crude like that then i ought to comprehend why human beings will be disenchanted. notwithstanding it truly is artwork. you do not see Radcliffe's penis each and every time you google him and also you gained't see it until eventually you purchase tickets to the tutor. stay and allow stay. Peace!
2016-11-27 02:57:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think he was too young for it. Sure, he may be young but he might need to get out that Harry Potter image. He's not growing any younger, and it would be quite awkward for him to be stereotyped in that kind of "for kids" role when he's older. So I guess this is rather a new breakthrough for him.
2007-02-11 20:41:56 · answer #5 · answered by ricerais 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I mean look at Dakota Fanning's newest role and Brooke Shield did a young prostitute role. So he is actualy old compared to these 2.
2007-02-11 16:23:56 · answer #6 · answered by Joanna C 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Why is nudity automatically considered dirty? The play is a great work of art, the nudity is very brief. It is not pornography. DR has been in the business for years, he is mature enough to make his own decisions.
2007-02-12 04:42:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. He has to get money. Who s going to pay the bills after Harry Potter?
2007-02-11 19:10:45 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. 'Equus' is a serious play, not a bit of porn.
2007-02-13 16:18:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋