British actor Daniel Radcliffe has signed up for the final two films in the seven-part Harry Potter series, his spokeswoman said on Friday.
The 17-year-old, who has just won rave reviews for his performance in Peter Shaffer's controversial play "Equus," will start filming the sixth movie based on the bestselling books by J.K. Rowling in September, she added.
Radcliffe shot to fame in 2001 when he appeared as the boy wizard in the first Harry Potter film.
The hit franchise, which continues with the fifth installment called "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" later this year, has amassed around $3.5 billion globally at the box office and turned the teenager into a multi-millionaire.
Rowling recently announced that the seventh and final book in the series, called "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" will be published on July 21, but it is not clear when the film version will be made.
The first six books have sold in excess of 325 million copies worldwide.
2007-03-02 12:42:35 · 8 answers · asked by RAW DIVA™ 5 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
So he will be the only "harry" to play in the movies, isnt that cool?
2007-03-02 12:47:03 · update #1
Harry and the rest of the cast(with the exception of the one who now plays Dumbledore) have been awesome; I guess it's not his fault; when I think of Dumbledore, I think of Richard Harris' portrayal of him and anything else is not as good.
2007-03-02 12:52:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm really not looking forward to this movie. I mean, come on, the book was 800 pages!!! They are going to have to cut three-quarters of it. In the case of OOTP, I just don't see how they can be true to the spirit of the book that way...as, in my opinion, it is the book with the most character development.
That was a big problem with the Prisoner of Azkaban movie too....the first time I saw it I had not read any of the books yet though I had seen the previous movies. I thought my nephew distracting me was why I didn't quite get all that was going on. Then I read the book and realized that the movie really did a horrible job of filling in the details. I didn't "get it" because they left a bunch of stuff out. I mean, if you had already read the book, you kind of knew what was going on. But an objective reviewing of the movie proved to me that the director really messed up. Thank God they only used that director once.
The Goblet of Fire move was an improvement...but it totally sucked that they cut out so much of the book and did not film the scene of the Weasleys showing up at the Dursley's house to pick up Harry. That is easily the funniest scene in all the books so far.
2007-03-02 22:30:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yep. I'm glad. I wouldn't want someone else to do it now. It's not like he's only doing Harry Potter, though. Look up the play he's currently in: Equus. (look at pictures)
2007-03-02 12:52:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
That is great! I am glad he is able to branch out but he is awesome as Harry.
2007-03-02 12:45:21 · answer #4 · answered by Lil Miss Answershine 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
3 cheers!dan's harry..all d way home...thanx warner bros.
2007-03-03 03:34:18 · answer #5 · answered by Hermione J.Potter 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yeah!love ya people!(especially harry fans!)
2007-03-02 12:54:58 · answer #6 · answered by shygal 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
YEAH YES YES YES YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HE ROCKS! EVERYTIME i GO ON A TRIP i TAKE THREE AT LEAST i HAVE LITERALLY READ THEM 15 TIMES APIECE
2007-03-02 12:47:18 · answer #7 · answered by i love roseanne!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
whats your question?
2007-03-02 12:45:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋