Everyone, remain calm, please step away from the monitor and do not rush. We have a link to the latest Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire picture. Yeah, sorry to disappoint you all, nothing that spectacular, but this does raise something interesting.
However, before that, check out the picture from Rope of Silicon showing Harry Snr and Rita Skeeter.
My girlfriend has read all the books and I bought her the DVD box set this year for christmas. So we watched all the movies, and they weren’t too bad (check out my own reviews). Since then I’ve been letting her know what’s been happening with the productions in the future movies, new Director, new writer, who is cast, etc.
“What are they going to do about Harry” she asked.
“I don’t know you’ve read the books!”
“No, I mean he’s already too old for the books. He’s only supposed to be aging a year each movie and the actors voice has already broken.”
Not being a Harry Potter fan that didn’t really bother me, but it was a good thought. For all the fans out there who are following the books it’s quite a big thing staying close to the original story, probably more so for J.K. Rowling than anyone. So what are they going to do?
I would have thought they are looking at changing the timelines of the movies, or maybe just glossing over the fact that he’s much older than he really is, and looks and sounds it! Surely they wouldn’t recast the main characters for the remaining movies, would they?
Personally, I can’t see them recasting him, that would be more of a shock to the audience than shifting the timeline and would glaringly hit those who hadn’t read the books as well as those that had. That would be hugely foolish and totally the wrong thing to do. Never mind the fact that the only cast member signed up for Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is Jason Isaacs (Lucious Malfoy) and there isn’t anyone listed as signed for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, just an oversight, or contractual work in progress?
Yet would they? Would they risk changing him out? HP fans (I don’t mean sauce), what are your thoughts? Non HP fans too. Do you think they could recast him without much upset, or is a timeline shift or is clever post production called for? As a few have said before, if they can make a hobbit, they can make Daniel Radcliffe look younger!
I think they should keep the all the actors of the other movies. They should not change the actors (harry is hot, ron is kind of)because they are very good and everyone likes them.it has been three years now is the fourth year if they change the actors it wont be any fun at all.I dont think that if they change the actors ll be watching the movies anymore just like i wont.they wi
Keep the original cast it doesn’t matter how old they are,they’re good actors
Theres no need to ever recast or replace any of the actors (unless someone passes on – such as Richard Harris has). The young actors still maintain the needed age range to portray the characters; Daniel Radcliffe is a barely a year older than his character is (no matter), Emma Watson is the exact age, Rupert Grint is a year or so older than the character portrayed and so on, with the exception of Tom Felton(Draco Malfoy) who is 18 though his character [in filming] is 14~ but I doubt he will be replaced, as he plays a convincing young person. Age is not an issue in the case of these films, as long as they continue to stay true to the books ( J.K.R won’t let them stray any farther than they have). If they were to recast or in any other way stray ~ they would likely face a massive international boycott.
As for those of you who seem to disagree with the casting choices, perhaps you shouldn’t be watching, as you are not pleasable, but rather should stick to the books and your imagination. I personally have been growing with the books and am merely a year older than the sixth years in the book just released. I must say, I quite appreciate the art which is casting for a film, as I am an actress and director [it is very difficult to search the nations for a cast, and they have superbly found character matches that are wonderful actors!]
it is my personal opinion that the cast chosen for the films were picked by someone with horrificly poor taste ( worthy of the mighty bat bogey hex that ginny is famed for). i think that the characters originally looked too young and are only now beginning to suit how they should have looked for book three. the girl playing ginny is no where near as pretty as ginny is described as being and come on, maybe ron is supposed to look a bit dumbfounded but seriously, rupert grint looks like monkey whos just started a swift recovery from a long addiction to narcotics. daniel radcliffe looks like a poncy little english school boy not the scrawny but handsome rugged young boy that harry potter is supposed to be. the films bacame a true failure at the point of casting, completely letting down the books!!!
they would lose soooo much of thier audience it would not even be funny. i am a die hard hp fan and i gaurantee i would not watch a movie with different actors i mean look what happened to home alone 3 when they switched mackaulay culkin, nobody even saw it. and remember as the actors are aging so are the audience besides ron and harry are hot don’t change them
So the overwhelming view is that there’s no way the should recast and that the timelines can be moved to fit in with them.
Anyway, doesn’t seem like anyone is really that bothered if there are some physical discrepencies between the actors actual ages and the book timelines.
Besides, I think they have more pressing issues to concern themselves with, for example getting a good movie!
No way! can they recast the main characters it would suicide for the producers if the public get used to a character they cant suddenly replace them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
P>S ToTally agree with what Astro Girl said!
If they ever think of recasting Daniel or any other actor/actress for that matter because they’re “too old for their characters”, they should first perhaps consider they age of Shirley Henderson, who plays Moaning Myrtle. In the books she died at about 16 (not sure what age exactly) and therefore her ghost is also 16, yet the actress playing her is 39!!!! Yes you heard correctly, 39. So i therefore conclude that there is absolutely no need whatsoever to recast any character purely because of age!
Age is really a non-issue as stated above hardly any actor actually plays their age.
What I find particuarly fun about using the same cast is we are watching these characters grow up in the books and on screen. The actors are all within two years of what they should be.
In this forthcoming movie our main characters are 14, so what if that means they’re 16 in real life?
It makes no sense to recast, unless one of the actors chose to try something different.
Regarding that comment on how they need to make Hermonine look dorkier in the movies as she gets prettier . Well, in book 4 she begins to pay more attention to her looks, so I think Emma Watson can continue on staying cute.
Lastly – I want to comment too on Harry’s hair – I’m so glad Alfonso took a moment to correct that detail which had been bugging for the last two movies. Yay for the messy hair!
I feel that they should set a trend. I mean doo they really have to make a movie for each book. Lets skip around a little. Don’t put a great deal of pressure on Daniel’s adam’s apple. How about J. K Rowling write a lot of books so we can jump ahead. Who said we need a visual of all the books anyway?
I’ll echo some of the earlier responses and say that I don’t think that the age of the actors will affect the casting of the films. It’ll come down with whether they WANT to play the character or not.
I think the issue of age and Harry looking older has come to the forefront now because when the books started Harry was a pre-pubesent and has developed though puberty with out any in-book notice of it (that I can remember). Each year Harry is a year older but our own images of him (at least my own) still have him as being really young.
Daniel Raddcliff and the other actors were all pre-pubesent actors when they started the roles and have since deveopled though puberty. That is a huge change (as we all know). However, as the actors pass though that phase, the physical changes from year to year will be less dramatic.
Re. the last comment about Ron, the books describe him as tall and thin. So actually he now looks more like Ron is supposed to.
Do they look a little older than they should be? Just say a wizard did it. Yeah, that’ll work.
Anyway, I think Rupert Grint is the oldest, and he’s 16 I believe. Even though he’s much taller than I’d figure he’d be, it’s not like he’s too old. Heck, I watched Buffy when the actors playing Cordy and Xander were in their late 20…and their characters were supposedly 16 or 17.
IF they plan on doing all of the movies (which could get difficult in OOTH and onward), I would hope they’d keep the three principles.
I’d rather suspend belief on his age than see a new face. :)
I think they shouldn’t recast Dan.
I mean can’t they use modern tecnology
to make him look younger?
Yeah, the age thing’s not a problem. Once your characters get to the age of about fifteen, the possible age range for your actors shoots up, could be anything up to about 30. (The guy who played Tom Riddle in Chamber of Secrets, supposed to be only a few years older than Harry then, was in his mid twenties.) But I can see them recasting some of the roles after Goblet of Fire, however – Radcliffe and some of the others might not want to carry on, and Harry changes character quite radically in book 5. Goes all angsty and rebellious. Not sure how well Radcliffe would carry that off.
Oh, and I totally agree about the hair thing. Harry is tousled. That is his nature.
I am a big HP fan, and just wanted to note, its great that is hair is finally messy, like it should have been from movie one on…
-Owl
I’ve read the first 4 Harry Potter books. I saw the first two movies before reading the first two books but read the third book before the movie. Don’t intend on reading the rest of the Potter books but that’s another story.
I think whether Harry or any of the other major kid characters gets recast or not will more likely come down to whether Radcliffe actually wants to be Harry Potter in 4 more films. That’s a lot of time investment and there’s certainly the risk of being typecast as Harry.
I agree with others that assuming everyone’s willing to stay on for 4 more movies that the age factor won’t be much a problem. I guess the audience may have to stretch their imaginations for installment #7 if it comes to that but who knows how the actors will age. There’s also something called makeup that I think would easily compensate for such age discrepancies if they were really an issue.
I never saw it as a big deal either. In Hollywood it is quite common for 20 somethings to play high schoolers, so why it should be any different for Harry Potter is unclear to me at this point.
But for Dough who thinks Harry is something of a geek, I would disagree. In the books he and Ron suck at academics in general, and they’re not heavy readers or…anything that would make them “geeky”; he’s simply something of a misfit. In fact Harry is really more of a jock with his skills at Quidditch. I think Hermione is the one they should be working on to look more nerdy, as the actress is becoming prettier and prettier every year. They need to get her some buck teeth and a horrid wig. :->
i am with mark, you never see an actor playing their age anymore, why should this be anydiffernt?
I mean, they have guy that is 27 playing superman in highschool, it is not a big deal.
I’m not knowledgeable with Harry Potter-ese, but how old will the character be in the 7th (and presumably final) book? Is it 18? How old is Mr. Radcliffe now? 15?
Perhaps they should shoot 6 and 7 back-to-back, as soon as Rowling brings out the 7th book. Radcliff and the rest of the young cast could probably play 18 when they’re 21. Happens all the time in this business — 25-year-old female hotties playing 17-year-olds, and such.
I think it would be something of a shock to recast him at this point. His face has been absolutely everywhere and even for people who haven’t seen the movies (I suppose there are a few…) he is the face of Harry Potter. The best thing they could do is stop dressing him up as a grown up. Harry is kind of a geek and an outsider and I don’t know any geeks and outsiders who ever dressed cool or had cool hair. In youth, looking cool often makes you seem older than you are (in old people, trying to look cool too often makes you look desperate!). I think they should stop trying to make him seem older and he’ll look, once again, like the boy he’s supposed to be.