Support NeoGAF

[Ghost_Protocol]

After watching the series again recently, it's become increasing clear to me that Daniel Radcliff, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson are, unequivocally, the worst actors in the Harry Potter film series. How in the fuck did that happen? How did side characters like Neville Longbottom, Luna Lovegood, Ginny Weasley, & Seamus Finnigan eventually all straight up embarrass them in the acting department? (Luna and Neville especially) It's not really fair to compare them to the adult actors, so I'm not going to do that, but man, after 7 films, Ron and Hermione were still painful to watch and listen to on-screen. Harry got a little better, but considering how long it took it's still kind of ridiculous.

How did you feel about their performances throughout the series?

 

[Log4Girlz]

I thought they were magical.

 

[jtb]

weren't they like... 10 when they were cast?

 

[Derwind]

I thought apart from the first and second movie the series was a convoluted piece of shit.

Books are superior.

 

[Verelios]

Oh boy.

Regardless of where I stand, and you can even keep the other two in the useless category, you actually came to GAF and denounced Emma Watson?

This is going to end well.

 

[perfectchaos007]

After watching the series again recently, it's become increasing clear to me that Daniel Radcliff, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson are, unequivocally, the worst actors in the Harry Potter film series. How in the fuck did that happen? How did side characters like Neville Longbottom, Luna Lovegood, Ginny Weasley, & Seamus Finnigan eventually all straight up embarrass them in the acting department? (Luna and Neville especially) It's not really fair to compare them to the adult actors, so I'm not going to do that, but man, after 7 films, Ron and Hermione were still painful to watch and listen to on-screen. Harry got a little better, but considering how long it took it's still kind of ridiculous.

How did you feel about their performances throughout the series?

Compared to the leads in Twilight, the leads in Harry Potter were Oscar worthy

 

[gdt]

They were serviceable enough I guess.

 

[120v]

i thought rupert and emma were pretty good, even as kids. daniel was just sort of ... there. i haven't read the books so i don't know if he was supposed to be the blank slate silent protagonist everybody could relate to or whatever. but i found it amusing how dull the title character was

 

[- J - D -]

Yes they should have recast the leads halfway through. That would have been very practical.

 

[Chuck Norris]

Radcliffe couldn't act, but Rupert was the perfect Ron and Emma Watson seemed like she had a stick up her ass, so she played Hermione perfectly

But to answer your question, these three were picked when they were about 8. Actors like Luna were picked in their mid-teens, and had already seperated themselves from the pack in more than just looks

 

[jtb]

also I don't see how the side characters were any better... it's not like they ever had any dramatic scenes to carry.

 

[Supermanisdead]

I still find it funny that Emma Watson spent the last 4 movies CRYING, but she can't fake cry for shit :s

 

[ivysaur12]

What the hell. Rupert and Emma were fantastic. Daniel was whatever, but he carried his own, I suppose.

Ginny? Now that was a role that should have been recast.

 

[Mr.Swag]

They were good enough to not get recast.
Could you imagine if they would have even recast in te middle of the series? No way the films would have been as successful.
And yes I know Dumbledore was recast, and funnily enough the first film in which Gambon is Dumbledore is the lowest grossing.

 

[wenis]

Because of money and the project they are attached too. All average actors with the role of a lifetime. Emma Watson would be a complete nobody without Harry Potter.

 

[takriel]

Ginny Weasley, are you serious? She's terrible!

I always thought that Rupert and Emma were perfect choices for Ron and Hermione respectively, but Daniel really only played a good child Harry, from Prisoner of Azkaban onwards he didn't feel right for the role anymore. He's just not a good actor imo.

 

[terribletwo]

they were all great

dunno what you're problem is

Harry looks just like Harry, Ron is funny, and Emma turned out hot (so good on that pervy casting director)

 

[ivysaur12]

Ginny Weasley, are you serious? She's terrible!

I always thought that Rupert and Emma were perfect choices for Ron and Hermione respectively, but Daniel really only played a good child Harry, from Prisoner of Azkaban onwards he didn't feel right for the role anymore. He's just not a good actor imo.

He's also way too short.

 

[Discotheque]

daniel radcliffe is playing igor now in a frankenstein film. for some reason i think that's perfect casting for him.

 

[Salsa]

ron guy is legit good honestly

at least good enough, he can be appropiately funny

emma watson and daniel radcliffe cant act for SHIT

 

[wenis]

daniel radcliffe is playing igor now in a frankenstein film. for some reason i think that's perfect casting for him.

Hunched in the darkness, only lines being "master" and "of course"? He's perfect.

 

[MattKeil]

To be fair to them, they didn't really have much to work with for the majority of the series.

 

[DominoKid]

I thought they were pretty damn good. Although Emma is nothing like I picture Hermione to be.

Ginny's awful in the movies

 

[KPJZKC]

Grint is actually a fantastic actor, but I'd agree with you in regards to Watson & Radcliffe.

 

[Discotheque]

Hunched in the darkness, only lines being "master" and "of course"? He's perfect.

i just picture a hunchback on him and it's brilliant. he always gave me igor vibes. like he'd be his better looking twin brother.

 

[brandonh83]

I thought they were fine. They had their ups and downs like most actors. I thought Radcliffe was great starting with Order of the Phoenix and on.

 

[DrSlek]

Emma started out shit. Got better.

 

[Timbuktu]

The woman in black wasn't too bad was it?

 

[Discotheque]

The woman in black wasn't too bad was it?

it was quite good. i think of the three leads radcliffe has the most promising future. he's not a great actor though, but he's getting cool projects.

 

[Yoshichan]

Are you straight up saying that Emma was a bad actor? Honestly, acting didn't get good until the fifth part (for obvious reasons), but overall, she was great.

Radcliff is horrible.

 

[odiin]

I'm glad people are finally starting to realize that Emma Watson can't act for shit. She's hot, sure, but so are a lot of other actresses. Some of whom actually have, you know, talent and stuff.

 

[brandonh83]

Radcliff is horrible.

That's a stretch. He was decent most of the time, great at other times. Consistently great in the last two movies. Yeah when he was like 10 he was shitty, go figure.

 

[h1nch]

I was thinking the other day about how psyched the producers must have been when they saw how attractive Emma Watson became once she matured? Because with kids you never really know. How many cute kids over the years grew into goofy, unattractive-looking adults? More than I can count. They hit the jackpot with EW, especially in the later HP films.

 

[Gettysburger]

Radcliffe was pretty bad, especially in the preteen years (particularly 2-4). Ginny was headshakingly bad, the whole romance aspect was gross. Luckily young Tom Felton was there to hold the series together.

This kid was born to play a villain, my favorite character in HP. His story is more interesting than HP's

 

[Slavik81]

The characters in the books faced a similar progression. I think you may be conflating the quality of the characters with the quality of the acting.

 

[Supermanisdead]

Emma Watson wasn't even the most stunning transformation, have you seen Neville Longbottom lately? He turned into a young Clive Owen.

 

[C4Lukins]

I thought Emma started out the best, but never really got any better. Rupert started out pretty awful, and got better with each film. Radcliffe was very mediocre throughout. He was really awkward in a couple of the middle films.I think they actually did great casting them, and none of them grew up to be ugly trolls which is a hard thing to predict with kids. As for comparing them to the other child actors, some were better then others but they were not the worst child actors on the set by any stretch.

 

[Coffee Dog]

Ron was pretty good. Mostly agreed otherwise.

 

[Marmaladefire]

Everyone knows Emma isn't a particularly good actor, but she's beautiful and seems like a lovely girl and it isn't ok to say out loud. Hearing her superb costars in Perks of Being a Wallflower try to talk her (and her awful American accent) up was kind of painful. Daniel has a good presence and he can hold a scene. He's not a cookie cutter hollywood hot guy and I think it works in his favor. I like him more for it anyway. I've never had much of an opinion on Rupert's ability, other than I think he'd be fun to hang out with.

 

[Yoshichan]

Emma Watson wasn't even the most stunning transformation, have you seen Neville Longbottom lately? He turned into a young Clive Owen.

Damn @ Neville IRL...

 

[daviyoung]

They're empty vessels for empty characters. Harry Potter isn't some nuanced high art for actors to flex their thespian chops, it's kids fantasy about wizards and warlocks.

Even Richard Griffiths was limp in it.

 

[grandjedi6]

it was quite good. i think of the three leads radcliffe has the most promising future. he's not a great actor though, but he's getting cool projects.

Radcliffe is smart. He realizes that even if he can't make it big (again), Harry Potter royalties + art films has him set for life. He'll just keep doing small stuff while slowly building his repertoire as an actor.

Watson isn't any better, but unlike Radcliffe, she seems to think she's a great actress and sex symbol. I expect her acting career to eventually stall out though her looks may keep her going for a while yet.

Rupert doesn't even try.

 

[Acorn]

Everyone knows Emma isn't a particularly good actor, but she's beautiful and seems like a lovely girl and it isn't ok to say out loud. Hearing her superb costars in Perks of Being a Wallflower try to talk her (and her awful American accent) up was kind of painful. Daniel has a good presence and he can hold a scene. He's not a cookie cutter hollywood hot guy and I think it works in his favor. I like him more for it anyway. I've never had much of an opinion on Rupert's ability, other than I think he'd be fun to hang out with.

I thought she was good on Perks, fantastic film.

 

[Vulcano's assistant]

To be fair, the secondary roles are full of famous guest stars.

 

[akira28]

I liked Luna, they didn't really get into the character much, but she was just supposed to be pale and weird, and I think she managed to pull that off.

I dug the book character and the actress though.

 

[polyh3dron]

Casting child actors is more or less a crapshoot.

Also, +1 to the "empty vessels" post.

 

[h1nch]

Also, I gotta say, Dan Radcliffe's method for fucking w/ the paparazzi was brilliant. He would just wear the same jacket and baseball cap every day in public, so every picture they took appeared to be from the same event/day, rendering them worthless. If I ever became a celebrity I would totally do that.

 

[Jarmel]

Radcliffe is easily the worst of the trio. The girl who played Ginny is equally awful.

 

[Arment]

All 3 were just fine. Get on my lawn.

 

[Peru]

I don't think the films are anything special, for the most part, but the kids are memorable, they were the right casting no matter how much you want to nitpick technical details.