-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Harry Potter movies: what will they do now?
- Thread starter Ecrofirt
- Start date
- Status
Felidae_Khrall
Member
Ecrofirt said:
Harry Potter at Gryffindor U.
Well, Rupert Grint (Ron) is 16, Emma Watson is 14, and Daniel Radcliffe is 15, so they aren't that far off at all. The only one who looks slightly out of place is Ron and it works well anyway because he's supposed to be taller and lankier than the other kids. They just need to keep pumping these movies out every year if they want to keep the same actors.
The Shadow
Member
Drensch said:
Book 1 Harry is supposed to be 10. Book 3 (Prisoner of Azkaban) he's supposed to be 13. They're not synced up that closely and the movies are a little ahead.
He's supposed to be 17 (I assume anyway) by the 7th book. The actor that plays Harry Potter probably won't pass for a teen by the time that movie is made.
Flaming Duck
Member
Cuaron (At least I think it was him) said in a recent interview that he didn't think it would be a problem for them to play the roles in all seven movies. They really aren't *that* far off. Besides, the chick who played Moaning Myrtle in the second movie was like 30. It can be done 
Anyway, none of them are even sure they're going to stick around for all seven.
Anyway, none of them are even sure they're going to stick around for all seven.
The Shadow
Member
The Hound said:
Well, there's the movie delay which isn't so bad, but the 6th and 7th book haven't been written yet. Book 5 was just released this month.
You do realise that the characters in the Harry Potter books they're playing are aging at exactly the same speed as the cast that plays them? If they fit into the roles in the first to third movie, then they'll fit into the roles in the fourth to seventh movie.
In the last book, Harry, Hermione and Ron are supposed to be like 16 anyway. And Danniel Radcliffe will only be about 17 then, Emma Watson 16, and whoever plays Ron uh...18?
If anything, as they get older, the difference will matter LESS. Because as you get older, looks between people of different ages is alot less apparent.
Book 5 was released a year ago, and the next one is coming out next year. ;o So they can easilly keep on track.
In the last book, Harry, Hermione and Ron are supposed to be like 16 anyway. And Danniel Radcliffe will only be about 17 then, Emma Watson 16, and whoever plays Ron uh...18?
If anything, as they get older, the difference will matter LESS. Because as you get older, looks between people of different ages is alot less apparent.
Book 5 was released a year ago, and the next one is coming out next year. ;o So they can easilly keep on track.
The Shadow
Member
Hamfam said:
Doh. You're right. Got the year mixed up.
The publishing pace of the books isn't guaranteed. It was three years between Goblet of Fire (2000) and Order of the Phoenix (2003).
Warm Machine
Member
As the characters age from year to year they are fine. Hermionie's age is bang on. The two other leads are 1 and 1.5 years ahead of the game. Harry is supposed to be 14 or 15 in the 3rd book so they are pretty close anyway.
The movie's schedules just have to keep pace. By the time Rowling finishes the 7th book the movies will probably have almost caught up.
The movie's schedules just have to keep pace. By the time Rowling finishes the 7th book the movies will probably have almost caught up.
krypt0nian
Banned
Goblet of Fire is out November '05.
Check it out here at Coming soon.net http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=4659
Check it out here at Coming soon.net http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=4659
Cerebral Palsy
Banned
They are making more Harry Potter films? Damn =/
The Shadow
Member
Cerebral Palsy said:
It's a hot property. I'm sure they'll do all 7.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
I think they could have used the same actors if the book series was finsihed. I think they can get away with using the trio for the 6th movie so long as teh 6th book comes out before the 5th movie comes out, but i don't think the 7th book will even be finished before they all turn 20.
Screaming_Gremlin
My QB is a Dick and my coach is a Nutt
DrForester said:
By that point it won't really even matter. Twenty year olds play teenagers all the time in movie and TV shows. I think the only thing that will keep the cast from doing all seven of the movies is if Dan, Emma, and Ruppert get sick of doing their roles and quit.
Flaming Duck
Member
No, Chris Columbus directed the first two and Alfonso Cuaron directed the third. Mike Newell is directing the fourth and no one has been named as director for the fifth yet (it's still way too early). I don't know how much they're getting paid, but yeah I imagine it's making them pretty much. The girl who plays Hermione said in an interview though that all her money is locked away and her parents won't let her have any of it until she's like 21 or something, haha.
The Shadow said:
He turned 11 at the beginning of the first, so 14 3rd and 18 7th. Not that much of a difference, but it's hardly unusual for actors be a few years older than their roles (how many teen drama actors have been in their mid 20s-30s or something equally absurd?). So as long as they can keep filming a year and a half, I don't see why it can't work.
Edit: Realized that I don't know how to add. Shadow's ages are right for the number for books 3 and 7.
Flaming Duck
Member
ohamsie said:
Hell, she was older than that. Assuming she's already had her birthday this year, she's 38. So she would have been around 36 when she was filming the part.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0376602/
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
all depends on the person, some actors can continually play younger characters, some age enough where it isn't likely. You can't count on these 3 being able to play 17 year olds when they are 20-22 years old. Guy who played Tom Riddle in Chamber Of Secrets was 23 or 24 at the time.
I think Radcliffe is just turning 15, rupert is 16 and that guy who plays malfoy is 16. Otherwise it's in sync for the moment.
Movie 4 comes out late next year and Movie 5 in 2007. So they'll be a bit older, but as mentioned earlier, people in their 30s have played high school/college students.
Cuaron just says he'd like to direct another one later. Hope he does, but he'll have to lengthen it up for these bigger books.
Movie 4 comes out late next year and Movie 5 in 2007. So they'll be a bit older, but as mentioned earlier, people in their 30s have played high school/college students.
Cuaron just says he'd like to direct another one later. Hope he does, but he'll have to lengthen it up for these bigger books.
Flaming Duck
Member
Wolfy said:
How. Dare. You.
Flaming Duck
Member
Nah, they just always say "Well we only take it one movie at a time...." or "Well, I'm only signed up to movie four, so after that who knows...." They're just making waves
I dunno, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson should try and haggle out the same paycheck that Radcliffe gets (if they don't already get it, and if they do they should haggle to get more than him), because they act circles around Radcliffe IMO, particularly Emma.
Of course, neither of them come close to giving the ultimate child-actor performance that Kirsten Dunst managed in Interview With The Vampire, but still, they're much better thespians than I think Radcliffe will ever hope to be.
Of course, neither of them come close to giving the ultimate child-actor performance that Kirsten Dunst managed in Interview With The Vampire, but still, they're much better thespians than I think Radcliffe will ever hope to be.
Screaming_Gremlin
My QB is a Dick and my coach is a Nutt
evil ways said:
Speaking of which, here is Yahoo's description of the film.
http://movies.yahoo.com/news/va/20040613/108716179500.html
What the hell movie is that?!? Ahh! Must be spoilers for book 6!
"Harry Potter as a devout high-schooler who gets pregnant following an unsuccessful attempt to cure her boyfriend of homosexuality, has earned $3.7 million to date. The $5 million film was released by United Artists, a unit of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc ."
Heh. That's a movie with Jena Malone in it. I don't remember the name of it. I only know about it because she was on Jay Leno on Friday.
Heh. That's a movie with Jena Malone in it. I don't remember the name of it. I only know about it because she was on Jay Leno on Friday.
I finally saw it yesterday...
The first half was OK... they cut a lot of things from the book and it was too fast paced... I didn't like that... a lot of little details (but important ones) were missing...
The second half... I really liked that one.: more slow and yet more action... more complete... I really liked the scene where Harry1 and Sirius are atacked by the Dementors and Harry2 makes the Patronus...
And believe it or not... I actually liked the time travel. I think it was well done (I didn't like it in the book).
The first half was OK... they cut a lot of things from the book and it was too fast paced... I didn't like that... a lot of little details (but important ones) were missing...
The second half... I really liked that one.: more slow and yet more action... more complete... I really liked the scene where Harry1 and Sirius are atacked by the Dementors and Harry2 makes the Patronus...
And believe it or not... I actually liked the time travel. I think it was well done (I didn't like it in the book).
- Status