Daniel as Harry (was Re: facts, oddities, pluses and whines, big and small)

[genevieve373 at yahoo.com]

> # Hurts to say this, but Dan Radcliffe is really not very good. He 
> has the "stillness" which moviemakers seem to look for in child 
> actors, and which Harry needs, but otherwise he's a bit wooden. 
> Absolutely likeable, but not very interesting or revealing to watch.


I agree that Daniel wasn't extrordinarily expressive all the time, 
but I think that is more the character than the actor.  I wouldn't 
expect a child who grew up psychologically abused to completely come 
out of his shell all at once in a drastically different environment.  
He used more expression at the appropriate times, and was stoic at 
other times...I guess this is just what I might expect from Harry.  
And, it leaves some opportunity for his personality to "blossom" in 
later movies.  Overall, I was really impressed with what Daniel did, 
especially with such a complex character as Harry Potter.  It may not 
have been perfect, but I don't think anyone else could have done him 
justice, especially considering how much time they took looking for 
the "right" Harry Potter.