From jeffschick16 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  1 13:31:40 2006
From: jeffschick16 at yahoo.com (can can)
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 06:31:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Harry Potter ditches the glasses and all his clothes
Message-ID: <20060801133140.57694.qmail@web60925.mail.yahoo.com>

OMG!  When i first read this, my jaw dropped!  I've only seen the movie for one of my psych classes, and I agree all the scenes, other than riding naked on a horse (mostly because I wouldn't want to see it lol), would be great for Dan.  Why is it though that teen stars trying to shed their child star image feel they have to get naked?  But the live stage is a GREAT place for Dan I think.  He loves applause, that instant gratification is great for someone with his energy.


peace........real love.........

Candace

"cuz...the worlds alot bigger than you and me...."

"Darling, the Wicked Witch has NOTHING on me!"  Sharon Osbourne




 

test'; ">
 		
---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low  PC-to-Phone call rates.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  2 16:33:29 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 16:33:29 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <eabptt+gfot@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <eaqk4p+nutr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" <eggplant107 at ...> wrote:
>
> From the Sunday Times
> =====
> 
> The Times  	July 28, 2006
> 
> Harry Potter ditches the glasses . . . and all his clothes
> 
> By Jack Malvern, Arts Reporter
> 
> HE found fame wearing wizards' gowns and schoolboy scarves, 
> but Daniel Radcliffe has chosen to make his debut on the 
> London stage wearing nothing at all.
> 
> The 17-year-old actor, who is now a multimillionaire thanks 
> to the Harry Potter films, has been cast as the stable boy 
> in Equus, Peter Shaffer's controversial drama about a boy's
> erotic relationship with horses.
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> The role requires the actor to simulate sexual pleasure while
> riding naked on his horse. It is a departure for Radcliffe, 
> whose career has been dominated by his part as JK Rowling's 
> teenage wizard. 
>
>...edited...
> 
> ... John Owen, a drama teacher at Ysdgol Gyfun Rhydfelen in 
> Pontypridd, ... staging it as a school play. ...
> 
> A subsequent report by the National Assembly for Wales called
> for a ban on Equus in schools.
> 
> Radcliffe's agent did not respond to inquiries last night.
>


bboyminn:

I have read the entire thread, so I am making comments in general, not
necessarily to Eggplant specifically, though certainly to Eggplant too.

If you would like to see a (very) short clip of the 1977 movie of this
Play starring Richard Burton, it can be found at video detective.

http://videodetective.com/home.asp?PublishedID=3530

Click the link that says... "Preview EQUUS (1977)" just below the
non-existant picture.

Next, just because Dan is going to be in this play does not mean he
will be appearing nude. As your own post suggests, this play has been
presented by secondary schools (high schoools). I don't think too many
secondary schools are going to allow nude horse riding on stage. 

The comments about Dan appearing nude are speculation and a bit of
sensationalizm by the news writer.

Also, let's consider the logistics of accomplishing this on a theater
stage; not an easy task, though not impossible to simulate.

So...nude? ...maybe ...maybe not.

Next, let us remember that this is Europe where people can put
artistic nudity into a fair and reasonable context. It would probably
be a scandal, not to mention illegal here in the USA, but in Europe,
like I said, they are far less 'up tight' about these things, and in
an artistic context, I don't think they would see it as a big deal. 

Though Warner is a USA company and certainly they are as 'up tight' as
they come. 

Still, Dan IS Harry Potter, and he is very wisely signing one movie at
a time. Warner Bros can't raise to big a stink or their Harry will
just move on. He's already made more money before age 18 than most
people earn in a lifetime. Plus he has established himself as an actor
and as a saleable commodity. So, they need him; he doesn't need them.

Finally, I think this is exactly what Dan needs to do. Frequently
after a franchise series of movies like this, an actor is a little
over exposed. That makes it difficult for them to move immediately
into other blockbuster movies or into sit-com television.

Look at Leonardo DiCaprio or Johnny Depp, two actor who could have
tried to make a career of being a teen heart-throb. But once you are
no longer a teen, where do you go? They both very wisely chose roles
that broke the sit-com/romanic comedy/heart-throb mold, and made
independant movies like 'Total Eclipse', 'Basketball Diaries', and
'Whats Eating Gilbert Grape'. 

Further, since it is difficult to break free of Harry Potter, I think
the theater stage and independant films are where both Dan and Rupert
can prove that they truly are actors with capabilities far beyond
'Harry Potter'. Not only is it a proving ground, but it is also the
best source of training to make them into truly spectacular versitile
well-rounded actors. 

I think both Dan and Rupert are playing their hands wisely, though I
sometimes wish Rupert was a little more business-like and calculating.
Personally, I blame his agent. But he's young, he deserves to live and
enjoy his young life, there will be plenty of time for business later.

Unless I'm mistaken 'Driving Lessons' will be appearing at Cannes Film
Festival. That would be a great experience for Rupert.

For some reason, there seems to be a delay in the release of 'December
Boys'. I don't know if it is because the Australian team who produced
it don't think there is an international audience for it, so they are
only releasing it in Australia. Rupert does have some advantage in his
film being made in Europe. The chances for exposure are much greater.

Personally, I'd love to see both movies. Even if the movies are crap,
which I'm sure they are not, it would be very interesting to see Harry
and Ron in some other role. I can appreciate a good actor even if they
are in a bad movie (and again, I'm sure these movies aren't bad, just
making a point).

So, I really don't think the nudity, if it exists, will be a big deal
in the ever-so-open-minded Europe.

Just a few thoughts.

Steve/bboyminn








From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  2 17:17:09 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 17:17:09 -0000
Subject: Driving Lessons - Coming Soon
Message-ID: <eaqmml+2k12@eGroups.com>

For those in the Edinburgh, Scotland area, Rupert Grint's new movie
'Driving Lesson' will be showing on Friday August 25 and Saturday
August 26.

FRI 25 AUG 17:30  	Cineworld  	?7.45 (?5.20 concs)
SAT 26 AUG 16:00 	Dominion 	?7.45 (?5.20 concs)

For details-

http://www.edfilmfest.org.uk/movies/show/driving_lessons/

Maps and locations of Cinema's -

Cineworld - Edinburgh
http://www.edfilmfest.org.uk/venuepop.php?view=Cineworld

Dominion - Edinburgh
http://www.edfilmfest.org.uk/venuepop.php?view=Dominion

The only way I'll be there is if I win the Lottery between now and then.

Steve/bboyminn






From penhaligon at gmail.com  Thu Aug  3 00:49:33 2006
From: penhaligon at gmail.com (Jane Penhaligon)
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 17:49:33 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <eaqk4p+nutr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00a301c6b696$b149c7f0$bd5a1618@the248437c0a60>

Steve/bboyminn said 
> 
> Next, let us remember that this is Europe where people can 
> put artistic nudity into a fair and reasonable context. It 
> would probably be a scandal, not to mention illegal here in 
> the USA, but in Europe, like I said, they are far less 'up 
> tight' about these things, and in an artistic context, I 
> don't think they would see it as a big deal. 

Nude theatrical performances are not illegal in most communities in the US.
In fact, I stage managed a professional production of Equus in Dallas,
Texas, a pretty conservative place, way back in the mid-70s, in which the
performer playing Alan Strang was nude for that scene. We did make sure that
the patrons were aware of this, but it was a sell-out run for 6 weeks and no
issues arose from the production at all.

Steve/bboyminn also said 

> Next, just because Dan is going to be in this play does not mean he will
be appearing nude. As your own > post suggests, this play has been presented
by secondary schools (high schoools). I don't think too
>  many secondary schools are going to allow nude horse riding on stage. 

> The comments about Dan appearing nude are speculation and a bit of
sensationalizm by the news writer.

I would be highly surprised if this professional West End production of
Equus would not be performed with that scene in the nude, as is appropriate
if one has read the play. 

Panhandle
penhaligon at gmail.com 







From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Thu Aug  3 03:13:04 2006
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 23:13:04 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his
 clothes
In-Reply-To: <eaqk4p+nutr@eGroups.com>
References: <eaqk4p+nutr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4e906f712c70ea2f2c1fa6891a1d95e0@verizon.net>

>  If you would like to see a (very) short clip of the 1977 movie of this
>  Play starring Richard Burton, it can be found at video detective.
>
> http://videodetective.com/home.asp?PublishedID=3530
>
>  Steve/bboyminn
>
Thanks for sharing that link. Looks intense! And definitely like it 
could be an acting challenge for Dan. I wish him the best in his acting 
career (I just hope he doesn't get tired of "Harry" and decide he 
doesn't want to finish out the series!) I really hope Dec. Boys and 
Driving Lessons comes to the US. Otherwise I guess we'll have to wait a 
year to get it on video!
Valerie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Thu Aug  3 05:20:17 2006
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 05:20:17 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <eaqk4p+nutr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <eas12h+3kcs@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>snip
> 
> I have read the entire thread, so I am making comments in general, 
not
> necessarily to Eggplant specifically, though certainly to Eggplant 
too.
> 
> If you would like to see a (very) short clip of the 1977 movie of 
this
> Play starring Richard Burton, it can be found at video detective.
> 
> http://videodetective.com/home.asp?PublishedID=3530
> 
> Click the link that says... "Preview EQUUS (1977)" just below the
> non-existant picture.


Thanks for the comments and the link Steve. I am actually intrigued 
as to how Dan will do. As I said before, I only read short clips of 
the play for a college English class and then it was more "what is 
the author trying to portray here?" so I didn't really like it 
enough to want to see it. Now I am not sure. I am sure if it is on 
stage it will be done classy and the nudity (if there really is any) 
won't be in the forefront. My only fear as I said before was his 
commitment might delay HBP but as long as he comes back for it I 
will be happy. I would love to hear from someone on that side of the 
pond who would actually see it and post a review here. Anyway, 
thanks for sharing the link. It actually has me intrigued now.

Theresa







From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  3 06:43:01 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 06:43:01 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <00a301c6b696$b149c7f0$bd5a1618@the248437c0a60>
Message-ID: <eas5tl+q9lm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Jane Penhaligon" <penhaligon at ...>
wrote:
>
> Steve/bboyminn said 
> > 
> > Next, let us remember that this is Europe where people
> > can put artistic nudity into a fair and reasonable context.
> > It would probably be a scandal, not to mention illegal here
> > in the USA, ...

> Panhandle:
> 
> Nude theatrical performances are not illegal in most 
> communities in the US. In fact, I stage managed a 
> professional production of Equus in Dallas,Texas, ..., 
> in which the performer playing Alan Strang was nude for 
> that scene. ...edited...
> 

bboyminn:

Well, my response to that is to ask of the actor playing
Alan Strang was 17? Eighteen and over is OK, but anything 
below that and people will certainly be screaming 'child 
abuse' and 'child porn'.

As I said, in Europe they are more enlightened. Youthful 
nudity isn't instantly pornography. 


> Steve/bboyminn also said 
> 
> > Next, just because Dan is going to be in this play does
> > not mean he will be appearing nude. ...edited...

> Panhandle:
> 
> I would be highly surprised if this professional West End
> production of Equus would not be performed with that scene
> in the nude, as is appropriate if one has read the play. 
> 
> Panhandle

bboyminn:

I was merely making a point. The fact that the play is 
being produced doesn't guarantee nudity. However, that 
said, I suspect there will be, and I suspect THAT is one
of the appealing parts to Dan. It shows him as an adult 
actor capabable of a range of adult performances, and not
just squeaky clean 'gosh Hermione' Harry. 

The idea for Dan is to start breaking away from, if not 
the Harry Potter role, then certainly the Harry Potter 
image. To demonstrate to the world that he can play a 
range of characters. We all know how difficult it is for 
young/child/teen actors to make the transition to working 
adults. Most of them come off a hit show and are never 
heard of again. However, those who are heard of again, 
go on to demonstrate a full range of acting skills. 

As an example, we all know 'Tommy' (Joseph Gordon-Levit) 
of 'Third Rock from the Sun' (TV sit-com) which he was 
brilliant in, but it was very physical almost slap-stick 
comedy. Yet even while 'Third Rock' was in production, 
he made a brilliant independant movie called 'Sweet Jane' 
which only played in indy theaters. Yet, he established 
himself as a stunning dramatic actor in that movie; 
absolutely stunning. Then went on to make such dramatic 
indy movies as 'Manic', 'Latter Days', 'Mysterious Skin',
and 'Brick'.

My point is, Joseph Gordon-Levit made those dramatic movies
to break from the image of 'Tommy' and prove himself as a 
versitile adult actor. In 2005, he was in five movies. So, 
his efforts are paying off.

I think that is what Dan is doing, proving he is an actor 
with range and depth. Establishing his skill in dramatic 
roles, and as I mentioned, using stage theater and indy 
films to hone his craft.

For that reason, I agree, he is probably eager to do the 
nude scene.

As far as any morals clause in his Warner Bros contract, 
also as I said, he is contracting one movie at a time, and
I'm sure at this stage, they need him more than he needs 
them. Plus, I hardly think legitimate stage acting could be
considered a violation of his morals clause. 

Finally, as someone else pointed out, I suspect this will 
all occur between HP films. Dan will play the role for a 
fix engagement (fixed number of weeks) then an understudy 
or new actor will take over the role, and Dan will go back 
to Harry Potter.

Just out of curiousity, is there any one here from Great 
Britian who could clarify the legality of someone under 
18 appearing nude on the theater stage? 

Just a few thoughts.

Steve/bboyminn







From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Thu Aug  3 07:30:31 2006
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 17:30:31 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <eas5tl+q9lm@eGroups.com>
References: <00a301c6b696$b149c7f0$bd5a1618@the248437c0a60>
Message-ID: <44D232B7.14299.A1850FB@drednort.alphalink.com.au>

On 3 Aug 2006 at 6:43, Steve wrote:

> Just out of curiousity, is there any one here from Great 
> Britian who could clarify the legality of someone under 
> 18 appearing nude on the theater stage? 

I'm not British, nor familiar with British law, but what comes to mind for me, immediately is the 
British film, Kes, made in 1969, and starring David Bradley (not the same David Bradley who 
appears in the Harry Potter films as Filch) as Billy Casper. It's one of my favourite films.

It's noted for its very gritty, realistic style. At the time it was made David Bradley was only 
about 14 years old and there's quite an extensive scene in the film in which he is quite 
graphically nude.

The film is available on DVD with that scene intact - it doesn't seem to cause any significant 
problems in the UK.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia





From artsylynda at aol.com  Thu Aug  3 17:42:38 2006
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 13:42:38 EDT
Subject: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
Message-ID: <bc2.1d10401.32038f8e@aol.com>

Dan is 17 now, legally an adult in every way, if I understand the  Brit law 
correctly.  At 16, it was legal for him to have sex or marry (he  said so 
himself in an interview).  At 17, they're grown up,  supposedly.
 
I watched the DVD of "Equus" the other day, which has tons more  nudity than 
one scene.  The newspaper articles keep emphasizing the one  nude scene while 
galloping on a horse.  Somehow they have to simulate the  horse - he can't 
gallop on a live horse on a stage, that isn't safe, nor is  there room (even with 
rubber shoes, there's a danger of the horse slipping and  falling unless they 
install rubber mats or something).  So how to they  "simulate" a horse on 
stage?  Any of you who've seen the stage show care to  explain?  Thanks!

Oh, and I read in an article online yesterday (sorry, can't  think where) 
that the previews will be in Feb. and the play will run until June  19, which 
should give Dan just enough time to do the publicity for OotP and  hopefully 
start on HBP!
 
Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

My blog: _www.abraxan.blogspot.com_ (http://www.abraxan.blogspot.com/)   
Read my Harry Potter fics here: 
_http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/_ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/)   



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  3 18:12:18 2006
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 11:12:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <bc2.1d10401.32038f8e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20060803181218.79705.qmail@web55108.mail.re4.yahoo.com>



artsylynda at aol.com wondered:                                  I watched the DVD of "Equus" the other day, which has tons more  nudity than 
 one scene.  The newspaper articles keep emphasizing the one  nude scene while 
 galloping on a horse.  Somehow they have to simulate the  horse - he can't 
 gallop on a live horse on a stage, that isn't safe, nor is  there room (even with 
 rubber shoes, there's a danger of the horse slipping and  falling unless they 
 install rubber mats or something).  So how to they  "simulate" a horse on 
 stage?  Any of you who've seen the stage show care to  explain?  Thanks!


akh answered:


While I have to admit it's been a while since I've seen the play (and even longer since I've read it), I only remember two scenes in the play that involved nudity.  The first scene is his ride on the horse and the second is his tryst with a girl in the stable.  I won't go into specifics for anyone who would like to see the play "unspoiled."  


The production I saw used actors in costume for the horses, and I believe that's in the stage directions.  Before you start thinking cheesy horse suit, they built wire headdresses that resembled horses' heads, and they wore shoes with wire lifts shaped to resemble horses' hooves.  When Alan rode the horse, he was riding piggy-back on the back of the actor.   In this production, the horses surrounded the playing area of the stage at all times.  Two friends of mine were horses, and they said it was actually physically taxing having to stand throughout the play, plus moving in a horse-like manner while standing on stilts, essentially when they were playing horses.

Others may have seen a different treatment of the horses than this one, but the effect was very striking and I thought it worked brilliantly.  Can you tell I loved the play?

akh, a big fan of both Peter and Anthony Schaffer (and I know they spell it two different ways).








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From tmarends at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  3 19:31:52 2006
From: tmarends at yahoo.com (Tim)
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 19:31:52 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <20060803181218.79705.qmail@web55108.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <eativ8+1u4o@eGroups.com>

That is the traditional way the play is presented... Actors as the 6 
horses.  Having just re-read the play (all this talk of Equus made me 
pull out my copy) I can see how the two scenes COULD be played 
without nudity at all... however, it is much more emotional to have 
the actor playing Alan actually get naked for those two scenes.  The 
character is reliving memories during those scenes... he almost can't 
help himself from acting out exactly what happened, for good or ill.  
I'd love to be able to get to London to see this... the emotional arc 
Alan goes through is incredible.  Would love to see how Dan handles 
it.

Tim

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, AnitaKH <anita_hillin at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> While I have to admit it's been a while since I've seen the play 
(and even longer since I've read it), I only remember two scenes in 
the play that involved nudity.  The first scene is his ride on the 
horse and the second is his tryst with a girl in the stable.  I won't 
go into specifics for anyone who would like to see the 
play "unspoiled."  
> 
> 
> The production I saw used actors in costume for the horses, and I 
believe that's in the stage directions.  Before you start thinking 
cheesy horse suit, they built wire headdresses that resembled horses' 
heads, and they wore shoes with wire lifts shaped to resemble horses' 
hooves.  When Alan rode the horse, he was riding piggy-back on the 
back of the actor.   In this production, the horses surrounded the 
playing area of the stage at all times.  Two friends of mine were 
horses, and they said it was actually physically taxing having to 
stand throughout the play, plus moving in a horse-like manner while 
standing on stilts, essentially when they were playing horses.
> 
> Others may have seen a different treatment of the horses than this 
one, but the effect was very striking and I thought it worked 
brilliantly.  Can you tell I loved the play?
> 
> akh, a big fan of both Peter and Anthony Schaffer (and I know they 
spell it two different ways).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>








From OctobersChild48 at aol.com  Fri Aug  4 04:13:19 2006
From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 00:13:19 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter ditches the glasses and all his clothes
Message-ID: <573.3a2c09b.3204235f@aol.com>

In a message dated 8/1/06 9:37:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
jeffschick16 at yahoo.com writes:


> OMG! When i first read this, my jaw dropped! I've only seen the movie for 
> one of my psych classes, and I agree all the scenes, other than riding naked 
> on a horse (mostly because I wouldn't want to see it lol), would be great for 
> Dan. Why is it though that teen stars trying to shed their child star image 
> feel they have to get naked? But the live stage is a GREAT place for Dan I 
> think. He loves applause, that instant gratification is great for someone with 
> his energy.
> 
> 

Sandy:

I had a pretty big argument with a fellow member on another list over the 
naked thing. That person was very disappointed that Dan was not shown completely 
nude in the bath scene in GOF. I said that I hoped that Dan would NEVER do a 
nude scene in anything... period. Perhaps it's my age, but I remember when 
movies were damned good without people being shown naked or in explicit sex 
scenes, and I don't want to see anyone I like and respect as much as I do Dan 
involved in that kind of thing. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a prude -- far from it, 
but I don't think nudity or explicit sex have added anything good to movies. 
I'm from a generation that considered that pornography. It is especially 
disheartening that Dan isn't even an adult yet and is already getting into the 
nudity thing (sigh).

Sandy


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Fri Aug  4 07:33:16 2006
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:33:16 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <bc2.1d10401.32038f8e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <44D384DC.15434.F4164B1@drednort.alphalink.com.au>

On 3 Aug 2006 at 13:42, artsylynda at aol.com wrote:

> Dan is 17 now, legally an adult in every way, if I understand the  Brit law 
> correctly.  At 16, it was legal for him to have sex or marry (he  said so 
> himself in an interview).  At 17, they're grown up,  supposedly.

I have spoken to an acquaintance who is a British lawyer (actually a QC) and this is what he 
had to say about this.

At 17, Daniel Radcliffe is still legally a minor. While a 17 year old has many legal rights, 
including some rights that can be considered adult rights, in a strict sense he is still a child, 
and there are still things he is not allowed to do. This would include participating in any 
indecent production, and anyone responsible for such a production would be in violation of 
the law under section 50 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 - a 17 year old cannot participate 
in the production of pornography, even though they may be completely legally able to 
participate in the activities that appear in the pornographic production if no such production 
was taking place.

But it is important to note that under British law, the mere act of a minor appearing nude does 
not constitute pornography. To be pornographic, the production would have to be indecent 
and nudity is not inherently indecent.

Indecency is not precisely defined in British law - the most relevant standard in this case 
would probably be the "recognised standards of propriety" stated in R v Stamford 1972 - it's 
quite a complex issue, but suffice to say, it is extremely unlikely that a well regarded play 
such as Equus would be ruled to be indecent if it was simply being performed in the same 
way it is normally performed.

This is not intended as legal advice, merely a basic opinion.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia





From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  4 20:13:51 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 20:13:51 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <bc2.1d10401.32038f8e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <eb09pv+9l6u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at ... wrote:
> Lynda AKA "Abraxan":
>
> Dan is 17 now, legally an adult in every way, if I 
> understand the  Brit law correctly.  At 16, it was legal
> for him to have sex or marry ...

bboyminn:

While I admit I DON'T know British law, I don't think Dan 
is quite legal; at least not /fully/ legal. I believe in 
England he can drink (alcohol) under some circumstances, 
but he is not as free to drink as an offical adult. Nor do
I think at 17 he is eligible to vote. In fact, only this
year is he allowed to start taking driving lessons.

So, the question is, if he appears nude in a clearly 
artistic context and in a morally controlled environment, 
would it be considered 'child porn'? As you point out, he 
is above the age of sexual consent. Is that sufficient? 

Is he also allowed to enter into contract and sign other
legal documents without the supervision of his partents?  


> Lynda AKA "Abraxan":
> ...  Somehow they have to simulate the  horse - he can't 
> gallop on a live horse on a stage, that isn't safe, nor 
> is there room ....  So how to they  "simulate" a horse
> on stage?  Any of you who've seen the stage show care to
> explain?  Thanks!
> 
> ...
>  
> Lynda AKA "Abraxan"
> 


bboyminn:

Well one way around the whole dilemma is to put Dan in a body suit or
at least flesh-colored briefs. As to the horse ride, it's not so much
a matter of faking a horse ride, but of doing it convincingly. They
could put him and his little fleshy briefs on a fake stationary horse
that rocks back and forth to simulate galloping, and move the scenery
across the stage behind Dan. The moving scenery thing is common in
stage productions and even in very old movies.

But, again, can that be done in away that seems believable.

They could also use video footage. I'm not sure of the context of the
nude horse ride; whether it is real-time or a flash-back, or whatever.
 But if it is some kind of scene recalled from memory, the scene could
be projected on the back ground while Dan and the pschiatrist remain
faded in the foreground. Again, I don't know the context, so it's hard
for me to accurately speculate.

Just a few thoughts.

Wish I could get to London to see the show. Who knows, maybe I'll win
the lottery.

Steve/bboyminn







From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  4 20:51:04 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 20:51:04 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <44D384DC.15434.F4164B1@drednort.alphalink.com.au>
Message-ID: <eb0bvo+lc3l@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at ...> wrote:
>
> On 3 Aug 2006 at 13:42, artsylynda at ... wrote:
> 
> > Dan is 17 now, legally an adult in every way, ...

> Shaun:
> 
> I have spoken to an acquaintance who is a British lawyer
> ... and this is what he had to say about this.
> 
> At 17, Daniel Radcliffe is still legally a minor. While 
> a 17 year old has many legal rights, including some rights
> that can be considered adult rights, in a strict sense he 
> is still a child, and there are still things he is not 
> allowed to do. This would include participating in any 
> indecent production, ... - a 17 year old cannot 
> participate in the production of pornography, ...
> 
> But it is important to note that under British law, the 
> mere act of a minor appearing nude does not constitute 
> pornography. ... nudity is not inherently indecent.
> 
>...
> 
> This is not intended as legal advice, merely a basic
> opinion.
> 
> Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
> Shaun Hately 

bboyminn:

Thanks for getting back to us, your always a great help.

Of course, we are dealing with tricky business here. I can think of a
few movies that have child nudity in them, though relatively brief.
Though it has been many years since I've seen it, the orginal 1963
version of 'Lord of the Flies', I believe had brief scenes of some
boys nude; running on the beach or whatever. Also, and again, it has
been many years since I have seen this movie, 'Blue Lagoon' with
Christoper Atkin and Brooke Shields, I believe the younger actors who
played the characters Richard and Emmiline we seen running naked on
the beach. Yes, the older Brooke and Christoper were certainly nude,
but I'm convinced the younger actors were as well. Also, Devo Sawa and
his young friend appeared, very out of focus and from a distance, nude
 in the 1995 movie 'Now and Then'.

Further, though I don't have access to Indy films where I'm living
now, I believe I've seen many indy/foreign movies where children of
various ages appeared briefly in the nude. 

So, my point is there is a context in which the censors will accept
child nudity. Usually it's the absents of frontal nudity, and/or very
brief appearances, or in the case of 'Now and Then', appearances from
sufficient distances as to mask the 'details'.

Now to the stage, I believe this is a unique situation. Again, I think
Europe in general is more open and far less bothered by the existance
of nudity in an artistic concept. I mean, the have nude statues and
portraits all over the place. 

Further, as I pointed out in another post in this thread, Dan could
appear in a flesh-color brief which is what he did in the Prefect's
Bath scene in 'Goblet of Fire'. Though, the movie itself never truly
shows him nude, he still said, he wore a flesh colored brief. Given
the proper lighting, I think this could be done reasonably well on the
Stage. 

As someone else pointed out, there are two critical scenes; one in
which he is riding a horse and another in which he is 'making love' to
a girl in the stable. Both could be done in a way that sufficiently
stays true to the scene without Dan having to be truly nude. Also,
well place stage props could strategically mask the 'details'.

Really would love to see that play, not for the nudity, but to see Dan
portraying that broad range of emotions.

Just a few thoughts.

Steve/bboyminn










From kchuplis at alltel.net  Fri Aug  4 14:14:51 2006
From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen)
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 09:14:51 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter ditches the glasses and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <573.3a2c09b.3204235f@aol.com>
References: <573.3a2c09b.3204235f@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4CFBB05F-3AA8-4E85-8DFF-D20A848A16F2@alltel.net>

Equus is a different matter to me. But it would have been really  
pointless to have complete nuditiy for the bath scene. that would be  
gratuitous.


On Aug 3, 2006, at 11:13 PM, OctobersChild48 at aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 8/1/06 9:37:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> jeffschick16 at yahoo.com writes:
>
>
>> OMG! When i first read this, my jaw dropped! I've only seen the  
>> movie for
>> one of my psych classes, and I agree all the scenes, other than  
>> riding naked
>> on a horse (mostly because I wouldn't want to see it lol), would  
>> be great for
>> Dan. Why is it though that teen stars trying to shed their child  
>> star image
>> feel they have to get naked? But the live stage is a GREAT place  
>> for Dan I
>> think. He loves applause, that instant gratification is great for  
>> someone with
>> his energy.
>>
>>
>
> Sandy:
>
> I had a pretty big argument with a fellow member on another list  
> over the
> naked thing. That person was very disappointed that Dan was not  
> shown completely
> nude in the bath scene in GOF. I said that I hoped that Dan would  
> NEVER do a
> nude scene in anything... period. Perhaps it's my age, but I  
> remember when
> movies were damned good without people being shown naked or in  
> explicit sex
> scenes, and I don't want to see anyone I like and respect as much  
> as I do Dan
> involved in that kind of thing. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a prude  
> -- far from it,
> but I don't think nudity or explicit sex have added anything good  
> to movies.
> I'm from a generation that considered that pornography. It is  
> especially
> disheartening that Dan isn't even an adult yet and is already  
> getting into the
> nudity thing (sigh).
>
> Sandy
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary  
> material from posts to which you're replying!
>
> Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at HPforGrownups- 
> owner at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>




From silverstreams at sbcglobal.net  Mon Aug  7 13:36:49 2006
From: silverstreams at sbcglobal.net (Candle)
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 06:36:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <eb0bvo+lc3l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060807133649.75241.qmail@web82202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Steve,
   
  You could add Parenthood to that list of nude children. A little boy in a cowboy hat is shown nude from the front. 
   
  I wonder if Dan appears nude if that will affect parents in general from taking their children to see the HP movies or product advertisers from promoting the show. Sometimes parents and advertisers get concerned that way.


Candle 
   
  May there always be a light to guide you.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From ashlee_kidman at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  8 00:50:02 2006
From: ashlee_kidman at yahoo.com (Sherman)
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 00:50:02 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <862AD033-67E9-4E3B-8826-19ED26EAFDD3@alltel.net>
Message-ID: <eb8n3q+89m2@eGroups.com>

I will really happy and glad to see Radcliffe naked riding the 
horse. I hope when the pictures can be seen, the pictures will be at 
this group photos. It is a briliant idea right?

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Karen <kchuplis at ...> wrote:
>
> I'm actually glad to see this. He's the perfect age and it might 
get  
> him out of Potterstereotyping for later. My only thing is.....and 
his  
> parents are worried about pictures from a Garden event on the 
internet?
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 27, 2006, at 8:40 PM, eggplant107 wrote:
> 
> > From the Sunday Times
> > =====
> >
> > The Times  	July 28, 2006
> >
> > Harry Potter ditches the glasses . . . and all his clothes
> >
> > By Jack Malvern, Arts Reporter
> >
> > HE found fame wearing wizards' gowns and schoolboy scarves, but 
Daniel
> > Radcliffe has chosen to make his debut on the London stage 
wearing
> > nothing at all.
> >
> > The 17-year-old actor, who is now a multimillionaire thanks to 
the
> > Harry Potter films, has been cast as the stable boy in Equus, 
Peter
> > Shaffer's controversial drama about a boy's erotic relationship 
with
> > horses.
> >
> > Peter Thompson, a spokesman for the production, said that 
Radcliffe
> > would appear in the play, scheduled for early 2007 in a West 
End  
> > theatre.
> >
> > He will play Alan Strang, a psychologically disturbed youth who 
is
> > interviewed by a psychiatrist after he blinds six horses with a 
metal
> > spike.
> >
> > The role requires the actor to simulate sexual pleasure while 
riding
> > naked on his horse. It is a departure for Radcliffe, whose 
career has
> > been dominated by his part as JK Rowling's teenage wizard. He 
recently
> > finished filming December Boys, in which he plays one of four 
orphans
> > hoping to be adopted.
> >
> > Richard Griffiths, who plays Harry Potter's curmudgeonly uncle 
in the
> > films, is in talks to take the psychiatrist role. It would be a
> > triumphant return to the London stage for the actor, who won a 
Tony
> > award for his lead role in The History Boys.
> >
> > Last week, the pair were filming Harry Potter and the Order of 
the
> > Phoenix, the fifth in the series.
> >
> > Shaffer's work caused a sensation when it was first staged at the
> > National Theatre in 1973. It transferred to Broadway, where it 
starred
> > Anthony Hopkins, and ran for 1,200 performances, making it one 
of the
> > most successful plays in New York history. It was made into a
> > Hollywood film starring Richard Burton in 1977.
> >
> > The playwright, whose works include Amadeus and The Royal Hunt 
of the
> > Sun, based the story on a real-life incident in which a boy
> > inexplicably maimed six horses.
> >
> > It encompasses sexual awakening, Greek mythology and religion. 
The
> > psychiatrist attempts to explain the boy's actions, but must 
confront
> > his own demons in the process.
> >
> > The play was the subject of controversy recently after John 
Owen, a
> > drama teacher at Ysdgol Gyfun Rhydfelen in Pontypridd, was 
accused of
> > sexual abuse after staging it as a school play. He committed 
suicide
> > the day before he was due to appear in court.
> >
> > A subsequent report by the National Assembly for Wales called 
for a
> > ban on Equus in schools.
> >
> > Radcliffe's agent did not respond to inquiries last night.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
> >
> > Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip 
unnecessary  
> > material from posts to which you're replying!
> >
> > Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at 
HPforGrownups- 
> > owner at yahoogroups.com
> > ____________________________________________________________
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>








From siskiou at vcem.com  Tue Aug  8 01:24:27 2006
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 18:24:27 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <eb8n3q+89m2@eGroups.com>
References: <862AD033-67E9-4E3B-8826-19ED26EAFDD3@alltel.net>
 <eb8n3q+89m2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <177429763.20060807182427@vcem.com>



Hi,

Monday, August 7, 2006, 5:50:02 PM, ashlee_kidman at yahoo.com wrote:

> I will really happy and glad to see Radcliffe naked riding the
> horse. I hope when the pictures can be seen, the pictures will be at
> this group photos. It is a briliant idea right?

I sure hope people are going to be more interested in the
actual play than see Daniel Radcliffe naked.

At this point I almost wish he had chosen a different
venture for his fist stage appearance, so he could be sure
people aren't just coming to see his body instead of his
acting chops. ;)

--
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Tue Aug  8 02:44:32 2006
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 02:44:32 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <20060807133649.75241.qmail@web82202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <eb8tqg+rlsi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Candle <silverstreams at ...> wrote:
>
> Steve,
>    
>   You could add Parenthood to that list of nude children. A little 
boy in a cowboy hat is shown nude from the front. 
>    
>   I wonder if Dan appears nude if that will affect parents in 
general from taking their children to see the HP movies or product 
advertisers from promoting the show. Sometimes parents and 
advertisers get concerned that way.
> 
> 
> Candle 
>    
>   May there always be a light to guide you.
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
The scene in Parenthood was cute but I never really noticed you saw 
anything. I remember he had his toy gun belt on and a backside view. 

As for Dan appearing nude, well it won't affect me taking my 
children but then they are 11 and 14. Still they would not be seeing 
the play so I would not even need to mention it. My oldest heard 
about it and said "well that's different. He is still gonna do Harry 
Potter, right mom?" I asked a fellow fan at work whose children are 
much younger and his response was "well, I just won't tell them 
about the play." So here are two parents who don't really care if he 
struts nude or not. As long as it is done in a professional manner. 
After all it is acting, not really how the young man is and that is 
what truly matters.

Just my humble and honest opinion.

Theresa







From tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net  Tue Aug  8 12:44:24 2006
From: tallcarabians at sbcglobal.net (Rae Callaway)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 07:44:24 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <177429763.20060807182427@vcem.com>
Message-ID: <mailman.38.1576048074.5049.hpfgu-movie@archive.hpfgu.org>

 

 

  _____  


Hi,

Monday, August 7, 2006, 5:50:02 PM, ashlee_kidman@
<mailto:ashlee_kidman%40yahoo.com> yahoo.com wrote:

> I will really happy and glad to see Radcliffe naked riding the
> horse. I hope when the pictures can be seen, the pictures will be at
> this group photos. It is a briliant idea right?

 

I seriously doubt anyone will be getting a camera into a stage production.
That's definitely not allowed.

 

Rae



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From abraxan at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  8 14:07:36 2006
From: abraxan at yahoo.com (abraxan)
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 14:07:36 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <177429763.20060807182427@vcem.com>
Message-ID: <eba5r8+64vg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> I sure hope people are going to be more interested in the
> actual play than see Daniel Radcliffe naked.
> 
> At this point I almost wish he had chosen a different
> venture for his fist stage appearance, so he could be sure
> people aren't just coming to see his body instead of his
> acting chops. ;)
> 
> --
> Best regards,
>  Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at ...
>

What everyone seems to be forgetting is that Dan's doing a love scene 
(at least one) in "December Boys" so parts of him (not the "bits" but 
perhaps his bum) will be shown there, quite possibly, just as is true 
of Rupert in "Driving Lessons."  The theaters in London don't hold 
THAT many people, and cameras are not allowed.  So the "exposure" 
(yeah, that's a pun, haha) he will be getting won't be widespread 
enough to damage him as Harry Potter, IMO.  I don't think WB would 
cooperate with that and if he'd already broken with WB for the future 
movies, I think we would've heard about it.  And things in England 
are just DIFFERENT from here.  There are nude male statues all over 
London.  Walking down the sidewalk, if you pass an apothecary (drug 
store) that offers acupuncture (not Boots, but some other kind of 
drug store - we never went in and I don't remember the name now), 
there are figurines of totally "endowed" (no Ken doll-"suggested 
anatomy" there!) men with colored dots showing acupuncture points.  
These are in the shop windows at the eye-level of a 3-year-old, right 
up against the glass.  I doubt there's a child in London who has any 
questions about what a man's "bits" look like.  Remember, it's 
Americans who are Puritanical, not Brits.

What I find interesting is that Dan said in a GOF interview that he 
couldn't see himself doing full-frontal nudity, and here he is a year 
later signing a contract that involves full-frontal nudity IN PERSON 
rather than on film, where his privacy can be protected at least a 
little during filming.  As serious an actor as he is, I suspect it 
was the role itself (and possibly Richard Griffiths talking to him 
about it) that tempted him.  I guess Dan has the courage of a Harry 
Potter, to consider doing such a thing for his first real (not one-
shot guest role) theater role.  JMO.

Lynda








From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  8 16:09:53 2006
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 09:09:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Set your calendars for  November 21, 2008
Message-ID: <20060808160953.35595.qmail@web55102.mail.re4.yahoo.com>

I presume most of you have read the official press release that has confirmed that Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince will premiere in theatres November 21, 2008. 

I think it's interesting that we don't have the director announced, but we 
have the release date firmed up.  I suppose that WB can afford a shorter pre-production time, given that some details are set in stone (as it were).  I suppose they want dibs on the Thanksgiving weekend...

At any rate, I do expect to hear an announcement about a director soon.   What I'm really curious to hear is whether this is 1) clever placement, or 2) overkill.

akh, who's still behind on this summer's movies, much less 2008!


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From siskiou at vcem.com  Tue Aug  8 16:43:23 2006
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 09:43:23 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Harry Potter ditches the glasses  and all his clothes
In-Reply-To: <eba5r8+64vg@eGroups.com>
References: <177429763.20060807182427@vcem.com> <eba5r8+64vg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <222145307.20060808094323@vcem.com>



Hi,

Tuesday, August 8, 2006, 7:07:36 AM, abraxan at yahoo.com wrote:

> What everyone seems to be forgetting is that Dan's doing a love scene
> (at least one) in "December Boys" so parts of him (not the "bits" but
> perhaps his bum) will be shown there, quite possibly, just as is true
> of Rupert in "Driving Lessons."

AFAIK, both of these are the "fade to black" type scenes
with nothing much visible.
December Boys is rated PG-13, I think.


> I think we would've heard about it.  And things in England
> are just DIFFERENT from here.

>   Remember, it's
> Americans who are Puritanical, not Brits.

I'm from Germany, so I know what you mean.
The many messages from drooling fangirls on the forums (many
from Britain) make me wonder, though. ;)

They may not be *offended* (more the opposite), but it still
means all they want to see is Dan without his clothes, no
matter how the play turns out to be.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From abraxan at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  8 18:32:36 2006
From: abraxan at yahoo.com (abraxan)
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 18:32:36 -0000
Subject: Set your calendars for  November 21, 2008
In-Reply-To: <20060808160953.35595.qmail@web55102.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ebalc4+t4lg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, AnitaKH <anita_hillin at ...> wrote:
>
> I presume most of you have read the official press release that has 
confirmed that Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince will premiere 
in theatres November 21, 2008. 
> 
> I think it's interesting that we don't have the director announced, 
but we 
> have the release date firmed up.  I suppose that WB can afford a 
shorter pre-production time, given that some details are set in stone 
(as it were).  I suppose they want dibs on the Thanksgiving weekend...
> 
> At any rate, I do expect to hear an announcement about a director 
soon.   What I'm really curious to hear is whether this is 1) clever 
placement, or 2) overkill.
> 
> akh, who's still behind on this summer's movies, much less 2008!

They're just continuing their July or November release practice - 
they seem to alternate to give them a year and a half to produce each 
film.  Wow, just think - Emma will be 18 then, Dan 19, Rupert 20!  
And we knew them when they were just 10, 11 and 12!  ;-)  I do hope 
WB's announcement means they've signed the cast - Emma's usually the 
one who waits until the last minute to sign.  Hopefully they've done 
enough of these to want to see the project through the entire run of 
seven films.  I sure hope so!

Lynda







From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  8 20:20:48 2006
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 13:20:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Set your calendars for  November 21, 2008
In-Reply-To: <ebalc4+t4lg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060808202048.41073.qmail@web55107.mail.re4.yahoo.com>

                                  --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, akh wrote, following the announcement of the release of HBP on film:
 >
> At any rate, I do expect to hear an announcement about a director 
 soon.   What I'm really curious to hear is whether this is 1) clever 
 placement, or 2) overkill.
 > 
 
 
Lynda kindly responded:


 They're just continuing their July or November release practice - they seem to alternate to give them a year and a half to produce each film. 



akh apologizes:
I was a little hasty in my first message (that's what I get for sneaking around work and posting to HPfGU Movie!).  I'm not at all surprised by the timing of the films; your observation is exactly right, and it falls neatly into their pattern following CoS.  I was wondering about the decision to announce the 2008 release date when they're still nearly a year away from releasing OOTP.  It's true that speculation has already hit the Internet about HBP, but that didn't force their hand for OOTP, IIRC.
Lynda then reflects:

Wow, just think - Emma will be 18 then, Dan 19, Rupert 20!  And we knew them when they were just 10, 11 and 12!  ;-)  I do hope WB's announcement means they've signed the cast - Emma's usually the one who waits until the last minute to sign.  Hopefully they've done enough of these to want to see the project through the entire run of seven films.  I sure hope so!


akh seconds:


I feel like Dan, Emma and Rupert's American aunt!  I just re-watched SS recently, and I found myself saying, "They're just so cute!"  way too many times, especially since I was watching it by myself.  

'd be shocked if they backed out of the movies at this late stage.  My SO is certain they'll stick with it, for the money, if for no other reason.  (Of course, this is coming from someone trying to make a living as an independent consultant, so he can't imagine anyone turning down a regular paycheck.)  

I also can't imagine their managers advising them to walk away from the movies.  There would bound to be some backlash from fans, and why invite that?  They're also still quite young at, 20, 21 and 22 by the end of movie seven, giving them ample time to break away from HP over the course of a career.

akh, who doesn't THINK she'd run up and throw her arms around any of the kids in a maternal hug, but isn't making any promises... 







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From turn2pg394 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  9 00:47:14 2006
From: turn2pg394 at yahoo.com (can can)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 17:47:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Luna
In-Reply-To: <1155057995.650.65509.m16@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060809004714.18192.qmail@web57107.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

I know it's REALLY late, but has anyone watched the Evanna Lynch interview?  Is she NOT Luna?  They cast her perfectly.  She's just how I imagined her to be.  Even Dan and Emma said think so.  
  By the way I have a new email address, yay me!lol


peace...real love...

Candace
 		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail Beta.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  9 19:06:36 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 19:06:36 -0000
Subject: Luna
In-Reply-To: <20060809004714.18192.qmail@web57107.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ebdbns+tgjd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, can can <turn2pg394 at ...> wrote:
>
> I know it's REALLY late, but has anyone watched the Evanna
> Lynch interview?  Is she NOT Luna?  They cast her perfectly.
> She's just how I imagined her to be.  Even Dan and Emma said
> think so.  By the way I have a new email address, yay me!lol
> 
> 
> peace...real love...
> 
> Candace

bboyminn:

It would be nice if you could post a link to the interview. I searched
for it at the Leaky Cauldron but couldn't find it.

Thanks.

STeve/bboyminn







From abraxan at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  9 20:18:25 2006
From: abraxan at yahoo.com (abraxan)
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 20:18:25 -0000
Subject: Set your calendars for  November 21, 2008
In-Reply-To: <20060808202048.41073.qmail@web55107.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ebdfuh+v78b@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, AnitaKH <anita_hillin at ...> wrote:
> 'd be shocked if they backed out of the movies at this late stage.  
My SO is certain they'll stick with it, for the money, if for no 
other reason.  

Dan's already richer than the princes of England, isn't he?  He 
doesn't need to do ANYTHING for money, ever again in his life!  (And 
good for him AND for the British actors' union for getting him a 
decent salary after the first film!!)  But yeah, the studio is 
probably going to be offering them more and more to stick with the 
franchise to the end.  And just MAYBE they have some sense of "duty" 
or "honor" to want to see the project through, who knows?  I think 
Dan does, anyway, from things he's said in interviews.

> 
> I also can't imagine their managers advising them to walk away from 
the movies.  There would bound to be some backlash from fans, and why 
invite that?  They're also still quite young at, 20, 21 and 22 by the 
end of movie seven, giving them ample time to break away from HP over 
the course of a career.
>

I think that's why the boys are doing films that are very different 
from HP now. I honestly don't know why Emma isn't following their 
example, unless she hasn't been offered anything that tempts her - or 
maybe she just likes to hang out with her friends in her off months 
more than working year-round as the boys apparently are doing (Dan, 
at least, since Rupert doesn't have nearly as many scenes in the HP 
films as Dan does).  The boys will be established as quality, 
experienced actors before the franchise ends with films such 
as "December Boys" and "Driving Lessons" and then there's "Equus."  
Yeah.  Nobody will ever doubt Dan's acting ability again if he can 
carry off that part!  And I believe he'll be brilliant in it.

> akh, who doesn't THINK she'd run up and throw her arms around any 
of the kids in a maternal hug, but isn't making any promises... 
> 
I'd be right there next to you, waiting to give them my grandmotherly 
hug - or I might shove you rudely aside so I could be first!  LOL!

Lynda 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>








From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Wed Aug  9 22:43:16 2006
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 22:43:16 -0000
Subject: Luna
In-Reply-To: <ebdbns+tgjd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ebdoe4+n9aj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, can can <turn2pg394@> wrote:
> >
> > I know it's REALLY late, but has anyone watched the Evanna
> > Lynch interview?  Is she NOT Luna?  They cast her perfectly.
> > She's just how I imagined her to be.  Even Dan and Emma said
> > think so.  By the way I have a new email address, yay me!lol
> > 
> > 
> > peace...real love...
> > 
> > Candace
> 
> bboyminn:
> 
> It would be nice if you could post a link to the interview. I 
searched
> for it at the Leaky Cauldron but couldn't find it.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> STeve/bboyminn
>
Well here is the link to the article on Leaky: http://www.the-leaky-
cauldron.org/index.php?articleID=8874

Unfortunately I don't have Real Player - RP only let's you download 
a free 14 day trial (which is long over for me)and that is the 
format it is in. So alas I have not gotten to see it. But from 
reading about her she sounds just like Luna and she is such a fan of 
Luna that I am sure she will do well.

Theresa






From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Thu Aug 10 05:31:17 2006
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 05:31:17 -0000
Subject: Luna
In-Reply-To: <ebdoe4+n9aj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ebegb5+tkqi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Theresa" <anmsmom333 at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, can can <turn2pg394@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I know it's REALLY late, but has anyone watched the Evanna
> > > Lynch interview?  Is she NOT Luna?  They cast her perfectly.
> > > She's just how I imagined her to be.  Even Dan and Emma said
> > > think so.  By the way I have a new email address, yay me!lol
> > > 
> > > 
> > > peace...real love...
> > > 
> > > Candace
> > 
> > bboyminn:
> > 
> > It would be nice if you could post a link to the interview. I 
> searched
> > for it at the Leaky Cauldron but couldn't find it.
> > 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> > STeve/bboyminn
> >
> Well here is the link to the article on Leaky: http://www.the-
leaky-
> cauldron.org/index.php?articleID=8874
> 
> Unfortunately I don't have Real Player - RP only let's you 
download 
> a free 14 day trial (which is long over for me)and that is the 
> format it is in. So alas I have not gotten to see it. But from 
> reading about her she sounds just like Luna and she is such a fan 
of 
> Luna that I am sure she will do well.
> 
> Theresa
>
Figured out why my RP wasn't working (actually my teenage son did) 
so I finally got to see it tonight. Wow I agree she IS Luna. She is 
so sweet and soft spoken. She even seems a little dreamy too. An 
orange painted bedroom and naming cats Crookshanks and Dumbledore. 
How cute is that? Anyway, I cannot wait to see her in OotP.

Theresa






From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 10 16:43:39 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:43:39 -0000
Subject: Luna - Audio Quality
In-Reply-To: <ebdoe4+n9aj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ebfnnr+tcr5@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Theresa" <anmsmom333 at ...> wrote:

> > > turn2pg394 wrote:
> > >
> > > I know it's REALLY late, but has anyone watched the Evanna
> > > Lynch interview?  Is she NOT Luna?  ...
> > > 
> > > Candace


> > bboyminn:
> > 
> > It would be nice if you could post a link to the interview. ...
> > 

> Theresa:
> Well here is the link to the article on Leaky: 
> http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/index.php?articleID=8874
> 
> ...
> 
> Theresa
>

bboyminn:

Off the main point, but how did others find the audio quality of the
Luna Interview which is really found a BBC Newsround.

I found it very staticy and crackily. For the most part it was so poor
I could barely understand it and settled for reading the written
transcript.

Just trying to determine if it was the video itself or a problem with
my computer.

Here is a link directly to the transcript and video.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_5190000/newsid_5195400/5195422.stm

I did find Evanna Lynch to be very Luna-like, she speaks soft and
plain. I think she will do an excellent job.

Steve/bboyminn







From anmsmom333 at cox.net  Thu Aug 10 18:32:10 2006
From: anmsmom333 at cox.net (Theresa)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 18:32:10 -0000
Subject: Luna - Audio Quality
In-Reply-To: <ebfnnr+tcr5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ebfu3a+l51j@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Theresa" <anmsmom333@> wrote:
> 
> > > > turn2pg394 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I know it's REALLY late, but has anyone watched the Evanna
> > > > Lynch interview?  Is she NOT Luna?  ...
> > > > 
> > > > Candace
> 
> 
> > > bboyminn:
> > > 
> > > It would be nice if you could post a link to the interview. ...
> > > 
> 
> > Theresa:
> > Well here is the link to the article on Leaky: 
> > http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/index.php?articleID=8874
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > Theresa
> >
> 
> bboyminn:
> 
> Off the main point, but how did others find the audio quality of 
the
> Luna Interview which is really found a BBC Newsround.
> 
> I found it very staticy and crackily. For the most part it was so 
poor
> I could barely understand it and settled for reading the written
> transcript.
> 
> Just trying to determine if it was the video itself or a problem 
with
> my computer.
> 
> Here is a link directly to the transcript and video.
> 
> 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_5190000/newsid_5195400/51954
22.stm
> 
> I did find Evanna Lynch to be very Luna-like, she speaks soft and
> plain. I think she will do an excellent job.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn
>
Yes mine was a bit crackly too. It didn't help that she speaks so 
softly though. I printed the transcript prior to watching and would 
look at it from time to time as I could catch what Evanna had said. 
I love how she reacted to the website stuff about her. Some people 
were a bit rude in the beginning but I loved her as Luna from the 
moment they announced it. I also love that Daniel Radcliffe was so 
nice to her during her screen test. That was so Harry Potter and 
Luna interaction. I can hardly wait until next summer.

Theresa






From taguem at jmsearch.com  Thu Aug 10 17:30:41 2006
From: taguem at jmsearch.com (Michelle A. Tague)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 13:30:41 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Luna - Audio Quality
In-Reply-To: <ebfnnr+tcr5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <EXCHANGE017pwKuX9aj00001d6f@compdevsys.com>

Mine was fine.
 
Michelle A. Tague
newbie to the group!

  _____  

From: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com [mailto:HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 12:44 PM
To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Luna - Audio Quality



--- In HPFGU-Movie@ <mailto:HPFGU-Movie%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com,
"Theresa" <anmsmom333 at ...> wrote:

> > > turn2pg394 wrote:
> > >
> > > I know it's REALLY late, but has anyone watched the Evanna
> > > Lynch interview? Is she NOT Luna? ...
> > > 
> > > Candace

> > bboyminn:
> > 
> > It would be nice if you could post a link to the interview. ...
> > 

> Theresa:
> Well here is the link to the article on Leaky: 
> http://www.the-
<http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/index.php?articleID=8874>
leaky-cauldron.org/index.php?articleID=8874
> 
> ...
> 
> Theresa
>

bboyminn:

Off the main point, but how did others find the audio quality of the
Luna Interview which is really found a BBC Newsround.

I found it very staticy and crackily. For the most part it was so poor
I could barely understand it and settled for reading the written
transcript.

Just trying to determine if it was the video itself or a problem with
my computer.

Here is a link directly to the transcript and video.

http://news.
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_5190000/newsid_5195400/5195422.stm
> bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_5190000/newsid_5195400/5195422.stm

I did find Evanna Lynch to be very Luna-like, she speaks soft and
plain. I think she will do an excellent job.

Steve/bboyminn



 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







From turn2pg394 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 11 01:15:55 2006
From: turn2pg394 at yahoo.com (can can)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 18:15:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Set your calendars / Luna /JKR
Message-ID: <20060811011555.75504.qmail@web57114.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Steve, sorry I didn't post the link.  I'm always late with news and had figured everyone had seen it way before me, so I didn't bother posting it.  I watched it on Newsround, put my headphones in and everything to listen, and I didn't have a problem with sound, she was dreamy, wispy Luna in my headphones.  She's perfect!
   
  Lynda, you mentioned Emma not pursuing any projects between films.  She said she actually wants to continue school all the way through college.  She said if something comes along that's interesting I guess, she'd go for it, but schools important.  I so admire that about Emma.  I was hoping one of them would say that.  Dan and Rupert are going to very well in acting world, I PRAY, and she will too when her time comes, I pray!lol
   
  On another note, and it's interesting that Steve mentioned me not posting a link because that's what I came to do.  I don't know if i'm late on this or not, but JKR did a reading in NYC with Steven King and John Irving for charity.  I just watched it.  Poor thing had to admit DD was no longer with us.  I kind of wish she hadn't, not that i'm one of those people who's desire to read a book or watch a movie when the ending as already been revealed, fades (just the opposite actually), but I liked not knowing as far as DD goes.  And Petunia, WOW.  I guess I kind of thought...maybe...I don't know, anyway.  Oh well, check it out for yourself, if you haven't already.
  http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?g=01ba972b-80ff-40ed-b26d-62d9e2b49029&f=06/64&fg=email


peace...real love...

Candace
 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From wootshanks at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 11 09:40:44 2006
From: wootshanks at yahoo.com (Paul W)
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 02:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Luna - Audio Quality
In-Reply-To: <ebfu3a+l51j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060811094044.79785.qmail@web35208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



Theresa <anmsmom333 at cox.net> wrote:          > > > >
> > > > I know it's REALLY late, but has anyone watched the Evanna
> > > > Lynch interview? Is she NOT Luna? ...
> > > > 
> > > > Candace
> 
> 


      Recent Activity
    
      6
  New Members

Visit Your Group 
  SPONSORED LINKS
      
   Harry potter  
   Entertainment movie  
   Entertainment new york  
   Harry potter collectible  
   Harry potter hat

      Yahoo! Avatars
  Express Yourself
  Show your style in
  Messenger & more.

    Yahoo! Search
  Find it now 
  Everything you
  need in one place.

    Yahoo! News
  Fashion News
  What's the word on
  fashion and style?



  .

   She is!!!  The way her voice is soft, and it kinda trails off is perfect!!!!  I can't wait!!!
         



Prof Wootshanks
>(o.o)<
Head o Ravenclaw
Quidditch Mastah
Holder of the Coveted WOMBAT Card
 			
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Everyone is raving about the  all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From ashlee_kidman at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 13 07:47:35 2006
From: ashlee_kidman at yahoo.com (Sherman)
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 07:47:35 -0000
Subject: Someone please help me
Message-ID: <ebmlen+10bao@eGroups.com>

I just want to see nude Dan pic.....Can someone guide me to that? 
Thanks....I just wanna to know that Dan really do that nude scene..







From alexpie at aol.com  Mon Aug 14 00:39:35 2006
From: alexpie at aol.com (alexpie at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 20:39:35 EDT
Subject: Someone please help me
Message-ID: <32a.a29843f.32112047@aol.com>

The production is not in even in rehearsal yet; as with all plays,  
photography will be strictly forbidden.  I will not comment further.
Barb


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 14 17:36:07 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 17:36:07 -0000
Subject: Someone please help me
In-Reply-To: <ebmlen+10bao@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ebqca7+a2ve@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Sherman" <ashlee_kidman at ...> wrote:
>
> I just want to see nude Dan pic.....Can someone guide me to that? 
> Thanks....I just wanna to know that Dan really do that nude scene..
>

bboyminn:

Remember, Dan is only 17, consequently any photo of him /nude/ would
be ILLEGAL in 99.9% of the world. 

It is one thing for him to /potentially/ appear nude in an controlled
environment and in an artistic context, but it is quite another to
think of transferring photos of him around the Internet. That would
surely have the police knocking at your door.

Further Dan seems to be a very straight-laced and proper boy, so I
absolutely don't think you will seem him nude in any context beyond
the requirement of a legitimate stage play or movie, and even then I
highly suspect it will be very tastefully and discreetly done. Even
further, I seriously doubt that Dan will do anything to jeopardize his
very lucrative film career by engaging in anything that would even
remotely be considered morally /untasteful/.

Let us not let our enthusiasm override out good judgement. Dan is a
good boy and a minor, so the likelihood of nude photos of him
appearing are somewhere between zero and none... as they should be.

Steve/bboyminn







From kchuplis at alltel.net  Mon Aug 14 18:49:26 2006
From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen)
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 13:49:26 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Someone please help me
References: <ebqca7+a2ve@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000701c6bfd2$5dda9000$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local>

do you people not recognize trolls?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve" <bboyminn at yahoo.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 12:36 PM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Someone please help me


> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Sherman" <ashlee_kidman at ...> wrote:
> >
> > I just want to see nude Dan pic.....Can someone guide me to that?
> > Thanks....I just wanna to know that Dan really do that nude scene..
> >
>
> bboyminn:
>
> Remember, Dan is only 17, consequently any photo of him /nude/ would
> be ILLEGAL in 99.9% of the world.
>
> It is one thing for him to /potentially/ appear nude in an controlled
> environment and in an artistic context, but it is quite another to
> think of transferring photos of him around the Internet. That would
> surely have the police knocking at your door.
>
> Further Dan seems to be a very straight-laced and proper boy, so I
> absolutely don't think you will seem him nude in any context beyond
> the requirement of a legitimate stage play or movie, and even then I
> highly suspect it will be very tastefully and discreetly done. Even
> further, I seriously doubt that Dan will do anything to jeopardize his
> very lucrative film career by engaging in anything that would even
> remotely be considered morally /untasteful/.
>
> Let us not let our enthusiasm override out good judgement. Dan is a
> good boy and a minor, so the likelihood of nude photos of him
> appearing are somewhere between zero and none... as they should be.
>
> Steve/bboyminn
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!
>
> Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at
HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>





From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 16 22:15:29 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 22:15:29 -0000
Subject: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
Message-ID: <ec05e1+u7ab@eGroups.com>

At the American Chronicle, young writer Samuel Van Eerden has voiced
his  opinions on the corrupting influences of Hollywood, and
specifically on recent decisions made by Dan Radcliffe and Dakota Fanning.

Since Dan's role in Equus was recently discussed her, and the
consensus seemed to be that we wished him well and welcomed the
change. Samuel Van Eerden has a decidedly different view on the matter.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=12465

Just passing it along.

Steve/bboyminn 







From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 16 22:29:19 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 22:29:19 -0000
Subject: 'Drivng Lessons' to Air on ITV in Sept.
Message-ID: <ec067v+k1k8@eGroups.com>

Just looking around the Internet and stumbled across this article at
Harry Potter Fan Zone -

http://www.harrypotterfanzone.com/fusion/fullnews.php?id=1186

The Sun TV Guide indicates that ITV will be airing 'Driving Lessons'
shortly after it's offical release in early September.

Just passing it along.

Steve/bboyminn








From kchuplis at alltel.net  Thu Aug 17 01:17:17 2006
From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 20:17:17 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec05e1+u7ab@eGroups.com>
References: <ec05e1+u7ab@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <7F4DD80E-A9CF-4D3B-9BD0-67837F2BB61A@alltel.net>

What did Dakota Fanning do?

On Aug 16, 2006, at 5:15 PM, Steve wrote:

> At the American Chronicle, young writer Samuel Van Eerden has voiced
> his  opinions on the corrupting influences of Hollywood, and
> specifically on recent decisions made by Dan Radcliffe and Dakota  
> Fanning.
>
> Since Dan's role in Equus was recently discussed her, and the
> consensus seemed to be that we wished him well and welcomed the
> change. Samuel Van Eerden has a decidedly different view on the  
> matter.
>
> http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp? 
> articleID=12465
>
> Just passing it along.
>
> Steve/bboyminn
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary  
> material from posts to which you're replying!
>
> Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at HPforGrownups- 
> owner at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>




From OctobersChild48 at aol.com  Thu Aug 17 06:30:07 2006
From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 02:30:07 EDT
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
Message-ID: <3b6.5838eb0.321566ef@aol.com>

In a message dated 8/16/06 6:18:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
bboyminn at yahoo.com writes:


> 
> At the American Chronicle, young writer Samuel Van Eerden has voiced
> his opinions on the corrupting influences of Hollywood, and
> specifically on recent decisions made by Dan Radcliffe and Dakota Fanning.
> 
> Since Dan's role in Equus was recently discussed her, and the
> consensus seemed to be that we wished him well and welcomed the
> change. Samuel Van Eerden has a decidedly different view on the matter.
> 
> http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=12465
> 
> Just passing it along.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Sandy:

Thank you, Steve, for passing this along. For the record, I would like to say 
that I totally agree with the author of this article, and that I, for one, do 
not wish Daniel well in the role, nor do I welcome the change.

Sandy


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 17 18:03:48 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 18:03:48 -0000
Subject: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <3b6.5838eb0.321566ef@aol.com>
Message-ID: <ec2b24+a46p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, OctobersChild48 at ... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 8/16/06 6:18:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> bboyminn at ... writes:
> 
> 
> > 
> > At the American Chronicle, young writer Samuel Van
> > Eerden has voiced his opinions on the corrupting 
> > influences of Hollywood, and specifically on recent 
> > decisions made by Dan Radcliffe and Dakota Fanning.
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> >
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=12465
> > 
> > Just passing it along.
> > 
> > Steve/bboyminn 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> Sandy:
> 
> Thank you, Steve, for passing this along. For the record,
> I would like to say that I totally agree with the author 
> of this article, and that I, for one, do not wish Daniel 
> well in the role, nor do I welcome the change.
> 
> Sandy


bboyminn:

While I do wish Dan well in his role on the stage, I also confess a
degree of uneasiness. Though I think Dan's choice to take on a role in
the limited confines of the stage is far wiser that Dakota Fanning
making a major motion picture with such adult content.

Dan's action will not be seen by millions of people at a time. They
will be confined to a few hundred people in an auditorium with a
limited view; people without 'pause' and 'zoom' buttons. 

I also think in America, this probably wouldn't be allowed. But as
I've said, Europe is far more open minded on these matters. 

Admittedly, this is a bold move on Dan's part, but when you play a
squeaky clean character like Harry Potter, perhaps 'breaking the mold'
is a good idea. I am reminded of Leonardo DeCaprio's role in 'Total
Eclipse' as the gay poet Rimbaud, which was followed by 'Romeo and
Juliet', 'Man in the Iron Mask', and 'Gangs of New York' among others.
All very bold moves for an actor. Though I will point out that
Leonardo was 21 when he made 'Total Eclipse'. 

I think Leonardo was intent on proving that he was a serious actor and
not just another flash-in-the-pan pretty boy teen heart-throb. I
wonder if that is one of the reasons why Dan is taking on this role,
to prove to himself and everyone else that he is a serious capable actor.

And what better place to do it than on the stage. Stage acting is very
demanding. There are no retakes, no director to yell 'cut' and do it
again. Further, the stage can't manipulate emotions the way movie
camera work, special effects, and music can. On that stage, you are
figuratively raw and bare. You bring life to the character through
skill and talent, either that or you 'die' on stage.

I've alway though stage acting was the perfect training ground for TV
and other young actors who are trying to hone their craft and prove
their skill. 

As a side note, I'm not sure when this play is suppose to open.
Perhaps, it won't open until after Dan's next birthday. That's a small
concession, but it's something.

I guess my central point is two fold. One I do feel a certain
uneasiness about Dan taking on such a role. The other is that, I think
the role he has taken on, daring as it is, is contrained by the format. 

Just one man's opinion.

Steve/bboyminn






From juli17 at aol.com  Thu Aug 17 20:31:36 2006
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:31:36 -0400
Subject: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <1155837654.936.33436.m16@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1155837654.936.33436.m16@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <8C89053454A9DA0-574-4D91@FWM-M30.sysops.aol.com>

 
Steve wrote:
> At the American Chronicle, young writer Samuel Van Eerden has voiced
> his opinions on the corrupting influences of Hollywood, and
> specifically on recent decisions made by Dan Radcliffe and Dakota Fanning.
> 
> Since Dan's role in Equus was recently discussed her, and the
> consensus seemed to be that we wished him well and welcomed the
> change. Samuel Van Eerden has a decidedly different view on the matter.
> 
> http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=12465
> 
> Just passing it along.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn 


Sandy:

Thank you, Steve, for passing this along. For the record, I would like to say 
that I totally agree with the author of this article, and that I, for one, do 
not wish Daniel well in the role, nor do I welcome the change.


Julie:
I question this being the corrupting influence of "Hollywood" (Equus
was a play first wasn't it?). Also I assume the actors and their
parents can make a decision without it having to be blamed on 
Hollywood. They can think for themselves, can't they? ;-) 
 
Beyond that, I'm sorry you don't wish Daniel well in the role
(whatever you mean by that, maybe you hope it will hurt his 
career?). I don't know whether it's a good career move or not,
but I personally have no interest in judging the morality of
others based on their choices, unless those choices specifically
harm other people. And Dan is 17, so I wouldn't really consider
him a child (not in the same league as 12 year old Dakota). 
 
But that's me,
 
Julie 
________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand. Always Free.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From artsylynda at aol.com  Thu Aug 17 20:40:49 2006
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:40:49 EDT
Subject: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
Message-ID: <40b.4f33907.32162e51@aol.com>

 
1a.  
_POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality _ 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/message/12999;_ylc=X3oDMTJydXBsbTFyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzM1OTcxNjEEZ3Jw
c3BJZAMxNjAwMDIwOTQ4BG1zZ0lkAzEyOTk5BHNlYwNkbXNnBHNsawN2bXNnBHN0aW1lAzExNTU4Mz
c2NTQ-) 
Posted by: "Steve" _bboyminn at yahoo.com _ 
(mailto:bboyminn at yahoo.com?Subject=Re: POV:%20Dan%20and%20Dakotta,%20and%20Morality)   _bboyminn _ 
(http://profiles.yahoo.com/bboyminn) 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:15 pm (PST) 
>>At the American Chronicle, young writer Samuel  Van Eerden has voiced
his opinions on the corrupting influences of Hollywood,  and
specifically on recent decisions made by Dan Radcliffe and Dakota  Fanning.

Since Dan's role in Equus was recently discussed her, and  the
consensus seemed to be that we wished him well and welcomed  the
change. Samuel Van Eerden has a decidedly different view on the  matter.

_http://www.americanhttp://wwwhttp://www.amhttp://www.ahttp://www.amehttp:_ 
(http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=12465) 

Just  passing it along.

Steve/bboyminn <<

 

 

For one thing, Dan isn't a "Hollywood" kid, he's in the  British film 
industry, which is a lot different than ours.  What Dakota's  mother is allowing her 
child to do is appalling, really.  The kid's only 12  - how's she supposed to 
know how to act out such a scene???  Yikes.  I  sure won't go see that film.  
Dan's doing a STAGE PLAY - big difference to  start with, and it's a "classic" 
play that's garnered many awards.  There  are "tasteful" ways to portray what 
Dan has to do onstage, I'm sure, or schools  wouldn't have put on the 
production as some folks here have mentioned.  I  wish Dan had made a different 
choice of venue to show the range of his acting,  but Brits are a lot less hung-up 
on nudity than Americans.  We need to  remember the Puritans came here and 
that colors our thinking.  England's  not hung up on topless beaches, etc.  At 
17, they consider Dan an adult,  unlike here.  Anything he does now is not 
"child" anything, if I understand  the British laws that I've heard of.  So it's 
not right to compare  them.  And this twerp doesn't think Dan can act, either.  
He needs to  get a life (the twerp - Dan seems to be doing just fine).

 

Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

My blog: _www.abraxan.blogspot.com_ (http://www.abraxan.blogspot.com/)   
Read my Harry Potter fics here: 
_http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/_ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/)   




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From turn2pg394 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 17 13:17:53 2006
From: turn2pg394 at yahoo.com (can can)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 06:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Neville
Message-ID: <20060817131753.2746.qmail@web57106.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

And only because I'm excited about this I'm posting the link to this "interview".
  http://www.hpana.com/news.19552.html
  It's Matt Lewis talking about having more interaction in Order now!  Reason I'm excited is because my biggest fear for Order was not only that they would cut out Ron playing Quidditch, but also that they would cut Neville (ONCE AGAIN) out of a major scene, but this looks hopeful!


peace...real love...

Candace
 		
---------------------------------
Get your email and more, right on the  new Yahoo.com 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From libtax10375 at earthlink.net  Thu Aug 17 21:54:07 2006
From: libtax10375 at earthlink.net (Leeann McCullough)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 21:54:07 -0000
Subject: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec05e1+u7ab@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ec2ohv+e5gp@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>
> At the American Chronicle, young writer Samuel Van Eerden has 
voiced
> his  opinions on the corrupting influences of Hollywood, and
> specifically on recent decisions made by Dan Radcliffe and Dakota 
Fanning.
> 
> Since Dan's role in Equus was recently discussed her, and the
> consensus seemed to be that we wished him well and welcomed the
> change. Samuel Van Eerden has a decidedly different view on the 
matter.
> 
> http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?
articleID=12465
> 
> Just passing it along.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn

Sandy:

Thank you, Steve, for passing this along. For the record, I would 
like to say 
that I totally agree with the author of this article, and that I, 
for one, do 
not wish Daniel well in the role, nor do I welcome the change.

Sandy


>
Leeann Comes Out of The Kitchen To Speak Her Mind:

I know we aren't supposed to post "I agree" messages here, but  
Steve's post and Sandy's reply have moved me to respectfuly ask the 
elves to let me break that rule. I promise to iron my hands as soon 
as I get up from the computer!

I too am quite disturbed by Dan's decision to do this role. It goes 
without saying that it is his decision, but I am free to disagree. I 
fully expect to be accused of being a 40 something soccer mom with 
an all too conservative point of view, but lets face something: 
Declining morality just scratches the surface of todays problems. 

I don't want to start a thread of just what our problems are because 
that would get us nowhere. I just wanted to express my feelings 
about his decision to do this role. If he were my son, in the US 
still a minor by the way, I would hope he would pass on this one. I 
can't believe there aren't other fabulous scripts just waiting for 
him.

(deep bow) Thank you for your time. I'm off to warm up the iron. 








From jeanico2000 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 17 22:17:39 2006
From: jeanico2000 at yahoo.com (jeanico2000)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:17:39 -0000
Subject: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec05e1+u7ab@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ec2pu3+g6ge@eGroups.com>

Thanks for the link to this article, Steve. To me, however, it's 
just another opinion piece that I don't particularly agree with.  
First of all, how can one even start to compare Dakota and Dan (a 12 
year old and a 17 year old?). There is a huge difference between 
these 2 actors: Dakota is, indeed, a product of Hollywood, but 
definitely not Dan. He couldn't be further from the "Hollywood" 
mentality. He's smart, and grounded and knowledgeable. He is an 
artist who loves what he does and he makes choices, in my opinion, 
based on what he things will help him to fine tune his craft. 
Sometimes, an artist's choices can seem or even be controversial. To 
each his own. Nobody is forcing anybody to go see Dan in that play. 
It's kind of wrong, though, not to wish him well just because you 
don't agree with his choice.
On the other hand, and from what I understand in that article, 
Dakota's mum and agent encouraged her to take the part in that new 
movie because it may garner her an Oscar nomination. To me, as a 
parent, that's just plain disturbing. I applaud Dan for his guts, 
and I pity Dakota who is being stuffed in some kind of `Hollywood 
super star mold' for all the wrong reasons.         
Equus will be a challenge for Dan, but you've got to realize (and I 
think some of you have already pointed this out) that this is a 
play, not a movie. They won't be shining any spotlights on Dan's 
private assets in the theatre. The lighting will probably be dark, 
and multi layered, and the nude scenes (which are incidental) can be 
done in an appropriate manner. Dan knows this, I'm sure. I, for one, 
wish him all the success and happiness in the world!
Jeannie 
PS: to answer your question, Steve, Dan will not be turning 18 until 
July 23rd. He will be 17 in the play, as it will be staged from 
sometime late February or early March through June 19th, 2007
  
 
--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>
> At the American Chronicle, young writer Samuel Van Eerden has 
voiced
> his  opinions on the corrupting influences of Hollywood, and
> specifically on recent decisions made by Dan Radcliffe and Dakota 
Fanning.
> 
> Since Dan's role in Equus was recently discussed her, and the
> consensus seemed to be that we wished him well and welcomed the
> change. Samuel Van Eerden has a decidedly different view on the 
matter.
> 
> http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?
articleID=12465
> 
> Just passing it along.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn
>








From kchuplis at alltel.net  Thu Aug 17 22:53:41 2006
From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 17:53:41 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec2ohv+e5gp@eGroups.com>
References: <ec2ohv+e5gp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <51199025-5C15-45EA-B418-7B3EA72E028A@alltel.net>

My difficulty with this being about "declining morality" and "todays  
problems" is that the play was premiered some 30+ years ago (1973).  
It's just truly difficult for me to consider this some outlandish  
decision by Dan and his parents when this play is actually what can  
be considered a long time staple of theater material.


On Aug 17, 2006, at 4:54 PM, Leeann McCullough wrote:

> Declining morality just scratches the surface of todays problems.




From kchuplis at alltel.net  Thu Aug 17 23:00:24 2006
From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 18:00:24 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <3b6.5838eb0.321566ef@aol.com>
References: <3b6.5838eb0.321566ef@aol.com>
Message-ID: <6D33BB4A-207A-4E6D-B12E-537824AAFF49@alltel.net>

OK, finally read the article. I can say I'd have to have a lot better  
reason than an Oscar to have my child do Hounddog, but I know little  
about the script OR what her mother REALLY said (notice, no sources  
quoted really).

However, as a theater person, I can guarantee you that Dan will get a  
years worth of acting lessons out of doing the role in Equus and,  
yes, it will help to separate him from the Harry Potter image.  
Legions of actors have fallen victim to never being cast again when  
they have become personified by one role. I can't blame him one bit.  
And I would fully expect him to do other controversial or  
diametrically opposite characters outside of Harry Potter or he'll  
never get to do much of anything again really. It just works that way. 



From siskiou at vcem.com  Thu Aug 17 23:14:06 2006
From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:14:06 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <51199025-5C15-45EA-B418-7B3EA72E028A@alltel.net>
References: <ec2ohv+e5gp@eGroups.com>
 <51199025-5C15-45EA-B418-7B3EA72E028A@alltel.net>
Message-ID: <1291580208.20060817161406@vcem.com>



Hi,

Thursday, August 17, 2006, 3:53:41 PM, kchuplis at alltel.net wrote:

> It's just truly difficult for me to consider this some outlandish
> decision by Dan and his parents when this play is actually what can
> be considered a long time staple of theater material.

Well, I'm not sure if it's exactly considered a staple.

If Dan really has his pick of plays/movie scripts, I'm sure
"something" must make him think *this* is the one that will do
the most for him in some way (may that be expanding his
range or the ideal vehicle to call more attention to himself
or anything in between).

I hope it works out for him.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at vcem.com





From turn2pg394 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 17 13:12:44 2006
From: turn2pg394 at yahoo.com (can can)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 06:12:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: speculations confirmed, not confirmed, whatever lol
Message-ID: <20060817131244.73503.qmail@web57115.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

http://www.hpana.com/news.19547.html
  If you haven't seen it already, Dan's new interview talks about maybe doing the 6th movie and being naked for Equus.  Does this confirm anything in our recent discussions?lol


peace...real love...

Candace
 		
---------------------------------
Get your email and more, right on the  new Yahoo.com 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Fri Aug 18 09:04:34 2006
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 19:04:34 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec2ohv+e5gp@eGroups.com>
References: <ec05e1+u7ab@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <44E60F42.4760.DBF82@drednort.alphalink.com.au>

On 17 Aug 2006 at 21:54, Leeann McCullough wrote:

> I don't want to start a thread of just what our problems are because 
> that would get us nowhere. I just wanted to express my feelings 
> about his decision to do this role. If he were my son, in the US 
> still a minor by the way, I would hope he would pass on this one. I 
> can't believe there aren't other fabulous scripts just waiting for 
> him.

The thing is... you are in the US, Leeann. Daniel Radcliffe isn't - and I think that does make a 
real difference here.

I'm trying to avoid the risk of upsetting anyone, but American attitudes to nudity, and 
particularly to childhood nudity are considerably different from those of many other places in 
the world. In general, most English speaking countries are reasonably prudish on nudity 
compared to many other countries, and the US is probably the most prudish of all of them.

Let me say, I don't think there's anything wrong with that, within a persons own culture. It'd be 
none of my business if Americans were all puritans in big hats - but when you look across 
cultures, even between cultures that are very similar in many ways, it is relevant.

Now, I'm not British - I'm Australian - so I'm looking at Dan's cultural background as an 
outsider as well - although I think Australians are still a bit closer to Britain culturally than the 
US is.

I really don't think nudity is as big a deal in the UK as it is in the US - and this includes the 
nudity of children. It's not exactly common to see nude children in British films or television - 
but it's also not that uncommon.

I mentioned Kes recently - it's one of my favourite films and it is a classic of British cinema. 
And it contains fairly graphic nudity of a boy in his early teens. It's there for a reason - and 
that's important. We're not talking about sexualised nudity, or nudity for the sake of nudity - 
but a scene where a person is naked for a good reason within the context of the story.

Growing up in the 1980s I can recall seeing children's TV shows on Australian TV that 
contained nude scenes involving children - a series called Saturdee which was set in a 
country town in the 1920s - the children swam nude in that show, because that is what kids in 
country towns did in the 1920s. Again in the context of the story, that made sense, and so in 
our culture it was OK. I'm not saying it should be fine in the US (although thinking about it - I 
do seem to recall the 1960s Disney film, Pollyanna opening with a scene of boys 
skinnydipping, so maybe it was fine in the US then) - but in our cultural context here in 
Australia, at the time that show was made, it was fine.

For that matter - and this does embarrass me to mention - I appeared nude in a film myself 
when I was 15. Again, in context, it made sense.

I guess my point is that what would concern me is if people started trying to impose the views 
from their culture on other cultures. Many other countries aren't as worried about nude 
children as the US is - and why should they be? There may be nothing wrong with America 
being that way - but that doesn't make it automatically right for anywhere else. Just as the 
fact, it's OK in some countries, doesn't make it right for America.

Different cultures have different views.

And in the UK, there's certainly nothing illegal about a 17 year old boy appearing nude on 
stage - on in a film, or on TV. As long as the context is right - it can certainly be illegal if the 
context is one that is intended to exploit the child.

But it's not exploitative, it's not illegal. And if it's not's exploitable is it really a problem?

Within that cultural context.

Somebody, I think, said the other day, that photos of nude children are illegal nearly 
everywhere. That's actually nowhere near true. Child pornography is illegal nearly 
everywhere, but in most places, a nude photo of a child would not automatically be 
pornographic. Again it depends on the context and the precise form of the photo - I've just 
taken a bunch of schoolkids to the Melbourne Museum on an excursion - in one exhibit there 
on the development of the human body, there's life size nude photos of a boy and girl of 
about 12 or 13. There are films out there with nude children in them - Kes is one, I've 
mentioned, but there's others.

Context is what counts. And that includes the cultural context.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia





From silverstreams at sbcglobal.net  Fri Aug 18 19:19:20 2006
From: silverstreams at sbcglobal.net (Candle)
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 12:19:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec2pu3+g6ge@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060818191920.48931.qmail@web82204.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>
> At the American Chronicle, young writer Samuel Van Eerden has 
voiced
> his  opinions on the corrupting influences of Hollywood, and
> specifically on recent decisions made by Dan Radcliffe and Dakota 
Fanning.
> 
> Since Dan's role in Equus was recently discussed her, and the
> consensus seemed to be that we wished him well and welcomed the
> change. Samuel Van Eerden has a decidedly different view on the 
matter.
> 
> 
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?
articleID=12465
> 
> Just passing it along.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn
>

I hope that Dan doesn't ruin his career. It's unfortunate, but the article did point out that some people have stalled their careers by the choices that they have made. I do feel bad for Dakota. I wonder how she will deal with it. Back when Jodi Foster did "Taxi" her sister was her body double in the rape scene. Then they used Jodi for the "aftershock" of the rape scene. She said in an interview that they had a psychologist on set to make sure that she was okay, but that she didn't even know that she had been raped until she saw the movie and then thought something about "oh, that is why I was upset." I hope it's not to intense for Dakota and that she can deal with it, Oscar or not.

Candle 
   
  May there always be a light to guide you.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From alexpie at aol.com  Sat Aug 19 01:12:07 2006
From: alexpie at aol.com (alexpie at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 21:12:07 EDT
Subject: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
Message-ID: <51b.5de63da.3217bf67@aol.com>


Steve wrote:I also think in America, this probably wouldn't be allowed. But  
as
I've said, Europe is far more open minded on these matters. 

Equus  ran for over 1200 performances on Broadway.
Good luck to Dan, for trying to stretch his acting chops, and boo hiss to  
the Miss Grundys who think the human body is somehow dirty.  The only dirty  
thing is the mind.
Barb




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From lizzy1933 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 19 03:55:08 2006
From: lizzy1933 at yahoo.com (Elizabeth L. Chase)
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 20:55:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
Message-ID: <20060819035508.55819.qmail@web36607.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Folks, don't panic!  If Dan's going to be running around starkers during the whole play like Oh, Calcutta or the one scene in Hair where everyone 'let it all hang out', there might be cause for concern, but I hardly think that's the case!  Someone else has also brought up the lighting, etc.

        Lizzie Lilly
   
   
   
  Oh God, it's years since I played the villian.  I haven't played a baddie for ages.
  -- Alan Rickman July 2006
   
   





 		
---------------------------------
Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com.  Check it out. 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From elvine78 at hotmail.com  Sat Aug 19 10:36:06 2006
From: elvine78 at hotmail.com (Elvine Elvine)
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 12:36:06 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <51b.5de63da.3217bf67@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BAY112-F33B4102BC5EABBCC1C71DFDD430@phx.gbl>

I'm European, from Scandinavia. I read the messages about how 
"inappropriate" (seems to be a very popular word?) it would be for Dan to 
appear naked. And I realize, more and more, how different our cultures are 
even though we are also very much alike.

Steve, any one presenting views even close to yours *would* be considered a 
prude in every sense of the word here. Please note that I'm not saying that 
you are wrong, not in your cultural context. Most people wouldn't even begin 
to think that it might be "inappropriate" (a word very seldom used here, 
anyway) to appear naked on stage. The only way Dan might embarrass himself 
is, I think, if he's not up to the task. I understand it's a very demanding 
role. That's my one and only concern.

If he, in the meantime, manages to spread a little European tolerance to 
nakedness to his American fans, then all the better. I just don't see why 
any actor should base his choice of roles on how it might be perceived by 
other people, as long as she or he is all right with it her/himself. I'm 
sure many people in this world find it "inappropriate" that Emma Watson is 
even talking to boys when she's playing Hermione, to take it to the furthest 
extreme.

And no, a naked any-year-old would not be breaking any laws in this part of 
the world.

Christin

_________________________________________________________________
Messenger + 3 = SANT! F Messenger i din 3-mobil. 
http://msn.microsoft.se/adstat/msnstats/sweden/redirect.asp?msnid=1460




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 19 14:56:14 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 14:56:14 -0000
Subject: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <BAY112-F33B4102BC5EABBCC1C71DFDD430@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <ec78qe+r5q5@eGroups.com>

"Elvine Elvine" <elvine78 at ...> wrote:
> Elvine/ Christin:
>
> I'm European, from Scandinavia. I read the messages
> about how "inappropriate" ... it would be for Dan to 
> appear naked. And I realize, more and more, how different 
> our cultures are even though we are also very much alike.
> 
> Steve, any one presenting views even close to yours 
> *would* be considered a prude ... here. .... Most 
> people wouldn't ... think ... it ... "inappropriate" ...
> to appear naked on stage. The only way Dan might 
> embarrass himself is, ... if he's not up to the task. 
> I understand it's a very demanding role. ...
> 
> If he ... manages to spread a little European tolerance 
> to nakedness to his American fans, then all the better. 
> I just don't see why any actor should base his choice of 
> roles on how it might be perceived by other people, as 
> long as she or he is all right with it her/himself. ....
> 
> Christin

bboyminn:

I'm going to stray slightly from the central topic of 
this group while I rant a bit, but I hope to bring it 
back on or close to the appropriate topic by the end.

First, Christin, keep in my that I wasn't expressing my 
personal opinion, but what I preceived to be the opinion 
of the American public at large. Also, keep in mind that 
there is a radical contingent here in the USA that thinks 
Harry Potter is the Spawn of the Devil and the prelude to 
the second coming (maybe sligtly over stated).

The problem here in the USA, a country which I dearly love, 
is that we let fanatics and fundimentalist force an 'all 
or nothing' context to politics. For example, in our zeal 
to protect children we frequently go to extremes. I can 
think of once case where a guy was prosecuted for video 
taping a child's birthday party, but because the video tape 
tended to show all the children photographed from the neck 
down, they we sure he was thinking dirty thoughts. So, they 
called his poorly made but innocent video tape 'child 
pornography'. Now, I never heard whether the prosecution 
was successful. I can't imagine that it was. But it shows 
how extreme things can get here. 

Also, note that he doesn't need to be convicted to be 
punished. The accusation destroyed his reputation, 
inhibited his ability to get a job, and cost him a small 
fortune in legal bills. That's the beauty of fundamentalist 
thinking in cases like this, even if they lose, they win.

The problem is there are fanatics and fundimentalist who 
think they can legislate, prosecute, and punish what I am 
thinking, or more accurately, what THEY THINK I am thinking. 
We will have reach a sorry state of affairs when we allow 
people to be prosecuted for what someone else thinks they 
might be thinking. When we finally have the 'thought police', 
we will have truly reached '1984'.

While the fanatics and hyper-rationalized fundamentalists 
have a lot of influence here, most Americans are far more 
open minded and level headed. 

Back to Dan, a part of me wonders if he isn't trying to 
prove something primarily to himself. He did a wonderful 
job in 'David Copperfield', which I believe was his first 
major role. But the role wasn't too demanding. Though in 
one scene where his step-father yelled at him at the dinner 
table, I swear Dan was really close to tears.

Other than that, Dan has been playing Harry Potter, a nice 
squeaky clean hero role. While the movie have been good, 
they are a bit shallow. The real meat and heart of the roles 
has been softened tremendously by lack of time. So, I think 
Dan is wondering himself whether he is just Harry Potter, or 
if he is really Dan Radclifffe - talented actor. This role 
in Equus, I suspect will push him to his limit. The emotional 
range is very demanding, and there will be no movie magic to 
make up of any lacking in the characters. He seems very  
'matter of fact' about the nude part. He said something like 
'it's in the script, so it must be done' and 'to do otherwise
 wouldn't really be playing the role, it would be a watered 
down version'. 

He's taken on a very demanding role, and even if he falls a 
bit short in it, he still will have grown tremendously by 
having played it. Even if his current talent and skill aren't 
up to it 100%, I hope at least his acting potential shows 
through, and he gets credit for that. 

As a side note, I've been thinking about the direction of 
the careers of Dan and Rupert after Harry Potter, and I 
think stage roles and independant film are both excellent 
place to prove themselves as genuine actors with range and 
depth. This is especially true of stage roles. It will help 
them grow tremendously as actors.

That's partly why I'm not as fussed about Dan's role on stage 
as I am about Dakota Fanning play her role on the screen. In 
the case of Dakota Fanning, it seems to be more about winning 
an Oscar than it is about proving herself as a serious actress. 

Just a few more thoughts.

Steve/bboyminn






From rkdas at charter.net  Sat Aug 19 20:37:28 2006
From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003)
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 20:37:28 -0000
Subject: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec78qe+r5q5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ec7sq8+p1as@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> bboyminn:
> 
> I'm going to stray slightly from the central topic of 
> this group while I rant a bit, but I hope to bring it 
> back on or close to the appropriate topic by the end.
> 
> First, Christin, keep in my that I wasn't expressing my 
> personal opinion, but what I preceived to be the opinion 
> of the American public at large. Also, keep in mind that 
> there is a radical contingent here in the USA that thinks 
> Harry Potter is the Spawn of the Devil and the prelude to 
> the second coming (maybe sligtly over stated).
> 
> The problem here in the USA, a country which I dearly love, 
> is that we let fanatics and fundimentalist force an 'all 
> or nothing' context to politics. For example, in our zeal 
> to protect children we frequently go to extremes. I can 
> think of once case where a guy was prosecuted for video 
> taping a child's birthday party, but because the video tape 
> tended to show all the children photographed from the neck 
> down, they we sure he was thinking dirty thoughts. So, they 
> called his poorly made but innocent video tape 'child 
> pornography'. Now, I never heard whether the prosecution 
> was successful. I can't imagine that it was. But it shows 
> how extreme things can get here. 
> 

Jen interjects:
Steve, I know you didn't mean to, but you sound like you are poo-
pooing the real and deadly crime of child pornography which exists in 
spades here and most westernized countries. Please don't confuse the 
current vogue of blaming everything wrong with America 
on "fundamentalists and fanactics" with the dedicated people working 
to end the heart-breaking crime of child pornography.

Dan obviously wants an acting challenge and I can think of no greater 
challenge than playing the disturbed boy in Equus. More power to him.

Best to you and yours from just another one of those pathetic 
American prudes...
JenD.
>
SNIPPED YET AGAIN
> Just a few more thoughts.
> 
> Steve/bboyminn
>








From kchuplis at alltel.net  Sat Aug 19 21:25:52 2006
From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen)
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 16:25:52 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec7sq8+p1as@eGroups.com>
References: <ec7sq8+p1as@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <2F3E14AB-E8AD-405B-A45E-00ACA2011273@alltel.net>


On Aug 19, 2006, at 3:37 PM, susanbones2003 wrote:
>
> Jen interjects:
> Steve, I know you didn't mean to, but you sound like you are poo-
> pooing the real and deadly crime of child pornography which exists in
> spades here and most westernized countries. Please don't confuse the
> current vogue of blaming everything wrong with America
> on "fundamentalists and fanactics" with the dedicated people working
> to end the heart-breaking crime of child pornography.
>
> Dan obviously wants an acting challenge and I can think of no greater
> challenge than playing the disturbed boy in Equus. More power to him.
>
> Best to you and yours from just another one of those pathetic
> American prudes...
> JenD.

I disagree. I think he sounded like he was poopooing extremism. The  
example he gave was a good one, I thought.

Karen

>>



From joxy at inet.karoo.co.uk  Sat Aug 19 21:38:07 2006
From: joxy at inet.karoo.co.uk (joxy)
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 21:38:07 -0000
Subject: No subject
In-Reply-To: <51b.5de63da.3217bf67@aol.com>
Message-ID: <ec80bv+g9a1@eGroups.com>

It's not about being open-minded.
It's not about thinking bodies are dirty either.
It's about exhibitionism and voyeurism.
It's also, in the case of Equus, about silliness.


>....Europe is far more open minded on these matters. 
>
>....who think the human body is somehow dirty.
> Barb






From rkdas at charter.net  Sat Aug 19 22:13:26 2006
From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003)
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 22:13:26 -0000
Subject: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <2F3E14AB-E8AD-405B-A45E-00ACA2011273@alltel.net>
Message-ID: <ec82e6+dgkr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Karen <kchuplis at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> On Aug 19, 2006, at 3:37 PM, susanbones2003 wrote:
> >
> > Jen interjects:
> > Steve, I know you didn't mean to, but you sound like you are poo-
> > pooing the real and deadly crime of child pornography which 
exists in
> > spades here and most westernized countries. Please don't confuse 
the
> > current vogue of blaming everything wrong with America
> > on "fundamentalists and fanactics" with the dedicated people 
working
> > to end the heart-breaking crime of child pornography.
> >
> > Dan obviously wants an acting challenge and I can think of no 
greater
> > challenge than playing the disturbed boy in Equus. More power to 
him.
> >
> > Best to you and yours from just another one of those pathetic
> > American prudes...
> > JenD.
> 
> I disagree. I think he sounded like he was poopooing extremism. 
The  
> example he gave was a good one, I thought.
> 
> Karen
> 
Hi Karen,
To me it sounded as if he were saying that we really spend out time 
on useless witch-hunts, which is not fair. Yes there are times when 
an overzealous prosector goes after someone who's innocent but in the 
main, the fight against child pornography here has many thousand 
times more real bad guys than innocents in the wrong place at the 
wrong time.
Jen D.
> >>
>








From elvine78 at hotmail.com  Sat Aug 19 22:17:01 2006
From: elvine78 at hotmail.com (Elvine Elvine)
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 00:17:01 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec78qe+r5q5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BAY112-F31ACF2A966CE2BC0E828B6DD430@phx.gbl>

Thanks for correcting my misstakes, Steve! Also, it seems we both agree on 
all important parts considering Equus. It will be a great challenge, I'm 
sure.

Christin


>From: "Steve" <bboyminn at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
>Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 14:56:14 -0000
>
>"Elvine Elvine" <elvine78 at ...> wrote:
> > Elvine/ Christin:
> >
> > I'm European, from Scandinavia. I read the messages
> > about how "inappropriate" ... it would be for Dan to
> > appear naked. And I realize, more and more, how different
> > our cultures are even though we are also very much alike.
> >
> > Steve, any one presenting views even close to yours
> > *would* be considered a prude ... here. .... Most
> > people wouldn't ... think ... it ... "inappropriate" ...
> > to appear naked on stage. The only way Dan might
> > embarrass himself is, ... if he's not up to the task.
> > I understand it's a very demanding role. ...
> >
> > If he ... manages to spread a little European tolerance
> > to nakedness to his American fans, then all the better.
> > I just don't see why any actor should base his choice of
> > roles on how it might be perceived by other people, as
> > long as she or he is all right with it her/himself. ....
> >
> > Christin
>
>bboyminn:
>
>I'm going to stray slightly from the central topic of
>this group while I rant a bit, but I hope to bring it
>back on or close to the appropriate topic by the end.
>
>First, Christin, keep in my that I wasn't expressing my
>personal opinion, but what I preceived to be the opinion
>of the American public at large. Also, keep in mind that
>there is a radical contingent here in the USA that thinks
>Harry Potter is the Spawn of the Devil and the prelude to
>the second coming (maybe sligtly over stated).
>
>The problem here in the USA, a country which I dearly love,
>is that we let fanatics and fundimentalist force an 'all
>or nothing' context to politics. For example, in our zeal
>to protect children we frequently go to extremes. I can
>think of once case where a guy was prosecuted for video
>taping a child's birthday party, but because the video tape
>tended to show all the children photographed from the neck
>down, they we sure he was thinking dirty thoughts. So, they
>called his poorly made but innocent video tape 'child
>pornography'. Now, I never heard whether the prosecution
>was successful. I can't imagine that it was. But it shows
>how extreme things can get here.
>
>Also, note that he doesn't need to be convicted to be
>punished. The accusation destroyed his reputation,
>inhibited his ability to get a job, and cost him a small
>fortune in legal bills. That's the beauty of fundamentalist
>thinking in cases like this, even if they lose, they win.
>
>The problem is there are fanatics and fundimentalist who
>think they can legislate, prosecute, and punish what I am
>thinking, or more accurately, what THEY THINK I am thinking.
>We will have reach a sorry state of affairs when we allow
>people to be prosecuted for what someone else thinks they
>might be thinking. When we finally have the 'thought police',
>we will have truly reached '1984'.
>
>While the fanatics and hyper-rationalized fundamentalists
>have a lot of influence here, most Americans are far more
>open minded and level headed.
>
>Back to Dan, a part of me wonders if he isn't trying to
>prove something primarily to himself. He did a wonderful
>job in 'David Copperfield', which I believe was his first
>major role. But the role wasn't too demanding. Though in
>one scene where his step-father yelled at him at the dinner
>table, I swear Dan was really close to tears.
>
>Other than that, Dan has been playing Harry Potter, a nice
>squeaky clean hero role. While the movie have been good,
>they are a bit shallow. The real meat and heart of the roles
>has been softened tremendously by lack of time. So, I think
>Dan is wondering himself whether he is just Harry Potter, or
>if he is really Dan Radclifffe - talented actor. This role
>in Equus, I suspect will push him to his limit. The emotional
>range is very demanding, and there will be no movie magic to
>make up of any lacking in the characters. He seems very
>'matter of fact' about the nude part. He said something like
>'it's in the script, so it must be done' and 'to do otherwise
>  wouldn't really be playing the role, it would be a watered
>down version'.
>
>He's taken on a very demanding role, and even if he falls a
>bit short in it, he still will have grown tremendously by
>having played it. Even if his current talent and skill aren't
>up to it 100%, I hope at least his acting potential shows
>through, and he gets credit for that.
>
>As a side note, I've been thinking about the direction of
>the careers of Dan and Rupert after Harry Potter, and I
>think stage roles and independant film are both excellent
>place to prove themselves as genuine actors with range and
>depth. This is especially true of stage roles. It will help
>them grow tremendously as actors.
>
>That's partly why I'm not as fussed about Dan's role on stage
>as I am about Dakota Fanning play her role on the screen. In
>the case of Dakota Fanning, it seems to be more about winning
>an Oscar than it is about proving herself as a serious actress.
>
>Just a few more thoughts.
>
>Steve/bboyminn
>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Sk bilder p kndisar! http://search.msn.se/




From kchuplis at alltel.net  Sun Aug 20 01:15:54 2006
From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen)
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 20:15:54 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec82e6+dgkr@eGroups.com>
References: <ec82e6+dgkr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <2C926EC9-6F86-4C2F-9509-8C2D4FDE7B8A@alltel.net>


On Aug 19, 2006, at 5:13 PM, susanbones2003 wrote:

> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Karen <kchuplis at ...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Aug 19, 2006, at 3:37 PM, susanbones2003 wrote:
>>>
>>> Jen interjects:
>>> Steve, I know you didn't mean to, but you sound like you are poo-
>>> pooing the real and deadly crime of child pornography which
> exists in
>>> spades here and most westernized countries. Please don't confuse
> the
>>> current vogue of blaming everything wrong with America
>>> on "fundamentalists and fanactics" with the dedicated people
> working
>>> to end the heart-breaking crime of child pornography.
>>>
>>> Dan obviously wants an acting challenge and I can think of no
> greater
>>> challenge than playing the disturbed boy in Equus. More power to
> him.
>>>
>>> Best to you and yours from just another one of those pathetic
>>> American prudes...
>>> JenD.
>>
>> I disagree. I think he sounded like he was poopooing extremism.
> The
>> example he gave was a good one, I thought.
>>
>> Karen
>>
> Hi Karen,
> To me it sounded as if he were saying that we really spend out time
> on useless witch-hunts, which is not fair. Yes there are times when
> an overzealous prosector goes after someone who's innocent but in the
> main, the fight against child pornography here has many thousand
> times more real bad guys than innocents in the wrong place at the
> wrong time.
> Jen D.
>>>>
>>

Huh. I didn't read it that way at all. Mostly because we are talking  
about 2 kids (1 nearly adult) who are making decisions, along with  
their parents. I just can't equate that to child pornography. I  
thought Steve made a good point that people tend to want to raze an  
entire forest because of the bad trees mixed in. To me his point was  
in trying to get the bad guys, people go into overkill mode and see  
*everything* as a threat or an example of pornography. 



From jerisueva at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 20 00:58:59 2006
From: jerisueva at yahoo.com (lily.phoenixfire)
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 00:58:59 -0000
Subject: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <BAY112-F31ACF2A966CE2BC0E828B6DD430@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <ec8c4j+a2ts@eGroups.com>

Hi all. I'm new and have not yet posted. I want to say I'm enjoying
reading everyone's thoughts and opinions. I appreciate the fact that
for the most part, you all seem to be going out of your way to make
sure if you disagree you do it in a civilized manner. :)

I chose this particular time to post because I wanted to tell Steve
that I absolutely agree with him. Well said Steve. 1984 may be closer
than we think. As for Dan, I'm happy to see he is willing to take on
this role. He seems to be a level headed, decent, normal guy, who
truly wants to grow as an actor. I'm rooting for him and am just sorry
I won't be able to see the play. I saw Equus years ago.

Thanks everyone,
Lily






From valerie.flowe at verizon.net  Sun Aug 20 04:26:55 2006
From: valerie.flowe at verizon.net (Valerie Flowe)
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 00:26:55 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec78qe+r5q5@eGroups.com>
References: <ec78qe+r5q5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c73de204a6419dcd5bf771c78765f98f@verizon.net>

>  Back to Dan<snip>
> This role  in Equus, I suspect will push him to his limit. The 
> emotional
>  range is very demanding, and there will be no movie magic to
>  make up of any lacking in the characters. He seems very
>  'matter of fact' about the nude part. He said something like
>  'it's in the script, so it must be done' and 'to do otherwise
>  wouldn't really be playing the role, it would be a watered
>  down version'.
>  He's taken on a very demanding role, and even if he falls a
>  bit short in it, he still will have grown tremendously by
>  having played it. Even if his current talent and skill aren't
>  up to it 100%, I hope at least his acting potential shows
>  through, and he gets credit for that.

I rented Equus recently. Wow! What an intense story! The guy who played 
Strang was phenomenal! As was Richard Burton! The boy was nude, by the 
way, in quite a few scenes.
This will surely be an unpopular view (where's that iron?!?!), but I 
have my misgivings about Dan being able to handle this role. The anger, 
fear, screaming, crying, etc, made me wonder how well Dan would handle 
that level of emotional acting (again recalling the mediocre crying 
snow scene in POA). I think, however, what disturbs me more than the 
nudity is the fact that Strang (as a result of his mother's 
overzealousness in her son's religious instruction...controversial in 
itself), develops a twisted connection with these horses. It's sad, 
it's depraved, it's disturbing. I couldn't even watch the scenes where 
he's gouging out the horses eyes...eek!!! The content of the movie left 
me feeling very unsettled. I think it's the association that people may 
make between Dan and the character, that has me a bit concerned.
I respect his wanting to take on such a challenging role. And I agree 
that the continuity of acting on stage, as opposed to the stops and 
starts and retakes of film, will be great practice for him. I just 
wonder if Equus not too far off the deep end for him at this stage in 
his life and acting career.
Now, Dan has been compared to Elijah Wood. I have been intrigued by the 
small, but diverse roles EW has taken on since 'Frodo'. 'Eternal 
Sunshine of the Spotless MInd', 'Everything is Illuminated'. I think he 
is gaining respect in his trade by his choice of roles. Not 
blockbusters, but meaty, acting roles.
Of course I always wish Dan well and trust that he is making choices 
that feel right for him, not someone (parents, agents, etc) dictating 
his next move.
Valerie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 20 14:57:13 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 14:57:13 -0000
Subject: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <ec7sq8+p1as@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ec9t89+l9us@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rkdas at ...> wrote:
> > 
> > bboyminn:
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > ... For example, in our zeal to protect children we 
> > frequently go to extremes. I can think of once case 
> > where a guy was prosecuted for video taping a child's 
> > birthday party, but because the video tape tended to 
> > show all the children photographed from the neck 
> > down, they we sure he was thinking dirty thoughts. ...
> > shows how extreme things can get here. 
> > 
> 
> Jen interjects:
> Steve, ... you sound like you are poo-pooing ... child 
> pornography which exists in spades here and most 
> westernized countries. Please don't confuse the current 
> vogue of blaming everything wrong with America on 
> "fundamentalists and fanactics" with the dedicated people 
> working to end the heart-breaking crime of child pornography.
> 
> ...

bboyminn:

I'll try and keep it short, since we are straying off topic. Although,
'keeping it short' is part of the problem. The very point I was making
is that this person was prosecuted in Federal Court for something that
wasn't even remotely close to 'child pornography'. These children were
at a normal birthday party, all fully clothed, all doing normal kid
birthday party things, all under the supervision of their parents. 

But, since he photographed them from the neck down, others thought
that implied that he was thinking 'dirty' thoughts. So, the problem
here wasn't the actual video, it was that someone else thought this
guy was thinking bad things, and they were determined to prosecute and
pursecute him for it. 

Plus, in reality, it's not just hyper-rationalized fundamentalists but
hyper-rationalized liberals too. How did this case even make it into
the court system? Why is the Federal Government wasting their time
being the 'thought police', when real dangerous explotative and
generally unconscionable child pornographers are out there running free?

This man's life was destroyed for what someone else thought he might
be thinking; not for his actions but for someone's preception of his
thoughts. As a society we simply can not allow that to happen.

On the subject of real child pornography, that simply can not be
allowed. Children are defenseless, they count on adults to guide them
through life, to tell them what is right and wrong. When adults
exploit that emotional and intellectual vulnerability, they do great
immeasurable harm to those children. So, I am absolutely against REAL
child pornography. 

But, my central point was that what this man did could not by any
stretch of the imagination be considered child pornography, and my
further point was that it seems unlikely that this kind of irratoinal
travesty could occur in liberal Europe. Yet, here in America, the
unlikely and irrational (as exampled by many other cases) did occur. 

So, on the issue of real child pornography, I'm with you 100%.

Steve/bboyminn






From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 20 15:30:39 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 15:30:39 -0000
Subject: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <44E60F42.4760.DBF82@drednort.alphalink.com.au>
Message-ID: <ec9v6v+7quk@eGroups.com>


"Shaun Hately" <drednort at ...> wrote:
> ...
> 
> The thing is... you are in the US, Leeann. Daniel 
> Radcliffe isn't - and I think that does make a 
> real difference here.
> 
> ...
> 
> I mentioned 'Kes' recently - it's one of my favourite 
> films and it is a classic of British cinema. And it 
> contains fairly graphic nudity of a boy in his early 
> teens. It's there for a reason - and that's important. 
> (It's)...not... sexualised nudity, or nudity for the 
> sake of nudity - 
> ...
> 
> Context is what counts. And that includes the cultural 
> context.
> 
> Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
> Shaun Hately ...

bboyminn:

I looked up the movie 'Kes', which is short for Kestrel (a small
falcon). The first thing that caught my eye was the rating.

Certification: Australia:PG / Germany:12 / Sweden:11 / UK:PG 
(video rating) (1987) / UK:U (original rating) / USA:GP / West Germany:12

I suspect the 'USA:GP' should be 'USA:PG' (Parental Guidance, but no
age restriction).

Here is an excerpt from a review of "Kes" for Internet Movie Database-

"The best thing about this film are all the characters that surround
Billy. All have had all spirit hammered out of them at an early age
and are damned if any one else is going to have any. The teachers
casual and resigned brutality living what remains of their dreams by
playing against the boys on the football field and imagining they are
Bobby Charlton (and still losing)..."

The part I want to emphasis is the '...teachers casual and resigned
brutality...'. 'Kes' was made in 1969 and takes place in the '60's. In
this school in Northern England, frequent caning (beating) is common.

So, not only is their nudity in this movie, but it is also a brutal
and dark movie. Yet, 'PG', and '11' and '12' ratings.

Another movie I mentioned  is 'Now and Then' (1995), a sweet romantic
movie, in which Devon Sawa who was then 17, though playing a boy of
much younger age, and several other younger boys appeared nude while
swimming in a remote lake (quick, from a distance, and slightly out of
focus). The girl, who are the central characters of the story, steal
their clothes, and the boys have to run after them nude. The rating
for this movie was PG-13, not for the nudity but for 'adolescent sex
discussions'.

So, I absolutely agree with Shaun, /context/ is the determining
factor. There is a clear, real and valid context in the 'Equus' play.
Further I feel that nudity will be incidental to the intense emotional
drama of the characters and the story. That's where Dan will shine or
not, in the emotional portrayal of the story. I think regardless of
whether he flies or fails in the role, he will grow tremendously as an
actor and be a better person for it.

There is one additional /context/ to Dan in the 'Equus' play, and that
is the producer, director, and the other actors in the play seem to be
the cream of the British crop. I don't think a very well supervised
and professionally produced play like this carries the same risk as
some low budget basement production.

Just some additional thoughts.

Steve/bboyminn







From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 20 16:01:04 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 16:01:04 -0000
Subject: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality
In-Reply-To: <2C926EC9-6F86-4C2F-9509-8C2D4FDE7B8A@alltel.net>
Message-ID: <eca100+ku19@eGroups.com>


Karen <kchuplis at ...> wrote:

> Huh. I didn't read it that way at all. Mostly because 
> we are talking about 2 kids (1 nearly adult) who are 
> making decisions, along with their parents. I just 
> can't equate that to child pornography. I thought Steve 
> made a good point that people tend to want to raze an  
> entire forest because of the bad trees mixed in. To me 
> his point was in trying to get the bad guys, people go 
> into overkill mode and see  *everything* as a threat or 
>an example of pornography.
>

bboyminn:

Yes, I think you are at the heart of the matter now. What 
I object to is the blind hyper-rationalized 'all or nothing' 
approach to problem solving in many aspects of our lives. 
The most rediculous and hyper-rationalized (should be read 
as 'irrational') aspect in 'zero tolerance'.

To me 'Zero Tolerance Policies' mean zero brain, zero effort, 
zero responsibility, zero common sense.

Examples:

Girl-1 has a severe asthma attack just as grade/elementary 
school is about to begin. Another girl (girl-2) just 
arriving on the playground lets girl-1 who is 
in extreme distress use her own asthma inhaler, and given 
the extreme nature of the attack, probably save girl-1's 
life. As a reward, girl-2 was expelled from school for 
violating the school's 'zero brain... no... no... I mean 
'Zero Tolerance Drug Policy'. 

In another instance at a recent Olympics, one female gymnast 
(I believe) had some sinus congestion and a headache. Her 
trainer gave her some 'Tylenol Cold' (as an illustation) 
medicine and wrote it down in his log as 'Tylenol'. The 
girls lost her metal because of the bookkeeping error. If 
the trainer had written 'Tylenol Cold' in the log, it would 
have been OK. There was no impropriety. It wouldn't have 
enhanced her performance since she took if afterwards, and 
it would have been allowed if it had been logged properly. 
Yet, for that small clerical error, she lost what she had 
worked a lifetime for. 

Zero Tolerance = Zero Brains, and more importantly, zero 
effort, zero thought, and therefore the preception of zero
responsibility on the part of administrators.

Again echoing Shaun, we must consider context because it 
does matter. In every case, a clear and reasonable look at 
the context would have cleared up the matter. 

Just a thought.

Steve/bboyminn








From jerisueva at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 20 21:19:31 2006
From: jerisueva at yahoo.com (Jeri)
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 14:19:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
Message-ID: <20060820211931.98234.qmail@web37107.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

>>The anger, fear, screaming, crying, etc, made me wonder how >well Dan would handle that level of emotional acting (again >recalling the mediocre crying snow scene in POA).>>

Hi Valerie,

I watched all four movies in reverse order. For some reason, it helped me to see how much Dan's emotional range has improved over the life of the movies.  I think his scene in the graveyard in GoF was phenomenal. I said on a forum that in the book, in the graveyard scene, Harry went from feeling absolute terror, to hatred, to the the decision to die fighting, standing on his feet just like his father.  However, in the move,Dan has very little dialog in the graveyard scene.  He has to portray that wide range of emotions using only his face. I think he did a magnificent job.  He has already stated that the director of OOTP has pushed him further psychologically and emotionally than he's ever been pushed. Equus will do that in spades. He will learn from it and even if some critics pan his performance, (which is inevitable) he will grow from having had the courage to take the chance. I wish him luck.

Lily

 
 		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Next-gen email? Have it all with the  all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







From alexpie at aol.com  Tue Aug 22 04:09:52 2006
From: alexpie at aol.com (barbarahanson)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 04:09:52 -0000
Subject: Dan, Dakota, and So on
In-Reply-To: <ec80bv+g9a1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ece02g+gtud@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "joxy" <joxy at ...> wrote:
>
> It's not about being open-minded.
> It's not about thinking bodies are dirty either.
> It's about exhibitionism and voyeurism.
> It's also, in the case of Equus, about silliness.
> 
> 
> >....Europe is far more open minded on these matters. 
> >
> >....who think the human body is somehow dirty.
> > Barb
>
This clip, which was attributed to me, included one from Steve, and 
also truncated mine in a way that obscured my meaning.  Not in the 
spirit of the list!  I call this to the attention of the darling Elves.
Barb
PS--Equus is not about exhibitionism or voyeurism, nor is it silly.







From taguem at jmsearch.com  Tue Aug 22 12:43:47 2006
From: taguem at jmsearch.com (Michelle A. Tague)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 08:43:47 -0400
Subject: Question - Scene in PoA.
In-Reply-To: <ece02g+gtud@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <EXCHANGE01QjGkRyvjV00000d12@compdevsys.com>

Ok, so this has been bugging me since I've first watched the movie.
 
When the class has followed Hagrid down to the area where he introduces
Buckbeak.... Hermione says "I think they're funny" with a serious look on
her face... then Draco replies by saying something smart... but WHAT is it
that she thinks is funny?
 
Anyone?
 
I hope I did this in the correct format!
 
Michelle 
a newbie ;-)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kchuplis at alltel.net  Tue Aug 22 13:30:08 2006
From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 08:30:08 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question - Scene in PoA.
References: <EXCHANGE01QjGkRyvjV00000d12@compdevsys.com>
Message-ID: <001201c6c5ef$160834d0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local>

The snapping books.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michelle A. Tague" <taguem at jmsearch.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:43 AM
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question - Scene in PoA.


> Ok, so this has been bugging me since I've first watched the movie.
>
> When the class has followed Hagrid down to the area where he introduces
> Buckbeak.... Hermione says "I think they're funny" with a serious look on
> her face... then Draco replies by saying something smart... but WHAT is it
> that she thinks is funny?
>
> Anyone?
>
> I hope I did this in the correct format!
>
> Michelle
> a newbie ;-)
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!
>
> Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at
HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>





From taguem at jmsearch.com  Tue Aug 22 13:47:37 2006
From: taguem at jmsearch.com (Michelle A. Tague)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 09:47:37 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question - Scene in PoA.
In-Reply-To: <001201c6c5ef$160834d0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local>
Message-ID: <EXCHANGE01iLXbgVPXD00000d7d@compdevsys.com>

Michelle:
Really? I didn't get that.  Why does she look so serious if she thinks
they're funny?
 
Thank you though.  I appreciate it.
 
Michelle 



Karen:

The snapping books.

 Michelle: 
> Ok, so this has been bugging me since I've first watched the movie.
>
> When the class has followed Hagrid down to the area where he introduces
> Buckbeak.... Hermione says "I think they're funny" with a serious look on
> her face... then Draco replies by saying something smart... but WHAT is it
> that she thinks is funny?
>
> Anyone?
>
> I hope I did this in the correct format!
>
> Michelle
> a newbie ;-)
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!
>
> Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at
HPforGrownups- <mailto:HPforGrownups-owner%40yahoogroups.com>
owner at yahoogroups.com
> __________________________________________________________
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From rkdas at charter.net  Tue Aug 22 14:25:10 2006
From: rkdas at charter.net (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 14:25:10 -0000
Subject: Question - Scene in PoA.
In-Reply-To: <EXCHANGE01iLXbgVPXD00000d7d@compdevsys.com>
Message-ID: <ecf446+b5fe@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Michelle A. Tague" <taguem at ...> 
wrote:
>
> Michelle:
> Really? I didn't get that.  Why does she look so serious if she 
thinks
> they're funny?
>  
> Thank you though.  I appreciate it.
>  
> Michelle 
> 
> 
> 
> Karen:
> 
> The snapping books.
> 
>  Michelle: 
> > Ok, so this has been bugging me since I've first watched the 
movie.
> >
> > When the class has followed Hagrid down to the area where he 
introduces
> > Buckbeak.... Hermione says "I think they're funny" with a serious 
look on
> > her face... then Draco replies by saying something smart... but 
WHAT is it
> > that she thinks is funny?
> >
> > Anyone?
> >
> > I hope I did this in the correct format!
> >
> > Michelle
> > a newbie ;-)

Hi Michelle,
Draco was dissing the "Monster Book of Monsters" to his cronies and 
anyone who'd listen and Hermione was attempting to defend Hagrid by 
saying she found them funny since he as the new teacher, was 
responsible for their selection. Her run-in with Draco is part of the 
whole set up for her to punch his lights out later in the film. 
Hope that helps...
Jen D.







From kchuplis at alltel.net  Tue Aug 22 15:04:25 2006
From: kchuplis at alltel.net (Karen)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 10:04:25 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question - Scene in PoA.
References: <EXCHANGE01iLXbgVPXD00000d7d@compdevsys.com>
Message-ID: <00b101c6c5fc$41ae4bd0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local>

I think it is just because she is defending Hagrid, not that she REALLY
thinks they are funny. I believe that that scene has a bit of reassigning
from the book. I don't think that is her line in the book.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michelle A. Tague" <taguem at jmsearch.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 8:47 AM
Subject: RE: [HPFGU-Movie] Question - Scene in PoA.


> Michelle:
> Really? I didn't get that.  Why does she look so serious if she thinks
> they're funny?
>
> Thank you though.  I appreciate it.
>
> Michelle
>
>
>
> Karen:
>
> The snapping books.
>
>  Michelle:
> > Ok, so this has been bugging me since I've first watched the movie.
> >
> > When the class has followed Hagrid down to the area where he introduces
> > Buckbeak.... Hermione says "I think they're funny" with a serious look
on
> > her face... then Draco replies by saying something smart... but WHAT is
it
> > that she thinks is funny?
> >
> > Anyone?
> >
> > I hope I did this in the correct format!
> >
> > Michelle
> > a newbie ;-)
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
> >
> > Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary
material
> from posts to which you're replying!
> >
> > Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at
> HPforGrownups- <mailto:HPforGrownups-owner%40yahoogroups.com>
> owner at yahoogroups.com
> > __________________________________________________________
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!
>
> Any questions or problems - contact the List Elves at
HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>





From artsylynda at aol.com  Tue Aug 22 15:29:38 2006
From: artsylynda at aol.com (artsylynda at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 11:29:38 EDT
Subject: New interview with Dan, Katie and David Yates
Message-ID: <4a4.668507b.321c7ce2@aol.com>


Leaky has a link to a new interview with Dan, Katie and David  Yates.  In it, 
David Yates talks about Dan and Katie's screen kiss.   It's so sweet how he 
talks about it - he says since most of the crew has known  Dan since he was 
ten, they all gathered around the monitors to watch "their boy"  have his first 
screen kiss (well, his first HP kiss - I imagine he kissed the  girl in 
"December Boys" he made love to in that film).  Yates said it was  tender and sweet, 
the way first kisses should be.  Dan, on the other hand,  said it took "about 
thirty" takes to get it!  Of course, he'd said all  along that he was going to 
mess it up repeatedly so he could do it a lot!   heehee.  It's a nice 
article, although the author made a few mistakes here  and there (called "Ginny" 
"Jenny," for instance).  Here's a link to the  article:  
_http://ww3.mid-day.com/smd/play/2006/august/142400.htm_ 
(http://ww3.mid-day.com/smd/play/2006/august/142400.htm) 
 
Lynda AKA "Abraxan"

My blog: _www.abraxan.blogspot.com_ (http://www.abraxan.blogspot.com/)   
Read my Harry Potter fics here: 
_http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/_ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/)   



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From swartell at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 22 17:09:15 2006
From: swartell at yahoo.com (Sue Wartell)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 10:09:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] Question - Scene in PoA.
In-Reply-To: <00b101c6c5fc$41ae4bd0$b301010a@ConsolidatedTelephone.local>
Message-ID: <20060822170915.82544.qmail@web53202.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Karen <kchuplis at alltel.net> wrote (re: Hermione's
comment about the Monster Book of Monsters being
funny):

> I think it is just because she is defending Hagrid,
> not that she REALLY
> thinks they are funny. I believe that that scene has
> a bit of reassigning
> from the book. I don't think that is her line in the
> book.
> 

It was Hagrid's remark in the book; he was highly
disappointed that no one got the joke.

Sue 
in Columbus OH

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



From laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 22 20:33:55 2006
From: laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com (laurenmcoakley)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:33:55 -0000
Subject: New interview with Dan, Katie and David Yates
In-Reply-To: <4a4.668507b.321c7ce2@aol.com>
Message-ID: <ecfpnj+qh65@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, artsylynda at ... wrote:
>
> 
> Leaky has a link to a new interview with Dan, Katie and David  
Yates.  In it, 
> David Yates talks about Dan and Katie's screen kiss.   It's so 
sweet how he 
> talks about it - he says since most of the crew has known  Dan 
since he was 
> ten, they all gathered around the monitors to watch "their boy"  
have his first 
> screen kiss (well, his first HP kiss - I imagine he kissed the  
girl in 
> "December Boys" he made love to in that film).  Yates said it was  
tender and sweet, 
> the way first kisses should be.  Dan, on the other hand,  said it 
took "about 
> thirty" takes to get it!  Of course, he'd said all  along that he 
was going to 
> mess it up repeatedly so he could do it a lot!   heehee.  It's a 
nice 
> article, although the author made a few mistakes here  and there 
(called "Ginny" 
> "Jenny," for instance).  Here's a link to the  article:  
> _http://ww3.mid-day.com/smd/play/2006/august/142400.htm_ 
> (http://ww3.mid-day.com/smd/play/2006/august/142400.htm) 
>  
> Lynda AKA "Abraxan"
> 
> My blog: _www.abraxan.blogspot.com_ 
(http://www.abraxan.blogspot.com/)   
> Read my Harry Potter fics here: 
> _http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/_ 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPRefinersFire/)   
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


Lynda-
Thanks so much for sharing this article with us!  I know what you 
mean about the errors (David Yates is the SECOND British director, 
not first!), but it was a nice read and left me feeling very excited 
about the next film!

-Lauren






From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 23 00:27:36 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:27:36 -0000
Subject: New "Driving Lessons" Trailer
Message-ID: <ecg7do+2qat@eGroups.com>

There is a new Driving Lesson trailer, or at least one I've never seen
before. It looks very good and shows more of Rupert's role.

This is a French website, just scroll down until you see a picture
(Icon) of Ruppert and at the bottom of that section, you will find
three links. They are High Bandwidth, Medium Bandwidth, and Low Bandwidth.

The more I see of this movie, the better it looks.

I can't post a direct link because apperently this site will only
allow you in through the /front door/.

http://www.universharrypotter.com/

Steve/bboyminn









From turn2pg394 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 23 03:15:55 2006
From: turn2pg394 at yahoo.com (can can)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:15:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality
Message-ID: <20060823031555.60300.qmail@web57104.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

It seems we've gone off the subject a bit, so I apologize for bringing it up again, but I just wanted to add my 2 cents.  When I first heard that Dan was doing Equus I was alittle taken aback because I still see the little boy from SS (I know, I need to let them grow up, Rupert's going to be 18 this week for goodness sake...I'm working on it!LOL).  But now that I've somewhate gotten past that, I realized that he would be portraying a well respected pierce of art up there, it's not naked for the "thrill" of being naked, granted he is to have a "romantic" scene with a girl in the stable, but nonetheless, it isn't soft porn or anything.  Plus the stage for Dan would be an awesome place, he's so full of energy he may pratically explode with the enegry the stage and live audience will bring.  I support him 100% although if they moved the production to Chicago instead of London, I'd go, however find a pop or washroom at those special moments in the play!LOL
  As for Ms. Fanning.  I don't see anything wrong with her doing a role like that.  It could be said that her mother and agent pushing her into such a role for an oscar nod is disturbing, but what actor/tress don't do anything for an oscar nod, and if they have ever won, they really go to extremes in some cases to get more.  It would be disturbing to watch this beloved little girl, who happens to be a wonderful young actress, ACT in that situration because we know how good she is, and well she will bring it home.  And I do hope they do have a psychologist or counselor of some sort on set for her to deal with what she has to portray, I mean they have a grief counselor on set for Dan now.  And what she will be portraying is very real in society, it's not something she's doing to shed her teen (oh sorry TWEEN) image.  Like when Maculey(sp?) died in My Girl, people thought how dare they get a beloved young actor to play that role!  As if that doesn't happen in society or
 something.
  Just my opinion.


peace...real love...

Candace
 		
---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low  PC-to-Phone call rates.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From lilyp at superig.com.br  Wed Aug 23 00:01:40 2006
From: lilyp at superig.com.br (lilyp)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:01:40 -0300
Subject: [HPFGU-Movie] New interview with Dan, Katie and David Yates
Message-ID: <20060823_000140_002624.lilyp@superig.com.br>

 Lynda AKA "Abraxan" wrote: 

  It's a nice 
> 
>article, although the author made a few mistakes here and there (called 
"Ginny" 
> 
>"Jenny," for instance). Here's a link to the article: 
> 
>_ http://ww3.mid- day.com/smd/ play/2006/ august/142400. htm_ 

Lilyp: 
Hi, I'm new here and my purpose, when I joined the group was more one of 
research, of knowing what the fans think about the films, the cast and the 
actors' choices, than to participate in the debates. I am Brazilian and 
writing in English is not that easy to me. 

But I couldn't resist to comment on this article. The reporter gets nice 
answers and tells a lot of interesting things, but he clearly doesn't know 
much about Harry Potter. He says David Yates is the first English diretor 
(and Mike Newell is English), he doesn't know the name of Ginny, who opened 
the chamber of Secrets, who is Ron's sister and who will be Harry's 
girlfriend in the next installment. The guy simply can't make the right 
questions if he doesn't know what he is talking about. The article is good 
because, despite the mistakes, it gives us lots of information, but it could 
be a lot better if the reporter knew what to ask. 

And that is a concern of mine. Usually the press doesn't know enough about 
HP. Lizo Mzimba, from CBBC and BBC is an exception (he's fantastic). I've 
seen articles that said that Luna would be Harry's girlfriend in the fifth 
film, for instance. The reporters see some novelty or something that seems 
juicy and try to expand it without really knowing what they're doing. 

In OotP, there are wonderful new characters (Luna, Tonks and Umbridge), but 
there are also "old" characters that seem like "new", because we see so much 
more about them and their growing up process, that is Nevile and Ginny. 

The press, not knowing the book, goes after the "new" characters and  things 
like "Potter's girlfriend" and "the kiss", but ignore Neville's and Ginny's 
development. 

The Leaky Cauldron had an interview with Matthew Lewis in last week's 
PotterCast and the actor told something about Neville's development (I'll 
post the link when they have a transcription of it). He says the Neville is 
really almost a new character and that it has been challenging to do him. 

But we don't have anything about Ginny and nobody has interviewed Bonnie on 
that. I'm really anxious to know what Ginny is like in this film, because 
her portrayal is important so that people won't be too much astonished when 
Harry begins to fancy her. 

How do you feel about it? I'm so frustrated with the press! 
Lilyp 





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






From turn2pg394 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 24 01:38:05 2006
From: turn2pg394 at yahoo.com (can can)
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:38:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: New Driving LessonsTrailer
Message-ID: <20060824013805.99838.qmail@web57102.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Thanks Steve for sending that link!  Driving Lessons looks even better, although it sounded cool before, I'm even MORE excited to see it now.  I'm soooo proud of Rupert (Happy 18th Birthday a day in advance to him!).  I'm disappointed it won't be in my area, but I suddenly feel a need to visit my cousin in NYC sometime in October!lol

peace...real love...

Candace
 		
---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low  PC-to-Phone call rates.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From turn2pg394 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 24 01:48:04 2006
From: turn2pg394 at yahoo.com (can can)
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:48:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: New interview with Dan, Katie and David Yates
Message-ID: <20060824014804.88102.qmail@web57108.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Hey Lilyp, I totally agree with you about character development in the movies.  I was SO excited when Matt mentioned that he would be in the final battle scene of Order, I just KNEW they'd cut him out.  And I also agree with you about Bonnie/Ginny.  I'm not big on the Harry/Ginny 'ship (at least I wasn't...some tasteful fanfics are helping me along!lol) but the reason I wasn't, was because in the movies, they never really developed her character and then all of sudden, she'll be Harry's love.  I'm hoping that they will allow her character to come out and develope more in Order before they do HBP.


peace...real love...

Candace
 		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Everyone is raving about the  all-new Yahoo! Mail.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From abraxan at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 29 14:14:37 2006
From: abraxan at yahoo.com (abraxan)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 14:14:37 -0000
Subject: Dan's newest role
Message-ID: <ed1i4d+ns56@eGroups.com>

Anyone who thought Dan couldn't act would get an argument from the 
movie and theater pros in England, I'll betcha.  He has not one, but 
TWO meaty, heavily dramatic roles coming up in the first half of 
2007.  In addition to doing "Equus" on stage in London next Feb-
June, in June, he will begin filming a movie for ITV (which I HOPE 
they show over here in the USA!) about Rudyard Kipling's seventeen-
year-old son, Jack.  Dan stars as Jack in "My Son Jack" which is an 
award winning play.  In real life, Kipling was a "King and Country" 
man, a great patriot.  When World War I happened, he was all for his 
son, Jack, joining the military and going to war, so much so that 
despite Jack's bad vision, which made the military reject him, 
Kipling finagled a place for Jack in the Irish Guard.  Jack was 
killed and his body was never found.
 
Dan had this to say about playing this role (and this kind of 
thoughtful, intelligent statement makes me even more impressed with 
this young man than I was before):
 
>>"For many people my age, the first world war is just a topic in a 
history book. But, I've always been fascinated by the subject and 
think its as relevant today as it ever was with young men all over 
the world still sacrificing their lives in the name of war."
 
"I can't even begin to imagine what it must have been like in the 
trenches, living amongst the stench of death and knowing that at any 
moment it may be your last. But, I think its important we try to 
imagine the horrors these young men experienced and to never forget 
them."
 
"I am extremely proud to be part of the production of My Boy Jack 
and only hope I can do justice to the memory of the men who fought 
and those who died."<<
 
You can read more about it and see new pics of Dan taken for the 
press conference for this announcement at www.danradcliffe.co.uk

Does anyone know when HBP begins filming?  It's supposed to be 
released Nov. 21, 2008, I believe, and Rupert and Tom are already 
signed for it, so I read recently.  Dan's most recent quote about 
HBP is that if the script is right, he's in.  Yikes, I hope the 
script is right!!!  I imagine a TV movie will only take about six 
weeks to film, like "December Boys" - some TV films only take three 
or four weeks to film, from things I read.  Anyone know any more 
about the schedule, or how long it might take to film "My Son Jack"?
Lynda







From laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 29 20:59:07 2006
From: laurenmcoakley at yahoo.com (laurenmcoakley)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:59:07 -0000
Subject: New interview with Dan, Katie and David Yates
In-Reply-To: <20060823_000140_002624.lilyp@superig.com.br>
Message-ID: <ed29qr+imh8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, lilyp <lilyp at ...> wrote:
>
>  Lynda AKA "Abraxan" wrote: 
> 
>   It's a nice 
> > 
> >article, although the author made a few mistakes here and there 
(called 
> "Ginny" "Jenny," for instance). Here's a link to the article: 
> >_ http://ww3.mid- day.com/smd/ play/2006/ august/142400. htm_ 
> 
> Lilyp: 
> Hi, I'm new here and my purpose, when I joined the group was more 
> one of research, of knowing what the fans think about the films, 
> the cast and the actors' choices, than to participate in the 
> debates. I am Brazilian and writing in English is not that easy to 
> me. 
> 
> But I couldn't resist to comment on this article. The reporter 
> gets nice answers and tells a lot of interesting things, but he 
> clearly doesn't know much about Harry Potter. He says David Yates 
> is the first English diretor (and Mike Newell is English), he 
> doesn't know the name of Ginny, who opened the chamber of Secrets, 
> who is Ron's sister and who will be Harry's girlfriend in the next 
> installment. The guy simply can't make the right questions if he 
> doesn't know what he is talking about. The article is good 
> because, despite the mistakes, it gives us lots of information, 
> but it could be a lot better if the reporter knew what to ask. 
> 
> And that is a concern of mine. Usually the press doesn't know 
> enough about HP. Lizo Mzimba, from CBBC and BBC is an exception 
> (he's fantastic). I've seen articles that said that Luna would be 
> Harry's girlfriend in the fifth film, for instance. The reporters 
> see some novelty or something that seems juicy and try to expand it
> without really knowing what they're doing. 
> 
> In OotP, there are wonderful new characters (Luna, Tonks and 
> Umbridge), but there are also "old" characters that seem 
> like "new", because we see so much more about them and their 
> growing up process, that is Nevile and Ginny. 
> 
> The press, not knowing the book, goes after the "new" characters 
> and  things like "Potter's girlfriend" and "the kiss", but ignore 
> Neville's and Ginny's development. 
> 
> The Leaky Cauldron had an interview with Matthew Lewis in last 
> week's  PotterCast and the actor told something about Neville's  
> development (I'll post the link when they have a transcription of 
> it). He says the Neville is really almost a new character and that 
> it has been challenging to do him. 
> 
> But we don't have anything about Ginny and nobody has interviewed 
> Bonnie on that. I'm really anxious to know what Ginny is like in 
> this film, because her portrayal is important so that people won't 
> be too much astonished when Harry begins to fancy her. 
> 
> How do you feel about it? I'm so frustrated with the press! 
> Lilyp 
 
And now Lauren: 
Hi Lilyp,
I've been unable to contribute to all of the interesting 
conversations going on around here, but now that my boss is on 
vacation (yay!) I'd like to give you my two knuts on this one.  I 
hope I add something interesting to this conversation as well!

I think the problem is that the press focuses greatly on the movies, 
as opposed to the books.  I guess it sort of makes sense when you 
think about it, because if the press disected the books the way they 
do movies nowadays, there almost wouldn't be a point of reading 
them; they'd told you all the good parts. (Like trailers do for 
movies- I'll see a trailer for a film and get all excited to see it, 
only to find out once I've wasted my $9.50 that I've seen all the 
best parts in the trailer for free already!)

The way the movies have been coming to shape up lately, I wonder how 
closely the last installment of the books & movies will align.  I 
felt the film GOF was by far the furthest from the book, and I 
expect OoTP to be further still (there is no "Weasley is Our King, 
no Quidditch... read it yourself on http://www.mugglenet.com/)

As a fan who came to the wizarding world from watching the film POA, 
I feel that I am a fan of two different types of Harry Potter.  The 
movie fan in me doesn't have a clue of Movie Harry & Movie Ginny's 
impending relationship (but book fan me does and loves it!).  Movie 
fan Lauren doesn't know who Ludo Bagman is, doesn't have a clue 
where Dobby has been, and thinks Ginny and Neville are seemingly 
unimportant characters (even when Hermione screams at Mad-Eye in 
class about the Cruciatus Curse- why did she do that?).

Any thoughts?  Like I said, just my two knuts.






From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 31 00:03:46 2006
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:03:46 -0000
Subject: Driving Lessons -Limted Release October 13, 2006
Message-ID: <ed5912+oguq@eGroups.com>

Recently stumbled across this on the Internet.

Driving Lesson will be in Limited Theatrical Release on 
October 13, 2006. So keep an eye on your local independant 
film theaters for show times.

Her is what one reviewer had to say about the movie and 
specifically about Rupert Grint's performance -

-- Rich Cline, SHADOWS ON THE WALL ---

"...Grint is a terrific foil for her (Walters). He maintains the
character beautifully, letting us travel from inexperience to the
first whiff of self-discovery and independence. It's a remarkably
subtle coming-of-age story, and nothing we've seen Grint do before
quite prepares us for the delicacy of this performance."


Just passing it along.

Steve/bboyminn







From turn2pg394 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 31 13:08:05 2006
From: turn2pg394 at yahoo.com (can can)
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 06:08:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Driving Lessons -Limted Release October 13, 2006
Message-ID: <20060831130805.14810.qmail@web57101.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

What's unforturnate is that "limited release" it only nyc and la in the states according one of the websites recently.  very disappointing for me.
   


peace...real love...

Candace
 		
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1?/min.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]