POV: Dan and Dakotta, and Morality

[Steve]

--- 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