[HPFGU-Movie] Re: POV: Dan, Dakota, and Morality

[Elvine Elvine]

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/