MOVIE: Draco and Harry's Hair

[blpurdom at yahoo.com]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Ali Wildgoose" <diagonalley_ at h...> 
wrote:
> 
> >Ron *is* supposed to be tall from the start.  I don't believe it 
ever says specifically "taller than Harry," but Harry is short for 
his age and Ron is noticeably tall [snip]

JKR does call Ron tall, but it is the fact that Dean Thomas is said 
to be even taller than him (during the sorting) that implies that 
Ron's height is already extraordinary for an eleven-year-old.  

> According to the VF article, Rupert is two years older than Daniel, 
thus almost assuring that his growth spurt will take hold before 
Dan's.  I don't know if this was an intentional move by the 
filmmakers, or if they just really liked Rupert...either way, things 
should work out all right.
 
Actually, this was probably because most child actors look young for 
their years and routinely play characters younger than themselves so 
that directors can work with people who are older mentally.  Child 
actors also need to be extremely obedient.  There are a lot of rules 
on film sets, and a myriad of ways to be injured.  Although many 
people oohed and aahed over my son and daughter when they were small 
(they're still very cute, but people do this less with 2nd and 4th 
graders) I never even considered taking them for screen tests, as was 
frequently suggested.  I have two reasons.

1) They're both big for their ages, not small.  I have a 7-year-old 
girl who can pass for 8 or 9 and an almost 9-year-old boy who is 
routinely mistaken for 10 or 11.  Directors want a 7-year-old who can 
pass for a 5-year-old.  (The older child is more likely to be able to 
read, as well.)

2) The obedience thing.  I love my kids.  However, it sometimes seems 
to take three or four times of repeating instructions before they 
even acknowledge I've said anything (their own little worlds).  A 
friend of mine who had a son who looked remarkably like he could be a 
baby Draco Malfoy (platinum blond hair, large grey eyes) was 
repeatedly told her son should be screen tested, so she finally did 
it.  Boy, did she get a surprise.  Her son was put in a room with 
about thirty other toddlers.  A drill-sergeantesque woman barked 
orders at them.  (Simple ones: stand up, sit down, turn this way and 
that, smile, frown, etc.)  After each order, there would be some kids 
who had done as asked, but most had not.  Any kid who had not 
executed the order correctly was out.  In no time, the number of 
toddlers was narrowed to three.  According to the agent, probably 
only one of the three would ever get any paying work, and would 
probably not work past the age of six.  My friend's son lasted one 
round.  (He was tired and happened to sit when told, but it was a 
coincidence.  When he was almost immediately told to stand again, he 
refused.)

This is one reason why children who start in show business at very 
young ages seldom continue into later childhood, let alone adulthood 
(Jody Foster being a notable exception).  At this stage, they aren't 
being screened for acting ability but for how easily the director can 
order them around.  Dan, Emma and Rupert are at the age when acting 
ability starts to have some bearing on their work, but it is still 
older children who can play younger who are more likely to get jobs.

--Barb