Alan Rickman interview (now with a movie rant)

[lupinesque]

Anna wrote:

> I take it you are not a Ron/Rupert fan.  Yes, He JUST turned 14 
this 
> past month, so, what about it?  And I believe Tom Felton(aka the-
one-
> who-shall-wear-leather-pants) turned 14 this past spring (March 
> maybe??); and I think Emmma Watson is only 12.  So does that mean 
> that all of the child actors are not "character-age" appropriate??

Nah, I'm with you, actually--I think the movies should be more mellow 
about this (though the 30-year-old teenagers in '60s B-movies always 
make me laugh . . . couldn't they find anyone maybe 10 years closer 
to the right age?).  But the *moviemakers* have said that they want 
to keep these actors, and also that they want them to be close to 
their screen ages, and so they feel pressure to make a movie a year, 
or as close to it as you can get with a lots-of-FX, blockbuster 
movie.  I think they're going to have trouble, especially with the 
actors who started out a little older than their roles.
  
BTW, everyone has yet to explain to me why the voice change was a big 
deal.  Daniel Radcliffe's voice changed sometime during Harry's 
second year.  So?  Presumably, so did Harry's.  Why is it such a 
scandal that we hear it happening?

On Ron/Rupert:  I was a fan in the first movie; the trailer has me 
worried that he's been encouraged to focus on the comic "bits" 
instead of letting the comedy flow out of the character and 
dialogue.  Ron is a very funny character, and Rupert Grint has good 
comic timing; those two things are enough to guarantee that it will 
be funny.  He doesn't need to pull absurd faces.

Amy
who should be saying all this on -Movie but is scared that if she 
goes in there she'll be trampled by rampaging Sean Biggerstaff fans