Show Me The Money! Rupert's House.

Steve <bboy_mn@yahoo.com> bboy_mn at yahoo.com
Thu Jan 9 00:06:41 UTC 2003


--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Richelle Votaw" <rvotaw at i...>
wrote:
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> > However, much like Daniel Radcliffe's parents, Rupert parents have
> > quit their jobs to become Rupert's fulltime highly paid 
> >chaperones.
> >
> > At least, Daniel's mother continues to work at her old job, and 
> > is therefore, bringing in substantial income to the family. 

>Richelle replied:
> 
> One parent quitting work, I can see.  These kids definitely need 
> a full time chaperone.  But two?  Daniel's mother working provides 
> a sense of normalcy even if the money isn't needed.  
-end this part-

bboy_mn:

It occurred to me that maybe it is the studio and not Rupert (or Dan)
himself that is paying for the chaperones. Although, I don't know it
for a fact, the possibility does ease my mind a bit. At least they are
not consuming all of Rupert's money. That money should be for his
future, not thier present. The SUN article said Rupter bought the
house as a gift for his parents. That may have been journalistic
license. The turn of a phrase for the sake of a good story. 

None the less, I stand by what I said, and re-enforce what Richelle
added, when a family takes it's normal life apart and reconstructs it
around the assumed income of a child star, you have taken the first
step on the road to DOOM. 

A child is suppose to be a dependant. He depends on his parent for a
sense of balance and proportion, a sense of stability and, as Richelle
pointed out, a sense of normalcy. Home is a sanctuary for someone like
this. It should be the one place they can come and be nothing but a
kid. Once the whole families existance, hinges around the efforts of
the child, the child becomes the adult and the parents become the
dependants. Totally messes up the family dynamic.
-bboy_mn - end this part-


bboy_mn originally said:
> > ...edited... The business of acting and being famous is very 
> ? fickle. 
-end this part-

>Richelle continues:
> 
> Now Rupert has said several times that he wants to act.  Forever,
basically.  ...edited...
> 
> Anyway, what I'm trying to say here is at this early time in their
careers I could more easily visualize Daniel with a future in acting
(in other things) than Rupert.  Rupert is adorable.  But he's being
stereotyped, not just as Ron Weasley, but as a comic character.  Of
course, with any luck that'll change in PoA.
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> Richelle

bboy_mn adds:
I think Dan is a fine actor; a natural, and because he is obviously
very intelligent as well as talented, he has a great potential
whatever direction he chooses. 

But I think Rupert has great potential as an actor. He is very
expressive both with his language and body as well as his face. And, I
don't think Rupert is limited to a bunch of goofy faces. I think his
ability to express has great range and subtility. True he is funny and
that may tend to stick him in comedy roles but I think he has the
potential for drama too. 

I could really see a long and sucessfull career for him. But again,
fame is fickle. A year from now, it's possible that people will say,
'Rupert who? Grint? Who's he?' He wouldn't be the first child star to
very quickly vanish from peoples minds. That would be a real shame.

Anyway, I wish him fair fortune and a long happy life, but I still see
the change in his family situation as a very bad sign. It would be a
shame if the actions of other people, and their bad judgement turned
his dream sour.

Just a few thoughts.

bboy_mn









More information about the HPFGU-OTChatter archive