There are no words for quite how everything wrong with modern movies just found a summary snapshot in a Daniel Radcliffe cover..
I don’t get it. Ok, i DO get it. Harry potter was a massive part of kids’ lives for a decade. Despite countless other iterations of similar material out there, potter got lucky.
And Radcliffe worked hard and continues to nurture notions of being an actual grown up actor. Except that:
- Amazon (just as bad as Empire for their Radcliffe love): you can dress him up in beard and glasses all you want. I am not watching harry potter escapes from South Africa.
- Countless actors out there, Empire. WHY pick Radcliffe? It’s not like he needs the money, even in these difficult times. Kid is set up for life. From playing a boy wizard years ago. Yawn.
- Radcliffe imho betrayed JK Rowling. Not good! He jumped the trans rights bandwagon (fine) but at at a time when the lady whose creation is the sole reason he has a profile needed support (not good).
- Ask yourselves this. Is it FAIR? Would this kid have any profile at all but for harrrryyyy pottttter? No, imho. I do not rate him in terms of movie star charisma. Harrison Ford /Tom Cruise, he aint.
- Would he even get cast as the next Ben Mitchell in Eastenders, but for Harrrryyy Potttter? No, imho.
- He can pout, pose and promote as much as he wishes..but Radcliffe, to my mind, is simply not leading man material and therefore has no place on a front cover of Empire magazine, whose editorial vision of late has (once again, imho, and as a lifelong reader of said mag) gone down a tad in quality.
Feel free to disagree, of course. But I would simply remind that contrary to rumours? It was not Potter who bagged the Moon-Knight part for Marvel. But Oscar Isaac (terrible in Star Wars; awesome in everything else and a great star, actor, action hero, heart-throb etc). Go figure?!