Okay. I know that fandom usually leads to fanfic stories that center on a million different sexual scenarios, but what's with the Harry Potter nudity? If Ace Showbiz has it right, Daniel Radcliffe is stripping once again, but this time it isn't for a disturbing play about horses. It's for Harry Potter.
Yes, they report that the almost-20-year-old will strip down for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Radcliffe is quoted as saying: "At first I thought I'd have pants [underwear] on for the scene. Apparently not. But I've sort of done that before on stage. It's all old hat now, really."
Well, it may be old hat to him, but there are still many hordes of Harry fans who probably weren't expecting to see his ... you can guess where I'm going with this. Will audience be able to see a good bit of skin when all is said and done? That remains to be seen. While the films are getting darker, we all know that violence and darkness goes down a lot easier than some added skin, and this is still a kid-centric series.
We've been waiting for some more official Spider-Man news for awhile now, ever since we told you there was a chance they might shoot both Spider-Man 4 and 5 at the same time. Good news is producer Laura Ziskin has chimed in, telling theater owners in California and Nevada that they expect Spider-Man 4 to hit theaters in May 2011. According to Ziskin (from an article in the Los Angeles Times), the script still isn't finished, yet they hope a fourth installment will be ready in three years.
However, when (and if) Spidey returns in May 2011, he'll have to square off against another Marvel flick in The First Avenger: Captain America(May 6), as well as Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II. All I'm sayin' is it should be an interesting month. Still no word on what (if any) involvement Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst will have in the making of future Spider-Man films. Three years is a long time to wait, so whaddya think: Is the long break a good thing for the franchise or will people forget and not care by the time Pete Parker swings back into theaters?
Yes, I'm sorry to say it, but we officially won't be getting any Harry Potter next year. After Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince premieres on November 21of this year, we're going to have to wait almost two whole years for Part 1 of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Coming Soon reports that the first part is set to hit theaters on November 19, 2010, with the second and final installment coming the next summer in 2011. It's nice that Potter fans won't have to wait a full year to see the Part 2, but it's still sad to think that so much time will pass before we can start wrapping up Harry Potter's life on-screen.
The end is still a few years off, but it still brings to mind the start of this cinematic whirlwind. When all this started, Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, and Tom Felton were just wee little things. Check out that cute, bespeckled face above. It's hard to believe this is the nude boy who hurts horses in Equus. How times change. Just imagine how old they'll be and look by 2010!
UPDATE: We've added a clearer version of the image above.
You'll have to excuse the blur in the photo above; it's a scanned version of a photo that's popped up in the new issue of Nick Magazine, and has surfaced over at a Brazilian Harry Potter fansite called Oculemencia. Here, we get our first look at Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Hermione (Emma Watson) and Ron (Rupert Grint) as they sit around in the Gryffindor Common Room. Hermione seems to be reading a paper of some kind, and Ron is just hanging out, staring at the two as if to say, "Can we just, like, go see Horton Hears a Who or something?"
I can't help but think that just as we Harry Potter fans run out of things to talk about, the frenzy begins again. What will happen when that seventh movie comes out? Life is going to become so dreary with no "I hope they include that part where ..." to discuss!
Harry Potter producer David Heyman has given an interview to Empire discussing that controversial Book 7 split. He gives a very good reason for why they are aiming to keep the film short -- Harry's young fans. "Is this going to be a four and a half hour film? That's probably what it would have been. Would our audience really embrace that? In some way, I think they might. But I think the younger ones would have drifted. There's always been difficulty making sure that the ones that are two hours, two and a half hours long – making sure that those are the right length. I think by having two films that are two and a half hours – although we're not sure of the length – then it will be a richer experience." Young kids did sit through Lord of the Rings quite spellbound though, so I am skeptical that it couldn't be done, but it is a valid point. You don't want to numb their poor eyes or butts.
After months of speculation, Warner Bros has revealed to the L.A. Timesthat they plan to split the final Harry Potter book into two films. One will be released in November 2010, the second in May 2011, and will simply be titled Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I / Part II.
Aware that this looks like a grubby money-maker by cynics (myself included), Daniel Radcliffe insists that's not so. "I think it's the only way you can do it without cutting out a huge portion of the book. There have been compartmentalized subplots in the other books that have made them easier to cut -- although those cuts were still to the horror of some fans -- but the seventh book doesn't really have any subplots. It's one driving, pounding story from the word go."
Producer David Heyman says it was a difficult decision to make for the studio. "I swear to you it was born out of purely creative reasons. Unlike every other book, you cannot remove elements of this book. You can remove scenes of Ron playing quidditch from the fifth book, and you can remove Hermione and S.P.E.W. [Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare] and those subplots . . . but with the seventh, that can't be done." Author J.K. Rowling has given her approval, much to everyone's relief.
I do admire that they are so dedicated to giving us the complete Deathly Hallows story that it wears down my cynicism. I disagree that there aren't things that couldn't be trimmed down -- Harry, Hermione and Ron's months upon months of hiding out in a tent, for one. But the fact that it was such an edge-of-the-seat read makes me worry they'll lose that momentum by splitting it in half. And what of the age factor? Will Radcliffe look 35 by the time this is finished?
In the end, I don't care how they release it. I just want it to be the best film of the entire series. %Gallery-18279%
It's funny. I consider Lois Lowry to be one of those instrumental writers for young girls, but I only read Anastasia Krupnik (and maybe one more). Regardless, one of her other big series was The Giver trilogy, which was once again trying to reach the big screen last March. Well, it seems that the production has hit another snag, one that is bad for Lowry fans, but great for followers of JK Rowling and Harry Potter.
On her blog, Lowry says that David Yates was going to helm The Giver after finishing the next Potter flick -- Half-Blood Prince. However, she goes on to say: "But he has just decided he wants to do the final Harry Potter first, thereby postponing The Giver by several years. Maybe the opening of this film could be held simultaneously with my celebration-of-life service after I succumb to old age? Or the producers will decide to get a different director. Stand by. But without holding your breath."
If this is true, it means that Yates will be behind three of the series' films -- Harry Potter and the ... Order of the Phoenix, Half-Blood Prince, and Deathly Hallows -- in other words, all of the final films. Hopefully he won't have to deal with any romantic turmoil on the set!
Speak out, Potter fans! Do you want him tackling the final installment, or is there someone else you would rather have helming the Hallows?
Earlier this month, director Guillermo del Torotalked about his open mind towards tackling The Hobbit, and how he was also interested in helming Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Now The Hollywood Reporter has posted that del Toro, whose name has been on the Hobbit shortlist for a while, is in official talks to direct the two J.R.R. Tolkien installments. The Pan's Labyrinth director will most likely come away with the two gigs in his pocket, and really, is there anyone better (Jackson aside)?
If he signs on the dotted line, the push will then be to get a script together -- something that has to wait until the strike is resolved (or an interim agreement is made). Then, both del Toro and Peter Jackson will oversee the writing, and try to get things ready for the tentative starting date in 2009 -- with a hefty $150 million price tag attached to each film. The first would hopefully bow in 2010, with the second in 2011.
Personally, I get anxious every time I hear that a script is going to be "fast-tracked," so I'm sort of hoping that they take a little more time with this. If they do, that could also possibly leave del Toro free to jump into Deathly Hallows, which would be all sorts of sweet. Stay tuned!
What do you do when your best-grossing movie franchise is near its end? You try to prolong it, of course. This may be what Warner Bros. has decided to do with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, the adaptation of the seventh and final book in J.K. Rowling's series. According to The Mail on Sunday, "crew working on the sixth Potter film, Harry Potter and The Half-Blood Prince, have been told J.K. Rowling's seventh book, Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows, will be released in two halves." But the decision -- if true -- is claimed not to be about squeezing more money out of the boy wizard. Instead the studio would split the final book over two films because the book of Deathly Hallows is way too long to appropriately condense it into one feature-length release. Of course, the book of Order of the Phoenix was even longer and they made that one into a single movie.
The move to extend Harry Potter 7 so that it's Harry Potter 7 and Harry Potter 8 seems to make sense for both financial and artistic reasons, and it also seems appropriate after the confirmation that The Hobbit would too be spread out over twofilms. Considering none of the other attempted fantasy franchises have been received very well, the idea that both the Harry Potter and the Lord of the Ringsfranchises would be extended appears to be a good one for both Hollywood and the fans. Who cares if Warner Bros. does want to do this for the money? You hardcore Potter lovers know you'd rather have another movie to watch, especially one that allows more of your favorite scenes from Deathly Hallows to make it in. Apparently Rowling agrees that the adaptation of her book needs to be at least longer than 4 hours -- and anybody thinking they can keep the kids seated for a single, 5-hour movie would have to be crazy. And speaking of crazy, that's exactly what The Mail on Sunday is for thinking Steven Spielberg could be the "big-name director" expected to helm the two-part Deathly Hallows and for thinking that Warner Bros. could seriously be hoping for an Oscar-worthy finale.
While speaking to MTV, Guillermo del Toro shed a bit more light on his rumored Frankenstein project, as well as talked more about possibly directing the two Hobbit films and the final Harry Potter flick, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Unfortunately, I can't see the man taking on all of those films -- especially since both The Hobbit and Harry Potter have strict deadlines to meet. First up, MTV asked whether del Toro was still interested in re-visiting Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. Good news is that del Toro very much wants to put his Frankenstein take up on the big screen, however because of the writer's strike he hasn't managed to write much. He claims to have written some notes prior to the strike, but decided to stop all writing once the strike happened in order to support the writers. As of now, he says, all he can do is draw: "The only way to do the Shelley novel is to actually do a four-hour miniseries," he said. But I think there permutations in which you can tell the myth in a different way." del Toro also joked that he will cast Robert De Niro in the role of Frankenstein, and that the director himself will "appear shirtless for most of the length of the film."
Regarding The Hobbit, del Toro said he's heard rumblings but nothing has come about. Says del Toro, "I keep an open mind, but nothing is official." Regarding Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, del Toro said he's still very interested in directing the seventh film if he were approached. He says, "Now that the novels have grown darker, I'm definitely interested ... After the third film, they've evolved really into a very nice universe to play in." He also admits to have read the seventh book (which he received from his "daughter") and claims to have been "very moved by the ending." So, if it were up to you, which of these three would you like to see Guillermo del Toro direct: Frankenstein, The Hobbit or Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows? Sign off below ...
Now that Daniel Radcliffe has grown up a bit, he's looking to balance off those last few Harry Potter films with stuff a little more "adult." For one, he took on a role (and off his clothes) in the staged play Equus, while he also starred in a cameo during the HBO show Extras as himself (who also happened to be a sex-obsessed teenager). Now, as we begin to start the cycle all over again and anticipate a sixth Potter flick, the UK Guardian reports the dude is among those being considered to star as a war journalist in a film called Journey. They say, "The film, Journey, will see Radcliffe play Dan Eldon, a 22-year-old who was among four journalists stoned to death by a mob in Mogadishu in July 1993. Eldon left behind 17 journals, thousands of pictures and a legacy that has won admirers including Madonna and Julia Roberts." Nice, meaty role, says me.
On another front, it seems fans are getting just a tad restless now that the seventh and final Potter book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, is over and done with. The people want more! They want an eighth book! And they will torture poor J.K. Rowling with future Potter questions for what appears to be the rest of her life. According to IESB, this time it's Rowling's own children who seem to be pressuring her into penning an eighth book. But Rowling, who's made approximately five gabillion dollars off the boy wizard, isn't exactly biting ... yet. She says, "If - and it's a big if - I ever write an eighth book, I doubt that Harry would be the central character. I feel I've already told his story. But these are big ifs. Let's give it ten years."
Not only is playing a Harry Potter character one of the most sought after jobs for British actors, it apparently is a gig some of them wish they could keep. In an interview with MTV, Kenneth Branagh, who played Defense Against the Dark Arts Professor Gilderoy Lockhart in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, revealed that he was hoping to see his character's name prominently featured in the seventh and final book, Deathly Hallows. That way he could return to the movie franchise, something he had also hoped for with the making of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (the character appears briefly in that book). But Branagh didn't simply want a little cameo in the final movie, he jokes that he should have been revealed to be Harry's dad. At least, I think that's what he meant. I'm not sure how that plot revelation would have worked out, but I guess since the actor-director was kidding, it doesn't matter.
Branagh did also reveal that he was considered to direct Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, but it ended up going to Alfonso Cuarón. He said the main reason he wanted to direct an installment was because of the kids, who he liked working with a lot. He thought they had more potential than they were exhibiting -- perhaps he can cast some of them in one of his Shakespeare adaptations down the line? I think Emma Watson would make an excellent Viola/Cesario -- which I personally think they finally got to show in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, under Mike Newell's direction. However, when asked whether or not he'd like to helm the adaptation of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Branagh said he thinks Warner Bros. will likely choose one of the series' previous directors (Columbus, Cuarón, Newell or Yates), any of whom he thinks would do nicely. Anyway, Shawn over at MTV Movies Blog put out the question of what character the fans most wanted to see reappear in the movies. You could leave him a comment about that over there, or feel free to tell us below.
Well you didn't expect that much time to pass before folks started having a bit of fun with this whole Dumbledore is gay thing. As you may recall, late last week J.K. Rowling outed the character during a reading of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, sparking much debate on this blog and across these great internets. So, you might be wondering, what's left to discuss? How about a list of some other memorable childhood characters who, quite possibly, wouldn't surprise us in their coming out of the closet. Yes, both Vulture and Radar went there, providing readers with two different lists full of fictional characters who could -- dun dun dun -- be ... gay!
Over on Vulture, they target such beloved characters as Fozzie Bear from The Muppet Show, Schroeder from Peanuts, The Flash (is it because he's flaming?), Spock from Star Trek, and -- here's the shocker -- Lando Calrissian from The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. (I think the cape is what does him in, but that's me.) Radar, on the other hand, has Willy Wonka (a fine choice, if I may say so myself) on their list, as well as Happy from Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Samwise Gangee from Lord of the Rings (Sam's not gay, he's just ... emotional), The Grinch from How the Grinch Stole Christmas and Mr. Tumnus from The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. Check out both lists and let us know what you think -- is this taking it a bit too far? Or, are there characters they're missing?
While we've entered the afternoon here on the East Coast, it's still fairly early on the West Coast, and so at least it's morning somewhere in the country. I'm sure most of you are well aware by now that J.K. Rowling officially "outed" the character of Dumbledore during a reading of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows on Friday evening at Carnegie Hall. When a fan asked whether Dumbledore finds "true love," Rowling responded: "Dumbledore is gay." Furthermore, she revealed that Dumbledore (who is headmaster of Hogwarts) was at one point in love with his rival, Gellert Grindelwald, whom he defeated long ago in a battle between good and bad wizards.
Reaction to this news so far has been mixed. Some fans couldn't care less when it came to Dumbledore's sexual preference, as the news doesn't change anything in the books. Others, like some of our commenters, would've liked Rowling to keep this information to herself. One reader, Jessica, had this to say: "Bringing his character from a great role model to a power hungry maniac, but now she says he was gay and in love with his rival?? Why make the series into a soap opera? If I had known before, I never would have read them and allowed my daughter to read them as well." Another reader, Dan, chimed in with this: "I think it was totally unnecessary to make this an issue one way or another in the Harry Potter series. I mean, come on, imagine if Disney said Cinderalla was really bi-sexual and secretly in love with Anastasia. Nothing seems to be off bounds today. How sad."
So, what do you think: Should Rowling have outed the character publicly like that? Should she have kept it to herself and, instead, let the fans draw their own conclusions? And, in your opinion, does this help or hurt the series as a whole?
2008 should be a very big year for Jim Broadbent. In May, we'll see the Oscar-winning actor appear alongside Harrison Ford in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull(as Indy's academic colleague). Then, later in the year, we'll see him in another giant franchise. According to Dark Horizons, Broadbent has definitely been cast in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Princeas the new (formerly retired) potions teacher Horace Slughorn (hmm, from crystal skulls to crystallized pineapple -- next up: a Crystal Gayle biopic?). As one of today's finest English actors, it's hard to believe he hasn't already appeared in the series, which is known for its casting of the best of the Brits. I guess it just took the perfect role to come around for him to finally be considered. Sure, Jette had suggestedSimon Callow for the role, but I think Broadbent will do a much finer job. Plus, we already know from Topsy-Turvyand Moulin Rouge!that he looks great with a big mustache.
I must remind that Half-Blood Prince is the first Potter book that I didn't read, and so I'm not too familiar with Slughorn, aside from what I've read and seen. The character returns to his position at Hogwarts, at the suggestion of Dumbledore, after many years of retirement, because he's to be a valuable asset in the battle against the Death Eaters. With Snape now moved to the job of teaching Defense Against the Dark Arts, Slughorn takes over the potions class he had taught for near-half a century. He also re-starts the Slug Club, an exclusive extra-curricular society made up of celebrated or favored Hogwarts students, including Harry, of course. Compared to J.K. Rowling's description of Slughorn, as well as Mary GrandPré's illustration of him, Broadbent may be too tall and not quite fat enough. But rest assured the actor will be perfect in his "tweedy" costumes and aged makeup. And hopefully the fans think so, since Broadbent will likely be required to return in the role for Deathly Hallows.
Okay. I know that fandom usually leads to fanfic stories that center on a million different sexual scenarios, but what's with the Harry Potter nudity? If Ace Showbiz has it right, Daniel Radcliffe is stripping once again, but this time it isn't for a disturbing play about horses. It's for Harry Potter.
.jpg)
I can't help but think that just as we Harry Potter fans run out of things to talk about, the frenzy begins again. What will happen when that seventh movie comes out? Life is going to become so dreary with no "I hope they include that part where ..." to discuss!
After months of speculation, Warner Bros has revealed to the 
It's funny. I consider Lois Lowry to be one of those instrumental writers for young girls, but I only read Anastasia Krupnik (and maybe one more). Regardless, one of her other big series was The Giver trilogy, which was once again trying to reach the big screen 
Earlier this month, director 
What do you do when your best-grossing movie franchise is near its end? You try to prolong it, of course. This may be what Warner Bros. has decided to do with 
While speaking to 
Now that 
Not only is playing a Harry Potter character one of the most sought after jobs for British actors, it apparently is a gig some of them wish they could keep. In 
Well you didn't expect that much time to pass before folks started having a bit of fun with this 
While we've entered the afternoon here on the East Coast, it's still fairly early on the West Coast, and so at least it's morning somewhere in the country. I'm sure most of you are well aware by now that 
2008 should be a very big year for 
