I find this a little disturbing.

I highly doubt that this will happen...there's been versions of the play in which the character Dan plays isn't nude. :unsure:

But, if it does happen, it will definately show that he's maturing as an actor, and he won't be taken as a child actor anymore. It's definately a sign of maturity.

I'm glad you posted the lesser of the disgusting articles I've read.

Really, what the hell is he thinking? He doesn't need the money and I don't see this enhancing his career. Oh well, I'll just consider it punishment for screwing up the best book I've ever read by turning it into a movie.

Gives a whole new meaning to the Harry/Myrtle scene in GoF. {8')|{

so those google advertisements at the bottom of the page do serve some purpose after all :P

and I agree with you. This is very disturbing. I believe that there has to be some way that the nudity can be avoided. He could at least where like...a shroud of some kind or something. anything would be better than nothing,even if it's just a rag or whatever.

and I think that while I don't approve of Daniel Radcliffe getting naked (who could?) in the play, he should at least wait til he's 18 to do something that...explicit.

I agree with the age thing. Also, most actors that do something like this after coming from playing a younger part end up screwing up their careers, so that's the punishment he deserves for attempting to play Harry.

That was sooooo creepy!!

Unfortunately, he can't really screw his career up until after the seventh book is out.

Ohh yeah, I heard about this on mugglenet and I read it in the paper also. It's...interesting. I was hoping that he would do the non-nudity version of the play...

try telling that to the 1000's of girls just slightly that age that are all aready planning on attending, and what camera's to buy in order to sneak a picture (this is the time when a non smiling eye rolling emoticon is in order)

I mean it's his own personal preferrance though. He wants to be artistic... who are we to tell him that's bad or good? <*Shrugs*>

As there would be problems with 17 year old girls who aren't allowed to have their picture taken naked, I don't think Daniel Radcliffe should be an exception.

do we know for sure he won't be 18 by the time this play is in the theaters with him in it though? perhaps it's in the talks, and he's in preperation.. but for next fall or so?

Will it be a such a problem then too?

If he's 17 at the time of the picture there's a problem. :P
I thought it was a play though? O_o

it is a play... you know the word theater.. yea it originated on a stage.. and not on a big screen. :rolleyes:

Bah, yeah, got confused there.

Okay...there's a part of me that just cracks up at the thought of Daniel Radcliffe riding a horse on stage naked. Whenever I think of his acting in general, I picture him in SS winking about 12 times a scene. *wink* "I'm a what?" *wink**wink*

But seriously as long as he is 18 at the time the play opens, I don't see a problem with it. He is going to be perceived as a "role model" for children regardless of any other roles he plays for the next decade or so. It's not as if he's starring in an adult film. From the way it's described the play seems very dramatic with the serious theme of insanity. The role sounds like a challenging one that any actor would be willing to play, especially someone who fears he'll be typecasted after playing such an internationally recognized character. I'm all for him broadening his acting horizons and would only be disappointed if he abandoned HP, as I've grown rather attached to him as Harry Potter. #StudentHarryPotter#

When i read this...I thought it was a publitsity stunt. but then a couple of days later i read that he WAS going to do it! I felt that if he feels he can do it then he will probably be able to go father in his career.

Just my opninion <*Shrugs*>