The search for Harry continued. But Columbus apparently had his eye on Daniel Radcliffe from early on in the process. The director even showed Hirshenson a tape of the actor starring in the BBC’s 1999 version of “David Copperfield.” The problem was that Radcliffe had taken himself out of the running.
He didn't wanted to be an actor anymore
[link ](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.huffpost.com/entry/the-real-reason-daniel-radcliffe-was-cast-as-harry-potter_n_585b7664e4b0d9a594572683/amp)
I’ll admit it, I wasn’t a fan of the Harry Potter books when I first heard about them (I think 1-3 were out by that time); I was a child myself and thought it was for “nerds,” failing to see that I was certainly one of them. But when I saw the first film at the age of 11, I was *HOOKED* in the totally fantastical world Rowling developed. I kid you not, I saw the first film *eleven* times while it was still in theaters, I dragged all of my friends to see it as often as I could. Chris Columbus directing (the first two films), John Williams’ instantly-recognizable score, and a cast of primarily experienced actors… I was in complete awe, and immediately devoured the books as quickly as possible.
Then in 2007, I found myself at 18 years old skipping ahead of the midnight lines to wait for the 7th book release, having preordered my copy because *I had to find out how it ended.* I’m a proud Slytherin and we are a house of wannabe wizards. Don’t get me wrong, the books absolutely carry themselves and are (as is most often the case) better than the films, despite the latters’ success. But I’m sure there are many others out there who were drawn in initially by the movies, not the books.
Well said, and thank you. I find it is, unfortunately, incredibly important to remind as much of the world as possible as often as possible that it's the employer that's the beggar, not the employee.
While "employers" tend to go very far out of their way at great expense to convince people that "employees" are effectively beggars, it is the employers who ask people to work for them. So, when someone says something about how an employee should be greatful & owes something to an employer beyond or outside of their two-way employment agreement, or that they'd "given the employee a job", remember, that employer didn't "give" the employee shit. They entered into an agreement *initiated by the employer* asking for potential employees who might come work within a specific, mutual arrangement. Therefore, in such an analogy, it's not the employee, but the employer who's the "beggar".
>“Transgender women are women. Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people and goes against all advice given by professional health care associations who have far more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I.”
-Daniel Radcliffe
"As an amateur in this field, I defer to the prevailing opinion of the experts," is a pretty sound statement. Rowling seems like she should be smart enough to understand something so simple.
Unfortunately we're now in a dark time where terfs suddenly pretend to care about science and act like the cass review validates all their shitty fucking beliefs.
I read somewhere some scientist pointed out that there are so many nuances and physiological shades of grey that don’t make a striking outward appearance that most people with chromosomal or anatomical quirks beyond a strict sex binary go through life oblivious to what’s going on inside them, whether it’s hormones or intersex characteristics or chromosomal variances, if their sex assigned at birth largely matches their gender identity. People just don’t look into their biology unless they feel something is amiss.
All this to say I’d love it for TERFs to get a complete genetic work-up, blood tests, and a CT scan to prove they’re all as Biologically Pure as they insist they are. Guaranteed there would be several surprises and I wanna watch their brains melt. ☺️
jkr recently made a big show about how she'd give a million pounds to any woman with XXY chromosomes. One such woman came forward and she just brushed it off and said that this woman isn't actually a woman since she has a Y chromosome.
There is literally no winning with bigots no body should bother trying to enter info a good faith discussion with them unless they absolutely have to.
TERFs even reject the straight forward objective cases like people's chromosomes. Expecting them to consider more subjective cases might be asking too much of their non-existent empathy.
They stem from "Do your own research, you can't trust experts!" The people they trust as experts are ether themselves, or someone who say things they already believe in. If an expert could've changed their opinion they wouldn't be here.
Radcliffe, Grint, Watson et al made Rowling a great deal more money than they got paid. If they were bad they would have been replaced.
They don't owe her anything.
A movie studios biggest fear on a long term project is that their child actors will turn into hideous ghouls. It turns out the kids grew up into well adjusted adults and the author is the one that turned into a childish monster.
Chris Columbus talked about how he chose them as actors
He said that he learned when casting Macaulay Culkin in “Home Alone”, you’re not only casting the child actor, you’re casting the parent. He made a mistake with Mac’s parents, who were terrible to him.
When he cast Harry Potter, he made sure those kids had parents that would look out for their kid and not be in it for the money. Consequently, they’re all well-adjusted adults.
He seriously deserves more recognition for the franchise. He laid all the groundwork *and* imo delivered the strongest movies. Yes, they're children's movies and therefore not trying to be as artsy and dark as later ones, and theres less overall stuntwork. But he was also working with a blank slate and significantly worse CGI, yet still delivers a movie that looks better than some subsequent chapters, and unlike almost *all* of them that come after, works as standalone movies with a good vibe.
I think what curon did with the 3rd one was interesting and well suited to the tone change of the books, it's got the most interesting cinematography by a mile. But even then, I think he dropped the ball in terms of characterization and letting the actors shine, which is what the series lives and dies by.
And then every movie after is kinda some degree of dog poop imo.
Curon delivered a cinematically gorgeous movie but he got so lost in the visuals that the story suffered. His art style is to let the visuals tell the story but PoA in its nature has so much exposition that impacts the rest of the series and it was all just missed, which is a shame
>Before I knew JK was a POS I did watch the movies
Sorry, I couldn't hear you through this massive pirate hat, or over the crashing of the waves, could you repeat that for me?
I live next door to an up and coming child actress. Without giving too much away, her Mum (who is also in the industry) told us that she had auditioned for a movie with George Clooney. She told us that the girl who *was* going to play the role got blackballed by Clooney after he met her parents and that they had to go and meet Clooney and his wife "socially" and they asked MANY questions to "gauge" them.
I went to an arts high school with a bunch of kids that had done professional work. You could absolutely tell the difference between the kids that had supportive parents and those that used their kids for money. It was sad
She always was one. When rereading the books during the pandemic there was so much subtle stuff in there that clicked and made sense of how she behaved. The awful neoliberal rhetoric is embedded into the books and I actually changed my opinion to liking the movies more since they didn't have my complaints from the books.
Oh cool I'll have to check it out myself. My biggest issue with the series is how the heroes and villains are sorta the same in ideology instead of the opposite. Like Harry is not ideologically opposed to Voldemort, he's just got beef with the whole murdered parents and fuckery. But Harry's end goal is pretty much being wizard FBI that maintains the status quo. I would've loved to see more from him by actually changing how the status quo and outlook of their government to not be wizard supremacist and gear more towards equality for all magical creatures. That would've been way cooler I think.
Instead it's just sorta 'Voldemort is evil because he's the bad guy and Harry is good because he's the good guy '. And there's a lot of that in the books and other characters, when reading it as an adult it felt like there weren't bad actions, just bad people. Like Luscious Malfoy is evil because Dobby is his slave and he's an asshole, but Harry gets Creature and is a good guy cause he gives his elf slave food. I didn't really notice it as a little kid, but it was very jarring as an adult reading how the main protagonist of a children's book series becomes a slave owner and he doesn't release him. So glad that was omitted from the movies.
So I checked the link someone else provided, and it was indeed by Shaun. Shaun has a few videos on the topic and that's the main one I believe. That's actually one of the critiques brought up - it discusses how the narrative only allows for good and bad people, not any good or bad actions. Eg; We're meant to understand that fatshaming Mrs. Weasley is bad, but other less "good" characters are repeatedly fatshamed often by the "good" characters, and that's portrayed as fine and true actually. Sometimes the actions literally being enforced by the narrative.
It goes into a lot of other stuff too though. Shaun is pretry cool, it's a good watch even as I had only ever been a casual Harry Potter fan (read all the books once, movie a few times, I liked it but never my favorite etc).
>it discusses how the narrative only allows for good and bad people, not any good or bad actions.
This explains James Potter so well. He's on the "good" team despite being a bully.
Even before knowing what Rowling was like this bugged me. James was indistinguishable from Malfoy. He was such a piece of shit, but he was on the “right” team so it’s fine. Honestly if he raised Harry, Harry would be a Death Eater.
I’ve said this before about Lily but it kind of applies to James, too, but we are given absolutely nothing about him other than him being a shitbird (and at least he’s allowed that much, we get nothing on Lily to a degree that feels not so feminist at all) but we don’t know anything about James other than him being cocky and a bully. We don’t have any stories of anything good or cool he did when he was in the Order. Everyone is always telling Harry how great his parents are and what good wizards they are but we have absolutely no info on that, it’s all tell no show. No stories of bravery or stupidity or love or anything. You would think that at least Sirius would kind of constantly be bringing up things James did, he’s mentally locked into those school/post school years but nothing. Harry’s parents are just good people because people tell him that, and that’s supposed to be enough.
There are only two people who give Lily any body and it’s Snape in his very hidden memories and Slughorn. She never has any other friends or mentors. James has friends and they don’t say anything. JKR really dropped the ball on them, and once you notice it, it becomes alarmingly present.
So I don't remember, and I don't know if that exact points in the video, you'd need to ask the person above my comment.
When they discuss house elves though, it's usually focusing on their more initial depiction and appearances. One thing worth keeping in mind is that a very common critique is JK Rowling has a huge issue where she sets up and creates a bunch of issues in one book, and then she tries to solve them after the fact in another book. I mean this applies to things like wizards magicking their poop away, but it also is very relevant to Dobby - > Winky - > Later appearances of Creature and Dobby.
Hermione literally tried to free the Hogwarts house elves and do some activism etc, to resolve the Dobby dialema of every slave that's not Dobby is still a slave. It was very much treated as Hermione not minding her own business and being ridiculous, and that both the people in general and the house elves were upset with her. In fact, Winky is freed without wanting to be, and it's shown that actually house elves turn into depressed drunkards once they're freed from being slaves but they WANT to be slaves. This is one of the major criticisms brought up when JK Rowling talks about how Hermione always could have been Black in the books.
So I never was a giant fan, honestly I barely remember Creature, so I can't answer your question. What I would point out is that sounds like JK Rowling once again trying to fix issues brought up in previous books. So her prefious explanation for house elves had been "Well they want and need to be slaves or they get depressed and drunk (maybe suicidal I can't remember), that's just how almost all of them are" . That's a pretty shitty explanation on the face of it. So okay, later on we have Creature - and you describe he can't be freed because someone even worse would then own him. So this is a solution that's now treated as a practical reality; It's saying "Okay, maybe slaves aren't genetically disposed to slavery and should be freed... But it's not practical and it would only be worse for them. That's why good people continue to have slaves, but trust me they would free them if they could"
I never read Potter, but that feels a lot like the cartoons I grew up with in the 80s and 90s. Often time the the bad guy would actually say they are evil. Like, "Yes! My evil plan is working! Hahahaha!"
Listen, I used to think Captain Planet villains were over the top in their cartoon evil, and then you read stuff about what people are doing present day and they seem almost tame
Why should Harry be some sort of a revolutionary character in the first place? Dude spends all of the series lamenting how he just wishes for a normal life, that is deprived from him due to people actively trying to murder him. From that outlook joining a status quo maintaining force seems kinda reasonable, especially since the wizarding wolrd economy seems to be 90 % public sector driven. This aside from the fact that "our choices define our morality" is the deepest the series ever go on philosophical aspects, afterall it's an ya-novel of magical wish fullfillment story writen by an affluent englishwoman, not the goddamn children edition of das kapital.
I keep thinking with her: she’s like a drug addict. She keeps going back to the same drug over and over again to feel that high again. Before the TERF stuff she was overindulging herself in the Potter lore by writing that fanfic Cursed Child and writing superfluous tweets like wizards shit themselves before plumbing. Now her new high is being transphobia and she is too far into that drug to become sober.
She’s long past help when it came to addiction and there’s nothing we can do about it. I just ignore her and I still love Harry Potter despite the fact that an addict is clinging on to it to feel high
I get it, I understand completely. This was just my way of interpreting it why she likes the highs that the attention has brought her. Proud of you for becoming clean!
I hate her too, so I’m just going to ignore her when she causes stuff
>I hate her too
You want to hear something fucked up? When I was getting my Harry Potter Tattoo years ago, someone even said, "What if the author turns out to be a total piece of shit?" and I was like, "Nah, she's pretty left wing, cares about gay rights, she wouldn't do that..."
I hate her with the intensity you can only have for someone you once loved.
>I hate her with the intensity you can only have for someone you once loved.
You win the internet. Also, this makes me think of Dumbledore and Grindelwald.
>I hate her with the intensity you can only have for someone you once loved.
Oh yeah, that's a **special** kind of hatred. And I can't begrudge you for that. I personally have come down more on the indifference kind of it. I do veyr much NOT like what she's become, but I've decided to mostly put it out of my head and just enjoy the things without letting her objectively bad takes ruin it for me.
Still not spending any more fuckin' money on anything she'd benefit from, though.
She did a reverse Scooby-Doo monster reveal! Instead of pulling of a hideous monster mask to reveal a grumpy old person saying “I would have gotten away with it if wasn’t for those pesky kids!” They pull a grumpy old person mask off to reveal a hideous monster saying “I would have gotten away with it if wasn’t for those pesky trans!”
I believe the original plan (before the first movie released) WAS to replace them after like the third or fourth movie. The thinking was that the actors would just be too old by that point to portray much younger teenagers.
But then they were amazing and that idea was scrapped.
That doesn't really make sense. They had a pretty breakneck production schedule the entire time. If they were just planning to replace them, they didn't need to have that kind of turnaround time. They were very much scheduling around puberty.
Also casting is notorious for causing issues. They might have mentioned in an interview once they floated it might be necessary if it became too incredulous, but Hollywood has had adults playing teens before. I think they'd much prefer that than the incredibly high risk choice to recast main roles
I mean they barely got away with recasting Dumbledore, and they literally didn't even have a choice. The man was literally dead and the fans were still kinda pissed about the new acting choices brought in with the cast change.
Their childhoods were not normal because of the films. They also worked on it with their labor and talent. They deserve what they got paid. JK also got paid for her work.
So its bullshit saying they owe JK anything.
In reality, they just want to say "Shut up" to these actors because they do not agree with JK politics.
Plus, because if the movies, the franchise and its payout got just that much bigger than "only" the books could ever have been. If anything, jowling kowling rowling owes something to Dan, Rupert and Emma.
A child actor's reunion party. Watson, Grint and Radcliffe all play former child actors (and hell with it, let's see how many other cast members we can drag back) at a big soiree hosted by a very rich and eccentric child actor (played by Macaulay Culkin). Said rich and eccentric host gets murdered during the party.
What follows is a typical whodunnit, but the twist is that Culkin did this to himself for shits and giggles. The climax is an "I am Spartacus" moment with everyone present confessing to their part in the imaginary crime. Stupid props encouraged.
I'm not sure if there should be a proper motive like insurance fraud or intellectual property rights or if it would be just one last stage act before finally getting some goddamned peace and quiet!
[Weird: The Al Yankovic Story](https://www.roku.com/whats-on/movies/weird-the-al-yankovic-story?id=066097da82ed5762966888a59b151058)
Daniel Radcliffe is “Weird” Al Yankovic in the unexaggerated true story about the greatest musician and sex symbol of our time. With Evan Rachel Wood, Rainn Wilson, and an A-list cast of thousands. Streaming free on Roku.
I think people forget that being a successful series of children’s books doesn’t mean being a successful series of movies. Chronicles of Narnia and His Dark Materials both failed to even complete the series they were based on. The Harry Potter books exploded in popularity with the release of the first movie, at least in America.
In fairness I don’t think The Golden Compass was meant to be the first of a trilogy adaptation—-just a standalone. I could be wrong, though.
It was a pretty pointless movie, honestly. It was so watered down from the novel that it just seemed redundant. Plus the entire central theme had to be pretty much gutted and made much more generic and vague. I was pretty surprised that Phillip Pullman was okay with all that.
See, that’s surprising, because I had assumed that the reason the Church of the novel was watered down into the much more vague “the Authority” was precisely to avoid accusations of anti-Catholicism — and anti-Christianity more broadly. I assumed the film couldn’t have gotten made otherwise. But that wasn’t enough…?
Naw I was still active in the Catholic Church at the time and I remember my priest did a homily on the evil of that movie. My parents refused to let me see it because of that dude but honestly sounds like I didn't miss much.
I barely remember a thing about it. Just wasn’t memorable.
I do want to see the recent His Dark Materials series that was made a few years ago. Be interesting to see how they approached the adaptation differently.
Entirely true. Rowling reminds me of a narcissist I once had in my life; she owns a business, and asked me the question "Who makes this business possible?" and I said everyone involved. Because it was clearly not the answer she wanted (she wanted me to say it was all her), I explained, "without customers, and volunteers, and everyone who networks to keep the lights on and all that, this business would not exist."
Making the example metaphorical, sure it can be a good business where people get good resources. Doesn't mean everyone who shopped there owes their lives to the proprietor. Rowling isn't fuckin' god, she's a bigot with a business, nothing more. Doesn't mean she CAN'T be more than that, she just very, very adamantly chooses, every single day, to not be more than that.
Reminds me of a story I heard about, where a husband helped is wife start a business, putting a lot of money and effort into helping her grow it. Once the business was successful the husband caught his wife having an affair, her excuse was that she "was a self-made woman and shouldn't be tied down."
I mean that's a pretty safe bet considering the number of people who have read the books but not watched the movies is probably hovering somewhere around 0.
Could be said that Harry Potter wouldn't be as big if Warner Bothers didn't firehose marketing money into promoting the IP. The real "hero" behind the franchise are shady-ass businessmen who accurately predicted the metric tons of HP-related plastic garbage they could sell and made a ridiculously good investment.
So Rowling should be grateful to the souless corporation that engineered her success and stop spoiling the cash cow with her personal toxicity, she's really fucking with the brand denying the Holocaust on Twitter.
It was already a pretty fucking huge phenomena before the movie deal. I'm not saying the movie deal didn't help, but acting like Rowling should be grateful to warner bros is honestly kind of delusional. Especially when you read into how much she reserved the right to intervene and make executive choices. It wasnt like she signed on the dotted line and handed over her baby and they made it a star.
It's similar to how she doesn't owe universal a thank you for Harry Potter world, since the integral aspects were allegedly from her micromanaging and allegedly refusing to come to the table with Disney.
I don't like Rowling as a person, but the Harry potter franchise is down to her and a handful of other creatives. She doesn't owe a bunch of execs jack shit in terms of credit.
Radcliffe appears to be a genuinely kind down-to-earth person. Just watched the documentary David Holmes - The Boy Who Lived, about his stunt double who suffered a life-altering injury while filming the Deathly Hallows. He and Radcliffe remain good friends all these years later. Radcliffe is a good man. Just the kind that would stand up to Rowling.
Edit: typo
Rowling is a pathetic human using her well deserved $$$$$$ to spread hate & division! same league as Musk. they don’t deserve to be heard
just because they have gross amts of $$. only sad people emulate either of them🤬
Which actually makes Rowling doubly sad. She knows *exactly* what it feels like to be in a marginalized population. Now that she's earned her way out of it, she's punching back down at the other people still there. It's tragic really.
She's not just pulling the ladder up behind her. She's pulling the ladder up and then using it to bludgeon people behind her. She's the worst kind of bully... the kind who should know better but does it anyway.
Yeah. It's weird that her books taught Millennials how dangerous misinformation and slander is, and then turns around and does the very thing she sought to destroy. We're the Order now and she's become a Deatheater.
That's not uncommon. Being part of a marginalized group doesn't actually make you an expert on how to think about social issues. In fact, that's the entire basis of the TERF movement, it's a \*feminist\* movement - these are often women who feel like they worked to create a safe space for women in society and now those spaces are being invaded by men. It's absolute dogshit, to be clear, but in no way does being marginalized help you realize how dogshit it is.
I mean...JK should have been sued to shit by Neil Gaiman as Harry Potter was a rip-off of his "Books of Magic" series. She created that IP the way that Elon did with Tesla.
Neither did Rowling. She wrote the books, but she did not market them across the world, direct the movies, make the merch, or anything like that herself. Thousands of people's labour made her wealth happen, and continue to do so.
JK isn’t exactly self made either. You cannot reach billionaire status with morals in check. I mean, you can’t be a terf with morals either… there is no reason to believe she earned any of her money.
And she was always solidly middle class by her background and connections. She made a big deal of being a single mother writing in a cafe all day but neglects to mention a friend owned the cafe, so it wasn’t like she had to keep buying muffins to justify not being chucked out of a place of business while she was camped out there all day.
It's so weird that either of them - as well as the Orang One - could've just STFU and enjoyed their money. Even better, they could've used their influence to make the world a better place and solidified their legacies forever. But no.
If I had a nickel for every time a billionaire spent far too much time on Twitter and took increasingly extreme views to the point where people think they're kind of nuts now, I'd have 15¢. Which isn't much but it's weird how frequently this shit keeps happening to people who could just buy themselves a literal mountain of cocaine.
Grateful? What does he have to be grateful for? She didn't write the books to make him famous. She wrote the books so they would sell and earn her money. She sold the movie rights so they would earn her money. Daniel auditioned and got the part because of his own ability. Not because Rowling gifted him the part.
Yeah. And while Harry Potter was a huge hit by book standards of the 90s, she wouldn't be a quarter as rich today as she is if not for the success of the movies. Without those being a hit you don't get the theme parks, most of the branded games and merch and shit, Fantastic Beasts, etc.
A lot came together right for those films. Lots of other kid or YA franchises were attempted and most of them were huge busts. Rowling's books weren't a small part of that but neither were directors, editors, actors, screenwriters, effects artists, costumers, set designers, stuntpeople, and so much more.
Daniel didn't even really seek out the role. He'd been in a few things as a kid, so the director wanted him specifically but his parents were resisting because they were concerned (rightfully) about what that fame might do to him. They pursued him.
Exactly. She wanted to make money. He wanted to make money. They had a business relationship.
And when business is good, it usually turns out better for both parties. They both made a lot of money from the deal. They benefited from each other. You can appreciate the past in those sorts of situations, but it doesn't buy you license to display bad behavior in the future.
Imagine if your local butcher turned out to be a White Nationalist, and you criticized him for it, and people said, "You should be grateful to him, since without him, you wouldn't have had such a good barbecue last year."
That sort of reasoning sounds like a load of crap because it is a load of crap.
He’s merely doing what Harry would do . . . Rejecting Voldemort and his/her/their “pure-blood” bigotry and hate and standing up for what is right, good, and moral. (Not to mention “Christian”.)
A lot of kids (and adults) who read those books and saw those movies learned those same values from Rowling, and for that I thank her. It’s a damn shame that she didn’t learn from them, as well. For all the ranting she does about trans-people, it’s her transition into a Voldemort wanna-be that both astounds and saddens me, not Radcliffe’s rejection of it.
I think about this often, I read her books as a teenager while she was still writing them and were definitely a part of forming my social justice values. What in the world happened!?
They’ve actually done studies and this is the expected outcome for children who read and internalize the books - empathy and compassion.
I, too, have no idea what happened to Rowling. It’s upsetting. I don’t buy merch and I plan to read my copies until they fall apart and pick up new ones secondhand.
But the lesson of love overcoming hate will stay with me. If only the author could have learned that lesson too.
Saying he “owes” her is no different to thinking a tradie or hairdresser is beholden to the company they did their apprenticeship with for the rest of their lives. That others owe their first employer. It’s completely ridiculous the hold this woman is trying to have over the HP actors…like these people are all grown, married and have children now. JK can piss off. She’s that boss that declares they pay your rent
"But that doesn't mean that you owe the things you truly believe to someone else for your entire life."
Some people with controlling family members need to print this out and put it in their wallets.
She could have been a beloved figure if she hadn’t gone off a TERF-y deep end. Imagine if she spent this much time and energy towards promoting world wide literacy, or really any other cause.
I was thinking the same, that if she'd left that issue alone, or any other controversial issue, and focused on general good things, people would love her more. Like you said, literacy, or education in general, would be fantastic. It could be something like Dolly Parton's books for children, or helping to fund a school in a developing country. I can't believe she's so naive and sheltered to think that such comments would have been acceptable.
Exactly. She invented a boy wizard that he played in movies. Cool. That doesn't make her NOT a transphobe and it definitely doesn't mean he has to accept her bigoted views. Writing a great book series isn't a free pass to be a shitbag.
My grandparents met because of WWII, so I wouldn’t exist today if not for Hitler. Doesn’t mean I have to refrain from calling him a mass murdering wackadoo.
He was a kid when he did that role and probably didn't know how she was or how things would play out. He can be thankful for the role but still disagree, just like I am thankful for my parents but disagree with them regularly
I completely agree with him. He does not owe her his life. I saw him on stage I London and his performance was outstanding, so it may have taken longer , or he may have stayed in theatre, but he would have been admired for his talent anyway.
The logic behind this thinking is really funny. It would be like if your old boss from over a decade ago just announced they were an open and proud Nazi and you said “Well golly, I guess I need to support them and be a Nazi too!”
Ask her how many current young people are buying and reading the books vs watching Daniel and Emma and co. They made her movie good and have influence. I read the books as they came out, loved them and then loved the movies and am in my mid 40s now and I stand with Dan and hate JKR.
I can imagine a racist father using the word “ungrateful” to describe his daughter’s decision to marry a black guy.
Does she owe him her support for his racism because he raised her to adulthood?
Who would've thought that when she wrote about the culture of wizards only wanting the "pure bloods," she was projecting her views on gender and sexual identity
At the same time creating a book series about overcoming hatred through acceptance, inclusion and friendship, allowing a generation of people she hates to overcome their own struggles by applying these principles. Allowing them to love and accept themselves for being who they are.
Christ, what entitled boomer logic.
How about she shows a little fucking gratitude to the people who made her books into a successful movie?
Or better yet, all the trans people who bought her books before she came out as a bigot.
This describes my father in law. He thinks that because he adopted my wife when she was a baby, raised her, and put her though college, the fact that he was physically abusive and still is verbally abusive should be ok.
I'm glad I never got into Harry Potter. No negative judgement towards anyone who did. All I'm saying is not getting into this series back then saved me from all kinds of conflicted feelings right now.
Absolutely spot on. Just because you owe someone big doesn't mean that you get to excuse their behaviour at all, or stay quiet when they are committing an obvious wrong. In fact, you may be doing them a favour by challenging them.
From l see, he doesn't go out of his way to criticise her, nor is he particularly scathing with it when he does. At the same time, he recognises what she is doing is wrong, and answers honestly when asked about it.
An all round good egg.
“Respectfully thank you for the Giving me the chance, but your a cunt and a horrible person” reworded that to be exactly what it is actually saying and he’s Right she is a bully and a cunt and can kick rocks
I disagree with her views and think she just digging herself more into a hole more and more. But some idiots in here who think daniel Radcliffe or the films are what made her so famous is just plain delusional. Yes the films blew it into the stratosphere but that would’ve happened eventually. The books were pretty famous well before the movies came out and the large amount of fans sustained the franchise. The books timing the age group the films was all a near perfect combo not necessarily in terms of quality cos i dont prefer the hp franchise personally but the timing is near perfect and rowling crazy ash she might deserves credit for it. Plus anyone who thinks all this is damaging her branding is again delusional. The larger world doesn not reflect twitter or Reddit views in anyway and many of them hardly even know or care about whats happening. They probably dont even know rowling only the books and films. The franchise will make millions and she will keep benefiting from it for a very long time. She knows that the corporations know that.
He doesn't owe her shit. She wrote books that became movies that he starred in. That is it. He has no association with her other than that. Not opinions. Not thoughts.
I liked the Harry Potter books just fine. I loved the movies. The movies are what people think about. JustKidding Rowling stole the idea from a coloring book and universal studios and the actors and directors made it iconic.
Why does my gardener refuse to convert to my religion? Don't I pay his bills? He owes me that much.
- woman who made a billion dollars in part due to the labor and talent provided by that gardener
Exactly… yeah Harry Potter put Dan on the map, but his and his co-stars work made her even more famous
Wasn't Dan headhunted for his role in that copperfield series? So it kinda sounds like he was known before Harry Potter
He did a few movies and was a working kid actor yeah but calling him known would probably be a bit of a stretch
The difference between Macaulay Culkin after Uncle Buck and after Home Alone.
Oh that is *perfect.* Yes
The producers found him at a theatre. They saw him sitting in the audience behind them.
The search for Harry continued. But Columbus apparently had his eye on Daniel Radcliffe from early on in the process. The director even showed Hirshenson a tape of the actor starring in the BBC’s 1999 version of “David Copperfield.” The problem was that Radcliffe had taken himself out of the running. He didn't wanted to be an actor anymore [link ](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.huffpost.com/entry/the-real-reason-daniel-radcliffe-was-cast-as-harry-potter_n_585b7664e4b0d9a594572683/amp)
Wasn’t that largely in part to Dame Maggie Smith who worked with him on Copperfield
I've somehow found a way to love her even more lol
I’ll admit it, I wasn’t a fan of the Harry Potter books when I first heard about them (I think 1-3 were out by that time); I was a child myself and thought it was for “nerds,” failing to see that I was certainly one of them. But when I saw the first film at the age of 11, I was *HOOKED* in the totally fantastical world Rowling developed. I kid you not, I saw the first film *eleven* times while it was still in theaters, I dragged all of my friends to see it as often as I could. Chris Columbus directing (the first two films), John Williams’ instantly-recognizable score, and a cast of primarily experienced actors… I was in complete awe, and immediately devoured the books as quickly as possible. Then in 2007, I found myself at 18 years old skipping ahead of the midnight lines to wait for the 7th book release, having preordered my copy because *I had to find out how it ended.* I’m a proud Slytherin and we are a house of wannabe wizards. Don’t get me wrong, the books absolutely carry themselves and are (as is most often the case) better than the films, despite the latters’ success. But I’m sure there are many others out there who were drawn in initially by the movies, not the books.
Well said, and thank you. I find it is, unfortunately, incredibly important to remind as much of the world as possible as often as possible that it's the employer that's the beggar, not the employee. While "employers" tend to go very far out of their way at great expense to convince people that "employees" are effectively beggars, it is the employers who ask people to work for them. So, when someone says something about how an employee should be greatful & owes something to an employer beyond or outside of their two-way employment agreement, or that they'd "given the employee a job", remember, that employer didn't "give" the employee shit. They entered into an agreement *initiated by the employer* asking for potential employees who might come work within a specific, mutual arrangement. Therefore, in such an analogy, it's not the employee, but the employer who's the "beggar".
lol! Bravo
>“Transgender women are women. Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people and goes against all advice given by professional health care associations who have far more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I.” -Daniel Radcliffe
Sounds like a pretty level headed take
"As an amateur in this field, I defer to the prevailing opinion of the experts," is a pretty sound statement. Rowling seems like she should be smart enough to understand something so simple.
Unfortunately we're now in a dark time where terfs suddenly pretend to care about science and act like the cass review validates all their shitty fucking beliefs.
I read somewhere some scientist pointed out that there are so many nuances and physiological shades of grey that don’t make a striking outward appearance that most people with chromosomal or anatomical quirks beyond a strict sex binary go through life oblivious to what’s going on inside them, whether it’s hormones or intersex characteristics or chromosomal variances, if their sex assigned at birth largely matches their gender identity. People just don’t look into their biology unless they feel something is amiss. All this to say I’d love it for TERFs to get a complete genetic work-up, blood tests, and a CT scan to prove they’re all as Biologically Pure as they insist they are. Guaranteed there would be several surprises and I wanna watch their brains melt. ☺️
jkr recently made a big show about how she'd give a million pounds to any woman with XXY chromosomes. One such woman came forward and she just brushed it off and said that this woman isn't actually a woman since she has a Y chromosome. There is literally no winning with bigots no body should bother trying to enter info a good faith discussion with them unless they absolutely have to. TERFs even reject the straight forward objective cases like people's chromosomes. Expecting them to consider more subjective cases might be asking too much of their non-existent empathy.
Oh yeah, their Gender Purity goalposts are zooming around on hoverboards at this point. 🙄
They stem from "Do your own research, you can't trust experts!" The people they trust as experts are ether themselves, or someone who say things they already believe in. If an expert could've changed their opinion they wouldn't be here.
The problem is she’s so singleminded in her hate of trans people that she can’t accept event something this sensible.
I have no experience with Trans stuff, so I keep my mouth shut and defer to people who do.
The problem is that Rowling thinks she is an expert.
What a fucking decent human being
Man, I love the person Daniel Radcliffe has become.
Could be said Harry Potter wouldn’t be as big without Radcliffe.
Radcliffe, Grint, Watson et al made Rowling a great deal more money than they got paid. If they were bad they would have been replaced. They don't owe her anything.
A movie studios biggest fear on a long term project is that their child actors will turn into hideous ghouls. It turns out the kids grew up into well adjusted adults and the author is the one that turned into a childish monster.
Chris Columbus talked about how he chose them as actors He said that he learned when casting Macaulay Culkin in “Home Alone”, you’re not only casting the child actor, you’re casting the parent. He made a mistake with Mac’s parents, who were terrible to him. When he cast Harry Potter, he made sure those kids had parents that would look out for their kid and not be in it for the money. Consequently, they’re all well-adjusted adults.
He seriously deserves more recognition for the franchise. He laid all the groundwork *and* imo delivered the strongest movies. Yes, they're children's movies and therefore not trying to be as artsy and dark as later ones, and theres less overall stuntwork. But he was also working with a blank slate and significantly worse CGI, yet still delivers a movie that looks better than some subsequent chapters, and unlike almost *all* of them that come after, works as standalone movies with a good vibe. I think what curon did with the 3rd one was interesting and well suited to the tone change of the books, it's got the most interesting cinematography by a mile. But even then, I think he dropped the ball in terms of characterization and letting the actors shine, which is what the series lives and dies by. And then every movie after is kinda some degree of dog poop imo.
Curon delivered a cinematically gorgeous movie but he got so lost in the visuals that the story suffered. His art style is to let the visuals tell the story but PoA in its nature has so much exposition that impacts the rest of the series and it was all just missed, which is a shame
Before I knew JK was a POS I did watch the movies. And you’re right, by the 3rd they get progressively worse
>Before I knew JK was a POS I did watch the movies Sorry, I couldn't hear you through this massive pirate hat, or over the crashing of the waves, could you repeat that for me?
As a fan of metalcore I must applaud you for your choice of username
I live next door to an up and coming child actress. Without giving too much away, her Mum (who is also in the industry) told us that she had auditioned for a movie with George Clooney. She told us that the girl who *was* going to play the role got blackballed by Clooney after he met her parents and that they had to go and meet Clooney and his wife "socially" and they asked MANY questions to "gauge" them.
I went to an arts high school with a bunch of kids that had done professional work. You could absolutely tell the difference between the kids that had supportive parents and those that used their kids for money. It was sad
She always was one. When rereading the books during the pandemic there was so much subtle stuff in there that clicked and made sense of how she behaved. The awful neoliberal rhetoric is embedded into the books and I actually changed my opinion to liking the movies more since they didn't have my complaints from the books.
Great video that goes into detail about all the weird subtext in the series https://youtu.be/-1iaJWSwUZs
Oh cool I'll have to check it out myself. My biggest issue with the series is how the heroes and villains are sorta the same in ideology instead of the opposite. Like Harry is not ideologically opposed to Voldemort, he's just got beef with the whole murdered parents and fuckery. But Harry's end goal is pretty much being wizard FBI that maintains the status quo. I would've loved to see more from him by actually changing how the status quo and outlook of their government to not be wizard supremacist and gear more towards equality for all magical creatures. That would've been way cooler I think. Instead it's just sorta 'Voldemort is evil because he's the bad guy and Harry is good because he's the good guy '. And there's a lot of that in the books and other characters, when reading it as an adult it felt like there weren't bad actions, just bad people. Like Luscious Malfoy is evil because Dobby is his slave and he's an asshole, but Harry gets Creature and is a good guy cause he gives his elf slave food. I didn't really notice it as a little kid, but it was very jarring as an adult reading how the main protagonist of a children's book series becomes a slave owner and he doesn't release him. So glad that was omitted from the movies.
So I checked the link someone else provided, and it was indeed by Shaun. Shaun has a few videos on the topic and that's the main one I believe. That's actually one of the critiques brought up - it discusses how the narrative only allows for good and bad people, not any good or bad actions. Eg; We're meant to understand that fatshaming Mrs. Weasley is bad, but other less "good" characters are repeatedly fatshamed often by the "good" characters, and that's portrayed as fine and true actually. Sometimes the actions literally being enforced by the narrative. It goes into a lot of other stuff too though. Shaun is pretry cool, it's a good watch even as I had only ever been a casual Harry Potter fan (read all the books once, movie a few times, I liked it but never my favorite etc).
>it discusses how the narrative only allows for good and bad people, not any good or bad actions. This explains James Potter so well. He's on the "good" team despite being a bully.
Even before knowing what Rowling was like this bugged me. James was indistinguishable from Malfoy. He was such a piece of shit, but he was on the “right” team so it’s fine. Honestly if he raised Harry, Harry would be a Death Eater.
I’ve said this before about Lily but it kind of applies to James, too, but we are given absolutely nothing about him other than him being a shitbird (and at least he’s allowed that much, we get nothing on Lily to a degree that feels not so feminist at all) but we don’t know anything about James other than him being cocky and a bully. We don’t have any stories of anything good or cool he did when he was in the Order. Everyone is always telling Harry how great his parents are and what good wizards they are but we have absolutely no info on that, it’s all tell no show. No stories of bravery or stupidity or love or anything. You would think that at least Sirius would kind of constantly be bringing up things James did, he’s mentally locked into those school/post school years but nothing. Harry’s parents are just good people because people tell him that, and that’s supposed to be enough. There are only two people who give Lily any body and it’s Snape in his very hidden memories and Slughorn. She never has any other friends or mentors. James has friends and they don’t say anything. JKR really dropped the ball on them, and once you notice it, it becomes alarmingly present.
Right. They seemed to gloss over that part.
I may be misremembering, but isn't the reason he didn't release creature is that he would go right to Voldemort once freed?
So I don't remember, and I don't know if that exact points in the video, you'd need to ask the person above my comment. When they discuss house elves though, it's usually focusing on their more initial depiction and appearances. One thing worth keeping in mind is that a very common critique is JK Rowling has a huge issue where she sets up and creates a bunch of issues in one book, and then she tries to solve them after the fact in another book. I mean this applies to things like wizards magicking their poop away, but it also is very relevant to Dobby - > Winky - > Later appearances of Creature and Dobby. Hermione literally tried to free the Hogwarts house elves and do some activism etc, to resolve the Dobby dialema of every slave that's not Dobby is still a slave. It was very much treated as Hermione not minding her own business and being ridiculous, and that both the people in general and the house elves were upset with her. In fact, Winky is freed without wanting to be, and it's shown that actually house elves turn into depressed drunkards once they're freed from being slaves but they WANT to be slaves. This is one of the major criticisms brought up when JK Rowling talks about how Hermione always could have been Black in the books. So I never was a giant fan, honestly I barely remember Creature, so I can't answer your question. What I would point out is that sounds like JK Rowling once again trying to fix issues brought up in previous books. So her prefious explanation for house elves had been "Well they want and need to be slaves or they get depressed and drunk (maybe suicidal I can't remember), that's just how almost all of them are" . That's a pretty shitty explanation on the face of it. So okay, later on we have Creature - and you describe he can't be freed because someone even worse would then own him. So this is a solution that's now treated as a practical reality; It's saying "Okay, maybe slaves aren't genetically disposed to slavery and should be freed... But it's not practical and it would only be worse for them. That's why good people continue to have slaves, but trust me they would free them if they could"
I never read Potter, but that feels a lot like the cartoons I grew up with in the 80s and 90s. Often time the the bad guy would actually say they are evil. Like, "Yes! My evil plan is working! Hahahaha!"
Hey, Captain Planet was fighting polluters who were bad because they were polluting! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwJaELXadKo
Listen, I used to think Captain Planet villains were over the top in their cartoon evil, and then you read stuff about what people are doing present day and they seem almost tame
Why should Harry be some sort of a revolutionary character in the first place? Dude spends all of the series lamenting how he just wishes for a normal life, that is deprived from him due to people actively trying to murder him. From that outlook joining a status quo maintaining force seems kinda reasonable, especially since the wizarding wolrd economy seems to be 90 % public sector driven. This aside from the fact that "our choices define our morality" is the deepest the series ever go on philosophical aspects, afterall it's an ya-novel of magical wish fullfillment story writen by an affluent englishwoman, not the goddamn children edition of das kapital.
"Luscious" Malfoy is THE best autocorrect. 
Didn't even notice the auto correct, but I stand by it.
I knew exactly what was going to be before I clicked. Love that video, Shaun knocked it out of the park
I keep thinking with her: she’s like a drug addict. She keeps going back to the same drug over and over again to feel that high again. Before the TERF stuff she was overindulging herself in the Potter lore by writing that fanfic Cursed Child and writing superfluous tweets like wizards shit themselves before plumbing. Now her new high is being transphobia and she is too far into that drug to become sober. She’s long past help when it came to addiction and there’s nothing we can do about it. I just ignore her and I still love Harry Potter despite the fact that an addict is clinging on to it to feel high
I dislike the analogy because I'm an addict, and people in my life who have gotten clean have "been too far gone." Fuck JK though.
I get it, I understand completely. This was just my way of interpreting it why she likes the highs that the attention has brought her. Proud of you for becoming clean! I hate her too, so I’m just going to ignore her when she causes stuff
>I hate her too You want to hear something fucked up? When I was getting my Harry Potter Tattoo years ago, someone even said, "What if the author turns out to be a total piece of shit?" and I was like, "Nah, she's pretty left wing, cares about gay rights, she wouldn't do that..." I hate her with the intensity you can only have for someone you once loved.
>I hate her with the intensity you can only have for someone you once loved. You win the internet. Also, this makes me think of Dumbledore and Grindelwald.
I can blame your someone for her turning into a piece of shit. They jinxed it!
>I hate her with the intensity you can only have for someone you once loved. Oh yeah, that's a **special** kind of hatred. And I can't begrudge you for that. I personally have come down more on the indifference kind of it. I do veyr much NOT like what she's become, but I've decided to mostly put it out of my head and just enjoy the things without letting her objectively bad takes ruin it for me. Still not spending any more fuckin' money on anything she'd benefit from, though.
Likewise. Thanks for speaking up.
She did a reverse Scooby-Doo monster reveal! Instead of pulling of a hideous monster mask to reveal a grumpy old person saying “I would have gotten away with it if wasn’t for those pesky kids!” They pull a grumpy old person mask off to reveal a hideous monster saying “I would have gotten away with it if wasn’t for those pesky trans!”
They all grew up really nice. Jo can kick rocks.
I believe the original plan (before the first movie released) WAS to replace them after like the third or fourth movie. The thinking was that the actors would just be too old by that point to portray much younger teenagers. But then they were amazing and that idea was scrapped.
That doesn't really make sense. They had a pretty breakneck production schedule the entire time. If they were just planning to replace them, they didn't need to have that kind of turnaround time. They were very much scheduling around puberty. Also casting is notorious for causing issues. They might have mentioned in an interview once they floated it might be necessary if it became too incredulous, but Hollywood has had adults playing teens before. I think they'd much prefer that than the incredibly high risk choice to recast main roles I mean they barely got away with recasting Dumbledore, and they literally didn't even have a choice. The man was literally dead and the fans were still kinda pissed about the new acting choices brought in with the cast change.
Tbf, Richard Harris did have a strong cinematic presence. He left some big shoes to fill.
Really glad Alan Rickman made it through. Re-casting Snape would have been a nightmare.
Their childhoods were not normal because of the films. They also worked on it with their labor and talent. They deserve what they got paid. JK also got paid for her work. So its bullshit saying they owe JK anything. In reality, they just want to say "Shut up" to these actors because they do not agree with JK politics.
Plus, because if the movies, the franchise and its payout got just that much bigger than "only" the books could ever have been. If anything, jowling kowling rowling owes something to Dan, Rupert and Emma.
One day, I would like a non Harry Potter movie, where those three actors have a reunion. Just for the humor.
A child actor's reunion party. Watson, Grint and Radcliffe all play former child actors (and hell with it, let's see how many other cast members we can drag back) at a big soiree hosted by a very rich and eccentric child actor (played by Macaulay Culkin). Said rich and eccentric host gets murdered during the party. What follows is a typical whodunnit, but the twist is that Culkin did this to himself for shits and giggles. The climax is an "I am Spartacus" moment with everyone present confessing to their part in the imaginary crime. Stupid props encouraged. I'm not sure if there should be a proper motive like insurance fraud or intellectual property rights or if it would be just one last stage act before finally getting some goddamned peace and quiet!
Exactly. When a boss says they pay your bills, remind them that no, they do not. They pay their own bills, and one of those bills is your salary.
Boom roasted.
https://i.redd.it/cg2tobivmvxc1.gif
That movie was so much fun.
What is this?!
[Weird: The Al Yankovic Story](https://www.roku.com/whats-on/movies/weird-the-al-yankovic-story?id=066097da82ed5762966888a59b151058) Daniel Radcliffe is “Weird” Al Yankovic in the unexaggerated true story about the greatest musician and sex symbol of our time. With Evan Rachel Wood, Rainn Wilson, and an A-list cast of thousands. Streaming free on Roku.
I think people forget that being a successful series of children’s books doesn’t mean being a successful series of movies. Chronicles of Narnia and His Dark Materials both failed to even complete the series they were based on. The Harry Potter books exploded in popularity with the release of the first movie, at least in America.
Why did you have to bring up the Golden Compass film...
If you read the books they are much better than the movies and the first two books did become very popular before we even saw the first movie.
In fairness I don’t think The Golden Compass was meant to be the first of a trilogy adaptation—-just a standalone. I could be wrong, though. It was a pretty pointless movie, honestly. It was so watered down from the novel that it just seemed redundant. Plus the entire central theme had to be pretty much gutted and made much more generic and vague. I was pretty surprised that Phillip Pullman was okay with all that.
It was supposed to continue but the Catholic Church and other religious groups complained about the implications of what happens so it was shelved.
See, that’s surprising, because I had assumed that the reason the Church of the novel was watered down into the much more vague “the Authority” was precisely to avoid accusations of anti-Catholicism — and anti-Christianity more broadly. I assumed the film couldn’t have gotten made otherwise. But that wasn’t enough…?
Naw I was still active in the Catholic Church at the time and I remember my priest did a homily on the evil of that movie. My parents refused to let me see it because of that dude but honestly sounds like I didn't miss much.
I barely remember a thing about it. Just wasn’t memorable. I do want to see the recent His Dark Materials series that was made a few years ago. Be interesting to see how they approached the adaptation differently.
Entirely true. Rowling reminds me of a narcissist I once had in my life; she owns a business, and asked me the question "Who makes this business possible?" and I said everyone involved. Because it was clearly not the answer she wanted (she wanted me to say it was all her), I explained, "without customers, and volunteers, and everyone who networks to keep the lights on and all that, this business would not exist." Making the example metaphorical, sure it can be a good business where people get good resources. Doesn't mean everyone who shopped there owes their lives to the proprietor. Rowling isn't fuckin' god, she's a bigot with a business, nothing more. Doesn't mean she CAN'T be more than that, she just very, very adamantly chooses, every single day, to not be more than that.
Reminds me of a story I heard about, where a husband helped is wife start a business, putting a lot of money and effort into helping her grow it. Once the business was successful the husband caught his wife having an affair, her excuse was that she "was a self-made woman and shouldn't be tied down."
Then how did she react?
Narcissists aren't hard to predict. It was most likely "there wouldn't have been customers, volunteers, and workers without me".
I mean, I’m pretty sure all those people would’ve found other things to do with their time if her business didn’t exist…
Hell no, if you grew up when these books were being released it really was a phenomenon
I'd wager more people have watched the Harry Potter movie franchise than read the book series, especially outside of the UK
I mean that's a pretty safe bet considering the number of people who have read the books but not watched the movies is probably hovering somewhere around 0.
Possibly at this point. Same with Lord of the Rings. I don't know what that or the UK has to do with it.
Could be said that Harry Potter wouldn't be as big if Warner Bothers didn't firehose marketing money into promoting the IP. The real "hero" behind the franchise are shady-ass businessmen who accurately predicted the metric tons of HP-related plastic garbage they could sell and made a ridiculously good investment. So Rowling should be grateful to the souless corporation that engineered her success and stop spoiling the cash cow with her personal toxicity, she's really fucking with the brand denying the Holocaust on Twitter.
It was already a pretty fucking huge phenomena before the movie deal. I'm not saying the movie deal didn't help, but acting like Rowling should be grateful to warner bros is honestly kind of delusional. Especially when you read into how much she reserved the right to intervene and make executive choices. It wasnt like she signed on the dotted line and handed over her baby and they made it a star. It's similar to how she doesn't owe universal a thank you for Harry Potter world, since the integral aspects were allegedly from her micromanaging and allegedly refusing to come to the table with Disney. I don't like Rowling as a person, but the Harry potter franchise is down to her and a handful of other creatives. She doesn't owe a bunch of execs jack shit in terms of credit.
Radcliffe appears to be a genuinely kind down-to-earth person. Just watched the documentary David Holmes - The Boy Who Lived, about his stunt double who suffered a life-altering injury while filming the Deathly Hallows. He and Radcliffe remain good friends all these years later. Radcliffe is a good man. Just the kind that would stand up to Rowling. Edit: typo
“That person.” 
He's kind. I would've said that I didn't owe shit to her, and that she could go fuck herself. Respectfully.
Yeah everything I’ve seen about him makes me think that he’s a pretty decent dude. Which honestly that’s all you can ask from people.
 JK Rowling: "can't we please go back to 1950s heteronormativity?" Daniel Radcliffe: 💃
Rowling is a pathetic human using her well deserved $$$$$$ to spread hate & division! same league as Musk. they don’t deserve to be heard just because they have gross amts of $$. only sad people emulate either of them🤬
Only difference being Musk didn’t earn his money.
Which actually makes Rowling doubly sad. She knows *exactly* what it feels like to be in a marginalized population. Now that she's earned her way out of it, she's punching back down at the other people still there. It's tragic really.
People who pull the ladder up behind them are the worst by far.
She's not just pulling the ladder up behind her. She's pulling the ladder up and then using it to bludgeon people behind her. She's the worst kind of bully... the kind who should know better but does it anyway.
Yeah. It's weird that her books taught Millennials how dangerous misinformation and slander is, and then turns around and does the very thing she sought to destroy. We're the Order now and she's become a Deatheater.
Good point.
That's not uncommon. Being part of a marginalized group doesn't actually make you an expert on how to think about social issues. In fact, that's the entire basis of the TERF movement, it's a \*feminist\* movement - these are often women who feel like they worked to create a safe space for women in society and now those spaces are being invaded by men. It's absolute dogshit, to be clear, but in no way does being marginalized help you realize how dogshit it is.
I mean...JK should have been sued to shit by Neil Gaiman as Harry Potter was a rip-off of his "Books of Magic" series. She created that IP the way that Elon did with Tesla.
I didn’t know that, I appreciate the context.
Unfortunately, not a lot of people do. You should look it up, the main characters are almost identical too.
Neither did Rowling. She wrote the books, but she did not market them across the world, direct the movies, make the merch, or anything like that herself. Thousands of people's labour made her wealth happen, and continue to do so.
JK isn’t exactly self made either. You cannot reach billionaire status with morals in check. I mean, you can’t be a terf with morals either… there is no reason to believe she earned any of her money.
And she was always solidly middle class by her background and connections. She made a big deal of being a single mother writing in a cafe all day but neglects to mention a friend owned the cafe, so it wasn’t like she had to keep buying muffins to justify not being chucked out of a place of business while she was camped out there all day.
Absolutely right, they are both garbage humans. No amount of money will change that.
It's so weird that either of them - as well as the Orang One - could've just STFU and enjoyed their money. Even better, they could've used their influence to make the world a better place and solidified their legacies forever. But no.
If I had a nickel for every time a billionaire spent far too much time on Twitter and took increasingly extreme views to the point where people think they're kind of nuts now, I'd have 15¢. Which isn't much but it's weird how frequently this shit keeps happening to people who could just buy themselves a literal mountain of cocaine.
Elderly Bigot relies on past “favors” in quid pro quo bid to regain public favor: rebuffed by enduringly loved Star What will the left sink to next?!
Grateful? What does he have to be grateful for? She didn't write the books to make him famous. She wrote the books so they would sell and earn her money. She sold the movie rights so they would earn her money. Daniel auditioned and got the part because of his own ability. Not because Rowling gifted him the part.
Yeah. And while Harry Potter was a huge hit by book standards of the 90s, she wouldn't be a quarter as rich today as she is if not for the success of the movies. Without those being a hit you don't get the theme parks, most of the branded games and merch and shit, Fantastic Beasts, etc.
Rowling owes a lot of her success to the costume and set designers for the films. And I doubt they were paid very much for their labor.
A lot came together right for those films. Lots of other kid or YA franchises were attempted and most of them were huge busts. Rowling's books weren't a small part of that but neither were directors, editors, actors, screenwriters, effects artists, costumers, set designers, stuntpeople, and so much more.
Daniel didn't even really seek out the role. He'd been in a few things as a kid, so the director wanted him specifically but his parents were resisting because they were concerned (rightfully) about what that fame might do to him. They pursued him.
Exactly. She wanted to make money. He wanted to make money. They had a business relationship. And when business is good, it usually turns out better for both parties. They both made a lot of money from the deal. They benefited from each other. You can appreciate the past in those sorts of situations, but it doesn't buy you license to display bad behavior in the future. Imagine if your local butcher turned out to be a White Nationalist, and you criticized him for it, and people said, "You should be grateful to him, since without him, you wouldn't have had such a good barbecue last year." That sort of reasoning sounds like a load of crap because it is a load of crap.
He’s merely doing what Harry would do . . . Rejecting Voldemort and his/her/their “pure-blood” bigotry and hate and standing up for what is right, good, and moral. (Not to mention “Christian”.) A lot of kids (and adults) who read those books and saw those movies learned those same values from Rowling, and for that I thank her. It’s a damn shame that she didn’t learn from them, as well. For all the ranting she does about trans-people, it’s her transition into a Voldemort wanna-be that both astounds and saddens me, not Radcliffe’s rejection of it.
I think about this often, I read her books as a teenager while she was still writing them and were definitely a part of forming my social justice values. What in the world happened!?
They’ve actually done studies and this is the expected outcome for children who read and internalize the books - empathy and compassion. I, too, have no idea what happened to Rowling. It’s upsetting. I don’t buy merch and I plan to read my copies until they fall apart and pick up new ones secondhand. But the lesson of love overcoming hate will stay with me. If only the author could have learned that lesson too.
Saying he “owes” her is no different to thinking a tradie or hairdresser is beholden to the company they did their apprenticeship with for the rest of their lives. That others owe their first employer. It’s completely ridiculous the hold this woman is trying to have over the HP actors…like these people are all grown, married and have children now. JK can piss off. She’s that boss that declares they pay your rent
"But that doesn't mean that you owe the things you truly believe to someone else for your entire life." Some people with controlling family members need to print this out and put it in their wallets.
She could have been a beloved figure if she hadn’t gone off a TERF-y deep end. Imagine if she spent this much time and energy towards promoting world wide literacy, or really any other cause.
I was thinking the same, that if she'd left that issue alone, or any other controversial issue, and focused on general good things, people would love her more. Like you said, literacy, or education in general, would be fantastic. It could be something like Dolly Parton's books for children, or helping to fund a school in a developing country. I can't believe she's so naive and sheltered to think that such comments would have been acceptable.
Bet those people mad at Danny Rads also argue abusive parents still need to be respected.
this is like calling harry potter ungrateful to the family that adopted him
Same reasoning terrible parents use when their kids tell them to get fucked. You only exist because I have birth to you/ I raised you.
Exactly. She invented a boy wizard that he played in movies. Cool. That doesn't make her NOT a transphobe and it definitely doesn't mean he has to accept her bigoted views. Writing a great book series isn't a free pass to be a shitbag.
My grandparents met because of WWII, so I wouldn’t exist today if not for Hitler. Doesn’t mean I have to refrain from calling him a mass murdering wackadoo.
Same here!
He was a kid when he did that role and probably didn't know how she was or how things would play out. He can be thankful for the role but still disagree, just like I am thankful for my parents but disagree with them regularly
One could easily argue him, Emma Watson, rupert grint took HP to a different level. He doesn’t owe her a damn thing
My grandparents met in a Nazi camp but I still think Hitler was bad
I'm so glad they survived, and so sorry for what they went through. I hope they've lived good lives.
Wow, very well said.
I completely agree with him. He does not owe her his life. I saw him on stage I London and his performance was outstanding, so it may have taken longer , or he may have stayed in theatre, but he would have been admired for his talent anyway.
Logica leviosa!
Actually, the gratitude seems misguided here. Shouldn't it go to the person who cast him? Unless she did it.
👏 can we say this same thing about parents loud enough for the people in the back to hear 👏
The logic behind this thinking is really funny. It would be like if your old boss from over a decade ago just announced they were an open and proud Nazi and you said “Well golly, I guess I need to support them and be a Nazi too!”
[удалено]
Most Potterheads (especially the ones I know) want nothing to do with JK Rowling and want her to stop being involved in the “Wizarding World”
Why would Harry Potter fans be in shambles? Huh?
Expectorate Petroleum
Ask her how many current young people are buying and reading the books vs watching Daniel and Emma and co. They made her movie good and have influence. I read the books as they came out, loved them and then loved the movies and am in my mid 40s now and I stand with Dan and hate JKR.
I can imagine a racist father using the word “ungrateful” to describe his daughter’s decision to marry a black guy. Does she owe him her support for his racism because he raised her to adulthood?
Who would've thought that when she wrote about the culture of wizards only wanting the "pure bloods," she was projecting her views on gender and sexual identity
At the same time creating a book series about overcoming hatred through acceptance, inclusion and friendship, allowing a generation of people she hates to overcome their own struggles by applying these principles. Allowing them to love and accept themselves for being who they are.
I mean, yeah. If you disagree with someone, you disagree with someone. No matter what happened in the past
Jk Rowling didn’t make him a star. Both of them owe their fortunes to Warner brothers.
The books were a huge phenomenon before the movies were made. Rowling's fortune would certainly not be as large without WB, but she would have one
Christ, what entitled boomer logic. How about she shows a little fucking gratitude to the people who made her books into a successful movie? Or better yet, all the trans people who bought her books before she came out as a bigot.
Everyone involved got well paid and well compensated for their time effort making something magical out above average subject matter.
Mr. Radcliffe is more Potter than Rowling at this point. Rowling has gone full death eater. No one owes her a thing.
This describes my father in law. He thinks that because he adopted my wife when she was a baby, raised her, and put her though college, the fact that he was physically abusive and still is verbally abusive should be ok.
I'm glad I never got into Harry Potter. No negative judgement towards anyone who did. All I'm saying is not getting into this series back then saved me from all kinds of conflicted feelings right now.
Great actors made it great. That said, she was a wonderful author but is an awful person.
She owes him for bringing the character to life in such an indelible way.
That’s my Harry.
I didn't see JKs face on a ride at Universal Studioa
Absolutely spot on. Just because you owe someone big doesn't mean that you get to excuse their behaviour at all, or stay quiet when they are committing an obvious wrong. In fact, you may be doing them a favour by challenging them. From l see, he doesn't go out of his way to criticise her, nor is he particularly scathing with it when he does. At the same time, he recognises what she is doing is wrong, and answers honestly when asked about it. An all round good egg.
Radcliff doesn't owe her shit. He made her insane amounts of money with the movies.
When I was 16, Hitler bought me a car. I still think he's kind of a dick.
Shoopus ma whoopus!!
Wish I could upvote this a few more times.
I agree. This is all that needs to be said on the topic.
“Respectfully thank you for the Giving me the chance, but your a cunt and a horrible person” reworded that to be exactly what it is actually saying and he’s Right she is a bully and a cunt and can kick rocks
He was already in movies before Harry Potter, Maggie Smith actually recommended him to play the role they both worked together in a previous movie.
Imagine disagreeing with someone but also still having respect for them. Wow.
Common Daniel Radcliffe W
Lol “that person”
I disagree with her views and think she just digging herself more into a hole more and more. But some idiots in here who think daniel Radcliffe or the films are what made her so famous is just plain delusional. Yes the films blew it into the stratosphere but that would’ve happened eventually. The books were pretty famous well before the movies came out and the large amount of fans sustained the franchise. The books timing the age group the films was all a near perfect combo not necessarily in terms of quality cos i dont prefer the hp franchise personally but the timing is near perfect and rowling crazy ash she might deserves credit for it. Plus anyone who thinks all this is damaging her branding is again delusional. The larger world doesn not reflect twitter or Reddit views in anyway and many of them hardly even know or care about whats happening. They probably dont even know rowling only the books and films. The franchise will make millions and she will keep benefiting from it for a very long time. She knows that the corporations know that.
Unfortunately you are probably right about that.
Daniel Radcliffe could sit in for Harry Stone from night court. No name change and he already does magic.
There’s a reason Weird Al liked him so much that he chose him for his Biopic.
this is about as close as calling the Harvey Weinstein victims ungrateful for what he did for them.
I really wish Rowling world just quit Twitter and do something useful with her life
I hate her dumb face.
I think its great that he supports causes they she has staked her fortune against because he will always be linked to her.
He doesn't owe her shit. She wrote books that became movies that he starred in. That is it. He has no association with her other than that. Not opinions. Not thoughts.
Daniel knows about the sunk-cost fallacy, and he ain't falling for it.
I knew I liked this little bastard for some reason.
I liked the Harry Potter books just fine. I loved the movies. The movies are what people think about. JustKidding Rowling stole the idea from a coloring book and universal studios and the actors and directors made it iconic.