Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Hughie reviews EQUUS - That Revealing Play Starring Harry Potter where he exposes his magic 'wand'!

uh... by jimmy rabbitte	Feb 17th, 2007 11:05:33 PM
magic? wand
Now you're running play reviews? by El Scorcho	Feb 17th, 2007 11:09:15 PM
Well, that's new...
Harry potter by iwontwin	Feb 17th, 2007 11:17:21 PM
and his one condom. I love EXTRAS.
I hear... by jimmy rabbitte	Feb 17th, 2007 11:18:29 PM
...Tim Hardaway saw the show and thought it was 'great'.
Harry, YOU made a juvenile comment about his wand! by Frank Duckett	Feb 17th, 2007 11:18:55 PM
"...and the story isn't as short as a weiner, but rather it's about taking a brave young actor seriously, instead of what flopped about on stage." I think Harry is having a Britney Spears-style meltdown.
We've covered many plays in the past & Frank... by HEADGEEK	Feb 17th, 2007 11:22:49 PM
We've covered all sorts of plays in the past, usually a couple a year - I'd cover more if people sent them in. And Frank Duckett... I made an IRONIC comment to show how juvenile and retarded such comments are. Because - we all know how retarded and juvenile I am.
Is this "Showgirls" for Radcliffe? by Gorrister	Feb 17th, 2007 11:24:21 PM
Elizabeth Berkley thought going full frontal in "Showgirls" would boast her career like it did for Sharon Stone, but it completely backfired on her. I doubt this play will harm Radcliffe's career in the UK, but I'm interested to see how the US audience responds to his future endeavours.
I work for a Harry Potter fan site by Bean_	Feb 17th, 2007 11:24:23 PM
And all anyone will ever talk about is Dan Radcliffe, and how he'll be naked, etc. It's extremely depressing and I hoped that the play would give people more than what they were intending on seeing it for. This reviewer brought me hope, thanks!
Hermoine take notes here! by RedwingsHoolihan	Feb 17th, 2007 11:28:45 PM
....I'm going to hell for that.
you need a regular theater column by blacklodgebob	Feb 17th, 2007 11:36:54 PM
It doesn't have to be every week, but it would be nice. If for no other reason, how about that every other show on Broadway is an adaptation of a movie. If you're coving video games and book, you might as well have an occasional theater column (that is, more than twice a year thank you).
Uh, Spoiler Alert!! by filmicdrummer17	Feb 17th, 2007 11:44:22 PM
Not for me...I've already read the books. But for anyone who hasn't, those deaths he mentioned come as quite a shock.
It's fucking inevitable.......... by RedwingsHoolihan	Feb 17th, 2007 11:47:09 PM
Someone's going to say "Harry gotta eat".....Then I'm going to break into their house and slap the piss outta them.
Oh Daniel Radcliffe! I love your speesee spicy sausage! by J-Dizzle	Feb 17th, 2007 11:55:35 PM
Its inevitable that Kevin and Bean will devote an entire segment to it.
If thinking of him as Uncle Vernon is bad... by Pascal	Feb 18th, 2007 12:00:31 AM
Where am I that I'll always think of him as Dr Meinheimer?
Yes, I would care... by KCMOSHer	Feb 18th, 2007 12:14:18 AM
...if the entire supporting cast of all four HP films came out and performed an elaborate burlesque routine. Because, I mean, shit...that'd be a seriously intense production number. The sheer number and variety of performers would mean that, inevitably, they'd perform one variant or the other of 'The Aristocrats'. I'd pay a dollar to see that over yet another staging of 'Equus'.
Stunt Acting, pure and simple. by TheGhostWhoLurks	Feb 18th, 2007 12:25:03 AM
I'd be MUCH more impressed with Radcliffe if he'd decided to take a role that WASN'T such an obvious cynical attempt to be seen as a "serious actor." If he wants to be seen as a "real" actor, then how about simply ACTING and letting your performance speak for itself, without the shallow and cheap stunt of being naked on stage? I'd have more respect for him if his choice in roles pointed in the direction of Equus — then I could actually buy him doing the role. But going from Harry Potter straight into playing a nude nutjob who gets his rocks off blinding horses??? It's just a desperate attempt to be seen as "legit" in the snooty and bizarre world of acting.
For christ's sake, describe his cock 'n' balls! by Daddylonghead	Feb 18th, 2007 12:58:30 AM
We all know it's a good play, and thanks for telling us about the acting, but come on, if this was a female star everyone would demand details of the nudity. I can honestly say that I find Radcliffe about as sexy as a Ford Taurus (which is to say, not at all), but I am at least idly curious. I mean, he's a film star, and he's naked! So stop faffing about and give us the details!
Art column by Dwarves	Feb 18th, 2007 01:22:57 AM
Pam Anderson and Cameron Diaz bought Art from Marilyn Minter two months ago, and Claire Danes was at the Nicole Klagsburn opening last month if you need a reason to discuss art. Aside from that art openings here in NYC have alot to offer.
He's worth $28 Million + by Chriss	Feb 18th, 2007 01:32:35 AM
Oh boo fucking hoo if he is typcast as Harry Potter. Children are running around this planet without limbs (well maybe not running) and starving to death, but you're worried about this little brat and his acting career.
Showgirls by EyeofPolyphemus	Feb 18th, 2007 01:36:02 AM
Elizabeth bekley's career was ruined because SHOWGIRLS was an awful movie. EQUUS is one of the best, most disturbing plays ever written. Raddcliffe cannot go wrong with it.
I'm going totally naked for 10 minutes of this talkback by Laserbrain	Feb 18th, 2007 01:54:00 AM
:D
What exactly did he do? Have sex with a horse? by Mike_D	Feb 18th, 2007 01:54:28 AM
I dont get it...everyone over in England must be pretty damn bored to see a child's wang.
Starting... by Laserbrain	Feb 18th, 2007 01:54:44 AM
NOW
Showgirls??? by Lovecraftfan	Feb 18th, 2007 01:55:16 AM
Ya cause Equus is just like Showgirls
Harry Peter and The Blind Stallion by NickDWolfy	Feb 18th, 2007 02:15:17 AM
It happens between book 6 and 7
Damn*t - Thanks for the Snuck-In-Book-Spoiler by Screwuhippie	Feb 18th, 2007 02:23:16 AM
I know this is a review about a boy and his whorse (and various other phallic jokes) but ... freaking mark it a spoiler or something Harry for us slightly offish folk that have not read the books yet and are waiting for the movies ... Nice to know of those two fine gentlemen that I can look forward to dying now in the upcoming movies. Darn-freaking-darn-it. Anyone else slightly irked or am I the only one on the planet that has not read the books ...
I have NEWFOUND RESPECT for Daniel Radcliffe by Proman1984	Feb 18th, 2007 02:28:46 AM
I can totally respect what he's doing and yes it takes guts and balls (no pun here). I think it's a sign of true actor and a true individual to take on a role like that and I admire that in him. I wish him luck in the future.
Nudity by blackwood	Feb 18th, 2007 02:30:37 AM
is the least interesting thing about "Equus", no matter whose willy is wagging on stage.
errr by lionbiu	Feb 18th, 2007 02:45:05 AM
many stage actors/actresses have been nude in various plays. It's hardly a big deal I just want to know if he can carry a emotion, because in every single potter film he has always been the weaker link in acting. I wish him good luck, but this does smell like "stunt" casting and the play has sold over £1.7 million worth of ticket's...and I am soooo sure they are all there to see the play ;)
SPOILER... by HEADGEEK	Feb 18th, 2007 03:29:03 AM
Um - this story clearly has had, from the beginning a SPOILER box around it on the front page.
About those spoiler boxes, Harry by Dannychico	Feb 18th, 2007 03:55:42 AM
They really need a redesign. I NEVER register those things as spoiler alerts. The frames just seem to highlight a story as more important than the rest. Of course, it doesn't help that the word "Spoiler" is teeny-tiny on the very side of the box, nor that the word appears as "poiler" on my browser. You should, frankly, invisotext those HP spoilers above. They are pretty major.
Richard Griffiths by Trader Groucho 2	Feb 18th, 2007 04:52:42 AM
also has a supporting role in Venus, as Peter O'Toole's friend.
I think the chick who plays Hermione should do the same by Doc_Strange	Feb 18th, 2007 04:55:05 AM
Girl has developed nicely over the years and... WHAT? FUCK you guys!!! You know deep down that's what you want to see too.
Mike_D - Radcliffe chose Equus because by Trader Groucho 2	Feb 18th, 2007 04:58:27 AM
next to Hamlet, it's the best role out there for a young stage actor. I'm sure he took it not because of the nudity, but despite it. What the frakk did you expect him to do, "No Sex Please We're British"??? Get yourself an education. Read the play.
Well done Daniel by John_lndn	Feb 18th, 2007 05:42:23 AM
I have a huge respect for Daniel for choosing to play in Equus. He could have just chosen to do a stupid teen movie and it would have been a blockbuster. But he decided to do the most difficult thing an actor can do: theatre, and London theatre! 90% of Hollywood "so-called" good actors wouldn't last 2 minutes in London stage. The fact that Peter Shaffer thought Radcliffe has the talent to play this character already said everything. This author doesn't care how the actor is called. People can make all the immatures comments they want to show us how ignorants some of you are, but that won't change the fact that Equus is one of the most acclaimed, awarded, respected and succesful plays of all time. And Alan Strang is the most difficult role a young actor can play. That's why he chose it, because it's a great role, nudity is just a small part of the role and the play, absolutely necessary, but just a part of it, not the point of the play. TheGhostWhoLurks, you are the cynical, because what you ask it's what he did 'ACTING and letting your performance speak for itself'. If there is nudity or not in the play is not related with that. And why can not an actor go from one character to a different one? don't be senseless. But you are not even right, because between HP and Equus Dan already did an independent movie who will be released this year and that everyone is loving too in the pre-screenings. It's very brave he decided to play such a difficult character in Equus, and he succeded. So, I have to congratulate him. Only one thing Hughie, you saw the first preview, as I'm sure you know they use previews to improve some things. It was just his first night, he has received a very good voice training, if you go to see it in a week, I'm sure you won't find any problems. That's why reviews are made after the offcial opening night, not the preview night. But the fact you thought he was so good even the fisrt night he was in a stage it's impressive. :) So again congratulations!
Really, this is WIAIN... by Negative Man	Feb 18th, 2007 05:56:47 AM
...As in, Whatever It Ain't Interesting News. Old play with a new actor in the role. Heck, the Bald Britney deservers a TB before this does. And the Bald Britney deserves a TB as much as a new Byron Allen celebrity ass-kissin' show.
Potter Gotta Eat! by TheMackenzie	Feb 18th, 2007 05:59:00 AM
I couldn't resist. Come forth and slap me...
Will Kemp by Anna Valerious	Feb 18th, 2007 06:20:26 AM
Isn't he in this as well? I know I had promised myself that I'd try to see Will-chan onstage, but to be honest, the subject matter in this one makes me uncomfortable. :/ I just wish I knew when "Miguel and William" would be released in the US...
42nd!!! Horse Fvkker!!! by sacmetal	Feb 18th, 2007 06:27:31 AM
The dood makes romance with a horse regardless (don't say irregardless) of the actor. Yay for horse love!
Oh Sure, Keep Crushing on Hermione, ya little Polanskis by tonagan	Feb 18th, 2007 06:47:12 AM
Couldn't resist :)
cool to see a review of a play here by the grasshopper	Feb 18th, 2007 06:51:08 AM
i have tickets to see this in May. the play is a great read, and i look forward to seeing it staged. kudos to Dan.
D...Du...Dum... by darquelyte	Feb 18th, 2007 07:06:11 AM
Dumbledore is dead? (sniffle sniffle sniffle) WHY GOD! WHY! Why'd you have to go and tell me that?! Oh wait, I read the book when it came out...never mind. And yeah, what's the over/under on when Hermione will do a nude scene? I'd camp outside the theater for that. Just saying. ~ÐL
SPOILER! by smackemyackem	Feb 18th, 2007 07:24:03 AM
One might assume that the spoiler box referred not to the Harry Potter books, but, rather, to Equus.
Gotta ask. In the play he cums sitting nekkid on horse by Teamwak	Feb 18th, 2007 07:48:42 AM
How on earth do they show that on stage? Mans gotta know these things. Does Daniel make an O face?
Mmmmm Jenny Agutter naked ... by Mace Tofu	Feb 18th, 2007 08:15:30 AM
Keep going....Harry dick going away. More Jenny...and talkbackers , girls can show off their tits at 16 in the UK ( Page 3 ) So before I go get my Logan's Run, Walkabout and Werewolf DVDs out does Harry hump the Horse onstage? Naked? Need more Jenny now! Thanks for the idea Tom.
Emma Watson and the blind donkeys play by dtpena	Feb 18th, 2007 08:30:40 AM
crosses fingers
i just got off the phone... by DECKERS	Feb 18th, 2007 08:33:24 AM
..with Daniel's penis. It says nuts to a sequel/prequel unless it gets a 50% cut (ya know, to make it 1 inch). His strangely hairy asshole says hi too.
Im STIFF! STIFF IN THE WIND! by misnomer	Feb 18th, 2007 08:37:21 AM
read this in school- only like 12 at the time, jesus.
Let the guy broaden his horizons... by film_fanatic_in_the_original_bla ck_and_white	Feb 18th, 2007 08:40:55 AM
Nothing wrong with that. He's just an actor trying to stretch and do something different. So let him do it.
Nipples on Daniel Radcliffe = Nipples on Optimus Prime by Little Beavis	Feb 18th, 2007 08:46:44 AM
booyahkahsha
What if Harry Knowles had that part? by Cotton McKnight	Feb 18th, 2007 09:07:29 AM
Would that be as big a deal, I wonder? What would the reaction be?
It's Sorcerer's Stone you Brit Git by dundundles	Feb 18th, 2007 09:07:57 AM
It's Sorcerer's Stone you Brit Git
Double You Flavour, Double Your Fun by Sam Raimi's Car	Feb 18th, 2007 09:14:43 AM
With double-mint double-mint double-mint gum!
Screwuhippie by rhaps0dy	Feb 18th, 2007 09:29:58 AM
Spot on about the spoilers i haven't read the books so now i too know that those guys die, i'm alittle annoyed in all honesty!! Harry having a spoiler box on the main page implies spoilers in regards to the play itself not about the harry potter movies!!
The thing about the Spoiler by DewMan	Feb 18th, 2007 09:50:47 AM
It is true that the article is tagged spoiler, but it's assumed that it refers to Equus. A person shouldn't read a Titanic review and find out what happens in The Departed.
Exactly by rhaps0dy	Feb 18th, 2007 09:55:53 AM
Exactly
Re: "The thing about the Spoiler" by smackemyackem	Feb 18th, 2007 09:56:42 AM
I swear! It's like I'm not even here!
Got my tickets! by Kentucky Colonel	Feb 18th, 2007 10:05:13 AM
Jill & I are traveling about Europe in early April and we have tickets to the Saturday 3-31 evening show (row P, 24 & 25 if you want to come up and say "Howdy"). Getting to London: $1200. Getting to see a West End production: $250. Getting to see the "magic wand": ummm, I'll be looking into his eyes. Sounds like a double fab time. What else should we see & do whilst in London, Paris & Amsterdam????
Would they remake the movie with Radcliffe? by performingmonkey	Feb 18th, 2007 10:11:29 AM
D'you think they'd consider remaking the movie if this stage adaptation is successful? The Richard Burton movie is thirty years old now so it's possible.
At least he didn't spoil who kills Dumbledore by dtpena	Feb 18th, 2007 10:15:39 AM
btw this is a very good review
SPOILER!! by Frank Duckett	Feb 18th, 2007 10:21:51 AM
Me: "Spoilers about Equus, eh? okay I'll tread lightly- Holy crap Sirius Black and Dumbledore die?!?!? Thank ye, Harry. Thank ye sooooo much."
Spoiler vs Spoilier by Screwuhippie	Feb 18th, 2007 10:31:43 AM
Headgeek er Harry or ... yeah ... thanks for the reply. Once again we are stuck answering the age old question ... if a Spoiler falls in the middle of a review of something else does it count as a spoiler? I think if the tree falls it still spoils. I know you don't post very much these days ... what with big celebs calling you right before romantic interludes but ... take at least 1-2 seconds to maybe comment in the pre-emble "Also ... Harry Potter Series Spoilers Contained Within as Well" ... I honestly think that wouldn't take to much time. Just thinking ... we all miss stuff. Nice site ... maybe hire a QA division or something :) Again ... if i'm out in left field simply ignore me (which most will do anyway ... so why am I giving guidance ... nevermind)
i'm impressed. by occula	Feb 18th, 2007 10:37:21 AM
where do you guys live that you didn't know about the spoilers in the books? i mean, here in america there was an epic brouhaha because some guys drove their car past a line waiting for the HP book at a bookshop and used a megaphone to shout out the secret. i mean, it ain't much of a secret anymore. regardless, i agree about spoilering something that isn't supposed to be full of spoilers about something else! sloppy, sloppy. i also commend dan radcliffe for this but personally think he should have done some actor's gang or shakespeare in the park first.
Rocks ... BIG Rocks by Screwuhippie	Feb 18th, 2007 10:45:54 AM
I live under a really big Rock. Not some steroid pumped part time wrestler/hollywood type "The Rock" but a real rock. This enables me to ignore things that most of the world knows. Unfortunately my Rock is semi-permiable so ... mis-leading spoiler reviews are its Kryptonite. Alas ... as America learned in WW2 ... you can't be ignorant or stay out of it forever. On a side note ... gotta love a society that encourages young Actors to skip the "Actor's Gang/Shakespeare in the park" path and jumps straight into full-frontal nudity. Thats a great way to re-capture the worlds love. Heck throw in some horse-sex-themes and you will win become endeared to millions!! Who here isn't excited about Danny boys first non-potter blockbuster. See-biscuits 2 ... a boy, a whorse and stuff no one should want to see. Steps off his soapbox Again ... more power to those that like this stuff.
If this comes to Broadway... by HootDad	Feb 18th, 2007 10:49:10 AM
I'll definitely see it. And not because of DR or RG or anyone else in the cast, but because this is one of my favorite plays ever and I'd love to see a full-blown Broadway level production. I'd actually love to direct it, but good luck getting any local theater with the guts to do it. And it CAN'T be done without the nudity. That would be "rubbish" as I read DR said in an interview. I've actually seen it twice - once at a college (without nudity) and once at an "equity waiver" house in LA (with nudity). The fact is, the drama simply doesn't work nearly as well without it. I applaud DR for taking on such a demanding role and, it would seem, succeeding. It will be interesting to read the "official" reviews once it opens.
Another movie? by HootDad	Feb 18th, 2007 10:51:37 AM
Interesting question, monkey. I saw it on stage before seeing the movie and I was disappointed in the movie because the play is such a "stage piece" and I don't think it adapted well. And I'm not sure it could.
Potter Spoilers by Gorrister	Feb 18th, 2007 10:55:45 AM
Personally, I think this is just plain silly. The book in which Sirius Black dies has been out for about four years and the one where Dumbledore dies has been out for nearly two years. Why on Earth are these considered 'spoilers' after so much time? Would it be a spoiler if Harry mentioned Romeo and Juliet die at the end of their story? Or that Lenny dies in "Of Mice and Men"? These books have been out in the public for YEARS. If certain Harry Potter fans would rather wait several years for the movie versions instead of picking up a book and actually using their brains, that's their problem.
Agree about Radcliffe's acting by Gorrister	Feb 18th, 2007 11:16:56 AM
Personally, I think most of the HP cast is poorly done. As said above, Radcliffe is a bad actor and only got the role because he looks like Harry. I also don't care for Watson as Hermione. She is a better actor than Radcliffe, but she's just plain wrong for the part. And I especially dislike the new Dumbledore. This guy has never read a Harry Potter book and it shows. Richard Harris was so much closer to the book-version of Dumbledore. This new guy portrays a short-tempered, loud and rash version of a character who is notoriously calm, soft-spoken, playful and just slightly mischievious.
No sir, I didn't like it by BannedOnTheRun	Feb 18th, 2007 11:40:34 AM
All the best to Daniel Radcliffe, but I just don't care for the play. I've seen what I'd call excellent productions -- great acting, great staging -- I just don't like it.
I agree by justcheckin	Feb 18th, 2007 11:42:56 AM
I don't consider it a spoiler after that much time. Good for an actor trying something new and being fairly good.
POTTER'S TAINT by THE KNIGHT	Feb 18th, 2007 12:05:43 PM
?
Of course its a by rhaps0dy	Feb 18th, 2007 12:13:33 PM
Spoiler, this is a movie website not a book review site, they don't review the harry potter books on here....well, i assume they don't, if they do i haven't seen it! For that reason i didn't expect the spoiler, also Gorrister i highly doubt that the HP books are written to such a high standard of literature so as to use my brain that much more than the movie...again i only assume...
Why's he all the production will be remembered for? by Jbud	Feb 18th, 2007 12:31:41 PM
It's not like the film reviews here only talk about casting and acting. Is it because the direction/production were boring or bad? I mean, if they were, please tell me how. I know this is aint it cool news but that doesn't mean all we want to know about is how was Harry Potter and Uncle Vernon. Plus, those of us who are theater fans in America would most certainly remember this for Griffiths, especially after the fantastic impression he made in The History Boys in England and on Broadway (and on screen)
the Philosophers Stone by Cedar_Room	Feb 18th, 2007 01:52:41 PM
is what the author called the book. And she's British, so I guess we stick with her. Unless you want to start calling our young wizard friend Chad Pooter as well. The book's name was changed for American audiences. Is that because Americans are too stupid to know what a philosopher is? I can't say for certain, but does anyone know the actual reason why the name was changed?
spoilers by muttoo	Feb 18th, 2007 02:09:01 PM
The bookstore posters for Book 7 tell too much about the spoiler for books 6 and 7. And it's not like you can avoid it - the giant 2-word slogan is all it takes.
Richard Griffith's is... by ian216a	Feb 18th, 2007 02:17:53 PM
UNCLE MONTY!!!! For christs sake, no self-respecting film geek isn't going know that!! And those that don't? I mean to have them - EVEN if it is to mean BURGLARY!!!
How does a 17 year old keep from... by Kirbymanly	Feb 18th, 2007 02:22:16 PM
...getting a hard-on while kissing a naked girl on stage? Magic indeed.
Censorship of horses by jethroc	Feb 18th, 2007 02:31:53 PM
Isn't anyone going to spoil why he gouged out the horses' eyes?
ian216a by Thomas Cromwell	Feb 18th, 2007 02:40:59 PM
MONTY, YOU TERRIBLE CUNT!!!!!!!!
Cedar_Room by Daddylonghead	Feb 18th, 2007 02:46:59 PM
Here in the US the character is actually called "Har Pot"; the publisher felt the British version of his name with its additional syllables was too complex and off-putting. Any time you wonder about things being dumbed down for an American audience, just look at our president... that should answer all your questions.
Uncle Monty by Oceanclub	Feb 18th, 2007 02:48:11 PM
I can't believe someone took several dozen comments to mention Richard Griffith's Uncle Monty! Honestly, if a film geek hasn't seen "Withnail & I" - indeed, has seen it and memorized it - they're not a film geek. "Flowers are essentially tarts; prostitutes for the bees..." P.
The Electric Car killed Dumbledore by Kentucky Colonel	Feb 18th, 2007 03:10:37 PM
or was it the other way around?
you know what? i take it back. by occula	Feb 18th, 2007 03:12:53 PM
i managed to be a 35-year old american affiliated with the film & tv industry who didn't know ONE SINGLE THING about 'lost' until i watched all the DVDs about 4 months ago. and it's been out for almost 3 years. however, now that i've inadvertently learned that lenny dies in 'of mice and men,' i'm going to kill myself.
Hooray Oceanclub by MaxCalifornia.	Feb 18th, 2007 03:13:44 PM
Glad someone finally mentioned Monty. Uncle Vernon? Screw that. Griffiths will always be that terrible c**t, Uncle Monty. "Here, hare, here".
Re: What if he gets a "Rodney" on stage? by Corwin_X2	Feb 18th, 2007 03:14:22 PM
Plantage55 said: "Seriously! What if he started to stumble over his lines...perhaps there's a chesty lass in the front row. Maybe Scarlett Johannson came by to see the fuss - and little Harry got stone hard" ... He doesn't need to look in the front row. I don't think it's been mentioned here yet that he's not just wandering around the stage naked on his own. It's actually a sex scene with a red-hot 24 year old actress named Joanna Christie - who is also buck nekkid throughout. I'd be amazed if he didn't get an occasional boner, especially as they get more comfortable in the part!
Why does being taken seriously mean having by superninja	Feb 18th, 2007 03:30:42 PM
to get nekkid or play troubled psychos? No, he is trying to shed his Harry Potter image, just like the other child actors will, even though it made them famous. Because they'll get more attention that way. It's of course less disturbing than Dakota Fanning wanting to play a character who is teasing and then raped (and getting permission from all the adults around her). I never thought Radcliffe was a terrible actor, I thought Columbus was a terrible director.
It's "than", not "then"... by Ray Gamma	Feb 18th, 2007 03:33:02 PM
you illiterate moron.
Why all the fuss over "Philosopher's" vs. "Sorcerer's"? by mraig	Feb 18th, 2007 03:36:21 PM
Does it really make Britain so much intellectually superior to the US if the word "philosopher" is in the title of their book for ten-year-olds but not in ours? It's not like the American version cuts out J K Rowling's brilliant ten-page exegesis on Plato's theory of the forms. From what I've seen of the series, there are a lot more sorcerers than philosophers, and when Rowling and Potter were nobodies the publishing company thought it might be a good idea for the title to actually reflect the content of the book. Now she could call it "Harry Potter and the Misfiled 1040A Form" and it would still sell to every kid in America and England.
Those that are protesting can go f*ck themselves by DarfurOnTheRocks	Feb 18th, 2007 04:34:25 PM
Like how dare Radcliffe for seeking to expand his horizons past Harry Potter? Those that protest his choice of roles should check themselves because as HP fans they were the ones getting all sorts of flak from the religious right that sought to label them as devil and occult worshipers. Morality is a funny thing huh??
INDIANA, YOU CUNT!! by occula	Feb 18th, 2007 05:03:51 PM
did you just say 'apollo dies' knowing FULL WELL that some of us have not seen BSG #13 or 14? you better be talking about something other than that show, you spineless fuck. and i am serious, if you aren't, you should start worrying about your karmic afterlife. if you aren't, well, apologies.
Withnail And I... by workshed	Feb 18th, 2007 05:26:32 PM
...maybe they could remake it with Daniel Radcliffe and David Tennant..? Or maybe not. Seriously, anynoe who purports to be a film buff and hasn't seen Withnail needs to go back to school and return when they have seen it at least one hundred times. It's only the funniest and heartbreaking film ever written and, more than any other, the film i didn't want to end. I saw it for the first time at a cinema in Doncaster (on it's first day of release as was the norm for anything from Handmade Films) and remember trying to dry my face till the tears didn't show anymore. An impossible feat and one i look forward to repeating for the rest of my life. Richard E.Grant turned in what may be the single greatest performance by an actor in modern film; only matched by the brilliance of Richard Griffiths in his dressing gown. Oh, and i think Radcliffe has been brave to take on such a mighty work as Eqqus (although Peter Firth was, for me, perfectly cast). Let's hope his post-Potter film choices will be just as interesting.
No way he tops Elijah Wood in Sin City by chrth	Feb 18th, 2007 06:04:35 PM
That has to be the best counter-typecasting role of all time.
Philosopher's versus Sorceror's Stone by chrth	Feb 18th, 2007 06:08:12 PM
The Philosopher's Stone had as much to do with Philosophy as AICN does, hence the change. The change in name is due to a cultural difference in the body of legend; if there was a book called Harry Potter and Paul Bunyan's Axe, they would've changed it to Harry Potter and the Giant Axe (or similar), since Paul Bunyan is not part of European popular culture.
The Philosophers Stone by Gorrister	Feb 18th, 2007 06:19:23 PM
The big deal about it is that The Philosophers Stone is an artifact that has real-life historical value. People all over the world tried for centuries to create the legendary Philosophers Stone. A man named Nicholas Flamel came along and claimed to have finally succeeded in doing so, which made him instantly famous. Over the centuries since, there have been numerous "Flamel sighings", suggesting he really did create one. But a "Sorcerors Stone" is complete rubbish created by Scholastic. There is no historical aspect to a Sorcerer's Stone (prior to the mid-90's, that is). Scholastic assumed American kids were too stupid to have ever heard of the legend of the Philosophers Stone, so they changed the name, despite the fact the the book sold very well in the UK without a name change. It has nothing to do with cultural differences. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of childrens stories that originated in Europe that are very well known in the US (Ever hear of The Little Mermaid, Little Red Riding Hood, or The Hunchback of Notre Dame?) The name change was purely a dumbing down of the title to appeal to kids whom Scholastic assumed were ignorant and borderline illiterate.
Gorrister: It has nothing to do with stupidity, it's by chrth	Feb 18th, 2007 06:23:33 PM
exposure that's the issue. The only reason I know about the Philosopher's Stone is because I played D&D. They don't cover Medieval Alchemy in grade schools in America. The other ones you've cited were all Disneyified at the minimum, so children were exposed to them either through the movies or through various Children's Fairy Tales books. The Philosopher's Stone, however, has never--in my experience, which includes working at a bookstore for a couple years--made the jump into American children's literature.
Philosophers Stone by Cedar_Room	Feb 18th, 2007 06:49:38 PM
I'd never heard of the legend of the philosopher's stone before I heard of the Potter book - but it didn't matter because I knew what a philosopher was, and also a stone. Are Americans out there seriously suggesting that the youth of America have no idea what a philosopher is? It would be like calling the book Harry Potter and the Panpiniform Pebble? Oh and another thing, surely a book company isn't aiming its business at the borderline illiterate child markey anyway? Theres surely little chance of profit there. This isn't intended as a rant against stupid Americans either by the way, I'm just genuinely curious.
Thank God for... by TheGhostWhoLurks	Feb 18th, 2007 06:53:59 PM
"Full Metal Alchemist," then! :)
Cedar_Room: What does the Philosopher Stone have to do by chrth	Feb 18th, 2007 06:55:43 PM
with Philosophy? NOTHING. So if all you knew was what a Philosopher was, and what a Stone was, all you'd assume is that it's a Stone that allows you to discourse like Plato. Would you want such a stone? I know I sure wouldn't. Nor would I care what Harry Potter would do with it. Sorceror's Stone, in all honesty, better conveys what Flamel's stone does. Now, JK Rowling wasn't wrong to use Philosopher's Stone, because children in Europe have probably been exposed to the concept of the Philosopher's Stone and thus would have a better gist of it. I also want to point something else out: Scholastic was taking a risk calling it the "Sorceror's" Stone, as several religious groups are extremely intolerant of anything that smacks of magic.
"aeris dies" by ian216a	Feb 18th, 2007 07:00:07 PM
If ever there was proof needed that I shall live and die as a geek, it will be the amount of time I spent laughing at that. And back to "Withnail and I", I was lucky enough to see it when it first came out as a teenager and innocent in the ways of wanton self medication. I thought it was good. When I watched it again years later and realised how the first 20 minutes was really just the two of them on speed... I mean, GOOD GOD!!!
whew by occula	Feb 18th, 2007 07:02:33 PM
thank you, indiana. i retract all 'cunt' comments and instead seek the balance with 'fluffy kitten' labels instead. you see, our cable isn't hooked up, so i have to wait for my friends to tivo the episodes (because i am a bittorrent snob), and i am assiduously avoiding all radio/internet potential spoilerage. and now, that i've shown what a massive dork i am, i'm going to book tickets to 'equus.' HAHAAHAHAH
well I'm from Britain, and I by Cedar_Room	Feb 18th, 2007 07:02:38 PM
well I'm from Britain, and I don't think most people here were aware of the history surrounding the real philosophers stone - and I doubt most children thought they were picking up a book which discussed the influence of Jean Jacques Rousseau - but americans are always changing stuff so there you go.
"book which discuss the influence of Jean Jacques by chrth	Feb 18th, 2007 07:04:33 PM
Rousseau" ... it's called our History Books ;)
I'd like to make love to a horse. by CTU Mole	Feb 18th, 2007 07:27:10 PM
Not only is it a beautiful animal but you always have a ride home.
so... by Colonel Kane	Feb 18th, 2007 08:58:46 PM
how big is his cock?
You people are all tards... by Bronx Cheer	Feb 18th, 2007 09:50:13 PM
except for the fellow who was talking up "Withnail and I." That is a GREAT fillum. Now, go back to fantasizing about seeing Harry's peter. Der.
Hey Philosophers! by :-o	Feb 18th, 2007 09:53:46 PM
America is Britain's younger, hotter sister who got all the boys. Live with it.
If Harry wanted more play reviews, by Bronx Cheer	Feb 18th, 2007 09:54:34 PM
he'd have a NYC bureau. I know AICN had one in the past, but it went away. I wrote the site to ask why they don't have one, and I heard nothing back. Considering all the film production going on in town (I Am Legend, anyone?), along with the plays, you'd think Mr. Harry "I Love Plays, It's You Losers That Are Too Stupid To Appreciate Theatre" Knowles would have a NYC bureau. God, I hate everything.
Apollo dosen't die. It's Boomer who dies... by Kentucky Colonel	Feb 18th, 2007 10:31:49 PM
Not hot sexy Asian Boomer, but Herb Jefferson "Soul Brother Boomer #1" who kicked the bucket when Moore & Eick took over. Too bad for his ass, too, cuz I love me some Naked Boomer in Jello-Bath. I shudder to think what he would have looked like in that tub.
Frodo in Sin City was fantastic! by Amy Chasing	Feb 18th, 2007 11:43:16 PM
this is just some young guy naked on stage - holy nipples on Batman's suit, it's sooo controversial now all witch-fearing Christian groups will say Harry Potter promotes exposing yourself or some other such drivel.
HAHAHAHAHA by occula	Feb 19th, 2007 12:42:37 AM
colonel, you so funny! you mock my tender love for the BSG.
"The play could consist of him walking on stage..." by Liberty Valance	Feb 19th, 2007 02:09:47 AM
"...taking a crap and walking off again." Someone needs to cast Emma Watson in that play right now.
:-o by Kristian66	Feb 19th, 2007 04:37:02 AM
Yeah, but she was a bit of a whore.
messi (ha ha) by Kristian66	Feb 19th, 2007 06:18:28 AM
Your use of the English language explains a lot.
Ah, TheGhostWhoLurks by MPJedi2	Feb 19th, 2007 06:25:46 AM
The minute you typed "But going from Harry Potter straight into playing a nude nutjob who gets his rocks off blinding horses???" you exposed the fact that you don't really know EQUUS at all, or have the faintest idea what the hell it's about. That and, as an actor I'm going to tell you that,"how about simply ACTING and letting your performance speak for itself" is exactly what he's doing. It's small-minded, uniformed people like yourself, who want to make the show into some sort of peep-show, who refuse to allow that to happen. Good Day, sir!
8======> by Doctor_Sin	Feb 19th, 2007 09:02:11 AM
I want Hermoine naked. Easy.
Last night's "Simpsons" by Anna Valerious	Feb 19th, 2007 10:08:27 AM
Play-Doh Theater presents "Equus". So wrong, yet so very funny. XD
Dumbledore dies?.... next you'll be telling me by crashbarbarian	Feb 19th, 2007 01:08:57 PM
that michael bay is putting flames on optimus prime!
The History Boys by Barry Egan	Feb 19th, 2007 01:20:49 PM
Richard Griffiths was great in this too. If people only know him as Uncle Vernon they will be surprised to find what a great actor he is.
Harry: Regarding The Spoilers by Barron34	Feb 19th, 2007 01:57:38 PM
I have to say that a spoiler box on an article about the play Equus is no warning at all that the article will contain spoilers for the Harry Potter movies. The article should have been flagged as containing spoilers for the Potter films. *****For those who point out that the books with the information in question have been out for years: some of us are not fans of the books, but have followed the Potter movies. Not everyone has either the time or the inclination to read every book that is adapted for film. Myself, I have had a casual interest in the films, but have become more interested in the Potter stories since the Prisoner of Azkhaban film, which I liked more than the first two films. After seeing that film, my interest in the Potter stories has grown. In fact, I recently rewatched Azkhaban on DVD, and decided that I was warming more to the Harry Potter story so much that I might take the time to read the books. I am now less inclined to get into the books, and I am further annoyed that key plot elements of the upcoming movies have been revealed in an article about a stage play that has no relation to the Potter books and movies other than that Radcliffe is in the play. People who are more casual fans of the films and who have not read the books should not be dismissed, and spoilers for a major genre movie series should not be revealed in an unrelated article without specific notice that there are Harry Potter spoilers in that article. Readers had no reason to expect such spoilers in this article about Equus. Just my opinion.
On Another Topic by Barron34	Feb 19th, 2007 02:03:47 PM
On a lighter note, could we please get a new cartoon on the AICN home page? That New Year's cartoon of Harry dropping down the pole was funny back in January, but we are deep in February and heading into March. A new cartoon would be appreciated. Just a thought.
everytime someone mentions the animation in the corner: by Amy Chasing	Feb 19th, 2007 02:32:39 PM
it stays for another month - irrelevant or not, thems the rules.
Amy Chasing by Barron34	Feb 19th, 2007 03:08:16 PM
Sorry. It is just tedious to see a New Year's Eve reference more than six weeks after New Year's.
THAT ANIMATION IS DATED by Halfbreedqueen	Feb 19th, 2007 04:25:26 PM
My goal then is to keep it there for at least 3 years straight. UPDATE THAT FUCKING ANIMATION!
the corner-animation is like waiting for a lift.. by Amy Chasing	Feb 19th, 2007 05:36:08 PM
the more you press the button, the longer it takes to get to your floor. This is the only way to explain the logic of leaving a New Years message up on an updated-daily website well into February. What's the bet if it get changed, it'll be the Harry-dressed-as-Santa-shot-up -HO-HO-HO one
OMG those are SPOILER boxes?? by Eyegore	Feb 20th, 2007 11:12:59 AM
I've been reading the site daily for years and never saw that. OBVIOUSLY Harry, they need to be redesigned, and also used less frequently as I see every article on the right side is in a spoiler box. I don't like to read spoilers. Now I'll be freaked about reading anything in the future if 75% or more of all articles has a spoiler box around them. Hercules has the best system. Invisotext Spoilers let you read the article and ignore the spoilers if you choose.
Rarely updated corner animations by Eyegore	Feb 20th, 2007 11:17:51 AM
When I first started reading AICN they were updated almost daily. Definately at least twice a week. WTF happened? Why give up on it? Who exactly is asleep at the helm and need a kick in the ass for the past couple of years?
Thank you, Talkbackers by Boxcutter	Feb 20th, 2007 05:20:13 PM
I had a shit, shit, SHIT day. All this childishness, erudition and obscenity was just what I needed. Cheers.
:) by HenryS	Mar 22nd, 2007 05:38:28 AM
"It's obvious that he doesn't have a well trained theatrical voice" Really? It's quite clear that he does have it! "the boy who couldn't act "?!!! It`s the silliest thihg I`ve ever heard! Ever since "David Copperfild" it has become absolutly clear that he is the best actor!

Talkbacks

Hughie reviews EQUUS - That Revealing Play Starring Harry Potter where he exposes his magic 'wand'!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks