OH, MY, GOSH

[ivellious]

Harry Potter ditches the glasses . . . and all his clothes.

Um. So, 17 year old boy. Naked. With horses. I... can't even begin to imagine how he thought this would be a good career move. But I guess since he's a multimillionaire, who really cares?

Just some snippets:
"...has been cast as the stable boy in Equus, Peter Shaffer’s controversial

Comments

[amarena]

I was so annoyed when I found out about the film of this - Tom Hulce (whom I will love and adore for ever and ever for his masterful performance as Mozart in Amadeus) was supposed to take the title role, but it was given to Peter Firth (?) instead. It does sound like a fascinating play though, I would like to see it.

I love your shock though, it's really cute :P

[ivellious]

Well I certainly was shocked. Not every day you hear about radical moves like this. I suppose he just really wants to avoid typecasting so he's making sure everyone knows he's not just Harry Potter.

But speaking of this, I also heard that some 12 year old actress is going to "star" in a movie which features a rape scene and full frontal/topless nudity. Now *that* I can't even understand how its even legal!

[amarena]

I guess I wasn't as shocked because my mum has showed/taken me to see strange and potentially shocking films and plays (mostly foreign I guess) since I was old enough to watch them. Also, the kind of classes I've done at high school and uni could be perceived as fairly risque, so I think I've got a high-shock factor - in regards to this kind of thing at least. I still don't deal with violence well at all (and it's definately the violence inflicted on the horses which disturbs me more than the sexuality/nakedness in this Equus play)

I also heard that some 12 year old actress is going to "star" in a movie which features a rape scene and full frontal/topless nudity I know it might seem like a fine line to some people in regards to what I find acceptable or not - but this film sounds really dodgy. With a very small number of exceptions (and I can't think of a single one at the moment) putting rape onto a screen and making it "entertainment" is, whether the director intends it or not, making it voyeuristic - making it a spectacle and by

[ivellious]

Well, sexuality/nakedness doesn't disturb me all that much, however sexual relationships with horses certainly does! And yeah the violence against the horses is pretty bad, he blinds a bunch of them with a metal spike or something gruesome like that.

I completely agree with you about the whole desensitizing issue - the average children's cartoon probably has more violence in it than old rated R movies. And yeah, same with warzone stuff. Same with the whole voyuerism thing, it seems like every other movie that comes out has to have some sort of sex scene. And I do know people who have gone to a movie solely for that reason...

See I don't understand why the guy who wants to make the movie with the rape scene doesn't just IMPLY it, like most movies. We just need to know she was raped, not SEE it. But the really sad thing is that the movie's main premise is about how she found refuge in Elvis Presley's music... the whole rape thing isn't even the main part! So that makes the visual rape seem all that more pointless.

[daghi]

now if emma watson would just ditch the clothes....

[ivellious]

What is it with people and her? Isn't she like 16?

[_kimiko_]

dirrrty