Come on people grow up…Daniel Radcliffe is not only “Harry Potter”! This is the problem with the public, they idolize and imagine these actors and actresses into their fantasy life expecting them to stay the sweet little creature that they have created. Daniel is an artist an actor who wants to have a carrier in acting. Will the public let that happen? The viewing public creates child actor despair, heartache and complete destruction. Years later the public looks at actors who became famous in “child star” roles and say “oh my – what happened? How could he/she let themselves be swallowed up by Hollywood?” Hello, the public swallows them up and then spits them out! You go Daniel, make your name as an artist and actor and a sexual human- being. Don’t let the poor life sucking public destroy your vision of your future. You have the talent and as long as you are steadfast in your dream to become and stay an actor and an artist…you will succeed.

Since when is it only actors that attempt to grow up too fast, become adults while still physically being “teens”? Children don’t wait to grow up anymore. We focus on the celebrities solely because they have greater access to far more volatile outlets for their “I’m an adult now, let me prove it” expressions. That being said, I believe Daniel Radcliffe put a lot of thought into this role before accepting it. From every interview I’ve seen him in (and I’ll admit to being Harry Potter obsessed, so I’ve seen a lot), he seems like a thoughtful and mature young man. Hopefully, the uproar from this single part doesn’t dissuade him from continuing to grow as a person and actor by taking on similar artistic characters.

I see absolutly no problem With Radcliff’s role in Equis. It is a play that was read by some of my peers during highschool for class only a few years ago. In the case of Fanning, actors aren’t thrown into a role with out them knowing waht it is. I’m sure she was able to decided if she was old enough to handle it.

I agree that it’s hard to see child stars grow up, but to say that they are “trying too hard” is a little extreme. From a career point of view, we all know what happens to actors who wait too long before they transition into more serious roles… they flop. And how can we say Daniel or Dakota were trying to find these roles at all? Is it possible that they were asked and meditated their options before taking the turn? I feel that someone who wants to see reality in media should be willing to accept these young actors’ characters as well as applaud their work.

Instead of lecturing Daniel for performing in a celebrated play, why not lecture beliefnet for running an American Express Card advert at the top of the same page with the slogan “HOW YOU KNOW WHEN YOU’VE ARRIVED”. Hedonism, eh?

Jodie Foster. ’nuff said.

For goodness sake! The young MAN is 17/18 years old! It will soon be hard to believe him AS Harry, as by the time they get the final movies out, he’ll look too old to be merely 16/17. I’d be worried if he’d reached that age and HADN’T thought about sexuality. As far as Dakota, I saw an interview with her where she was upset at people being angry with her movie. She was asked to be in it, she was NEVER in a compromising position, and she is an ACTRESS playing a ROLE. Her MOTHER was on the set during that scene! So I hardly think that, given the choice to perform in this role, and the adult way that she considered it and decided to expand herself, that she’s some sweet little “bubble-gum” girl.

The fact is their actors, they play roles. This is not real and I’m sure the actor and Actress in question know about the material they are portraying, these two are taking risks and I appluad them for doing so.

Our culture has affection for children, but no particular respect for them. Which would you rather have? What would you be willing to pay, or give up, to have it?

The thing that I find most disturbing about this article is not the focus of child actors portraying more ‘adult’ roles, but the sheer fact that the writer associates the naked form and all issues associated with the naked form as ‘adult’ issues.The body is not only meant as a sexual term. And to think that children don’t know about the body is absurd. Why must we force OUR adult view of the body as the mindset of children. And have you read Equus? If you did, then you would realize that the role has more to do with spirituality than anything. Or is that what frightens you. Will it shake your beliefs? Religion is different from faith. As far as Dakota goes… let’s look at the bigger picture. Because of this film, the world’s eyes will be open to the FACT that children ARE out there who have gone through those experiences. Statistically , every 5 minutes a child is being RAPED or ABUSED in some way. Why are we constantly trying to shelter our children from these well known facts. I personally would rather I informed my child of the dangers than have them experience them on their own. Kudos to Daniel and Dakota. At least they aren’t so morally afflicted to actually take a stand and speak on issues that mean something. And those who can’t see past their ‘adult ridden’ minds… GROW UP!

I think it’s time to face facts here; all kids grow up! Their sweet little innocence may be forever memorialized on film in such movies as Charlotte’s Web and Harry Potter, but denying them an adult identity simply because some people would simply rather remember them that way is a indication of the age old foible of ‘parental denial’. Sure it’s hard to see ‘our’ kids become adults. It’s easy to think that childhood is so wonderful and should be held onto as long as possible, but it’s time for a reality check. Seriously – would anyone want to be 15, 16 or 17 forever? Or even 11 or 12? Not me – no thanks. Anyone familiar with Eqqus in particular should note that it just wouldn’t work for a 25 year old to play the part. Remember – these ‘kids’ are taking on roles suited for their ‘real’ age – their characters are the same age as they are and it’s time the older fans got a clue.

I agree with much of what the other comments say. The part in “Equus” is meant for a 17 year old – that’s the character’s age. Ditto for the Dakota movie. If Daniel and Dakota didn’t portray these characters then likely another actor the same age would.

“…playing the heroic, non-sexual “Boy Who Lived…” I’m pretty sure no fan-girl views him a non-sexual manner.

I was going to comment but everyone else seems to have allready said it quite elequently.

Every so often I think we’ve come a long way in understanding that rape has nothing to do with sexuality, and then a discussion like this arises… Rape is about violence and the abuse of power. Violence is an all-too-common aspect of what we call ‘entertainment.’ Interestingly, the play for which Daniel Radcliffe is taking all this heat for raises questions/concerns about the ways in which we have interwoven sexuality and violence.

“…the thought of him consciously choosing to grow up and dealing with sensuality and sexuality is discouraging.” I can understand how that might be discouraging if you were talking about Dakota Fanning here. She’s barely thirteen. But Daniel is seventeen, soon to be eighteen. Isn’t this the time of his life when he SHOULD be choosing to grow up? Or do you think he should wait til he’s…oh…twenty five or so?Come on. Daniel is a level-headed, enormously intelligent young man. Yes, I said “man.” He’s nearly grown up. Joanna above was correct in her observation: we expect our child actors to forever exist in a sort of hazy, dreamy neverland in which they always stay the age at which we remember them best. The expectation is so strong that for too many of these actors, their attempts at growing up are stifled and their lives become so unbearable that they turn to drugs, alcohol, and sometimes suicide. I applaud Daniel for seeing that there’s a far better path before him, and I’m thrilled that he’s chosen to take that path. Let’s support him by following him down that path–The Road Not Taken, if you will.”…and I, I took the one less traveled by/And that has made ALL the difference.”

It’s beyond me why people can’t make sense of this. Fact: Seventeen is “of-age” in the U.K. He is, by their laws and in their eyes considered an adult. The U.S. is one of the few countries left that believes you aren’t an “adult” until you’re eighteen. When are we going to open our eyes and understand that adult isn’t an age at all but a state of mind and maturity. Dan was, at twelve, more mature than some of the adults I’ve met. He was certainly more mature than Britney, Lindsey and *wretch* Paris ever will be. Please don’t link those names ever again, because Dan outclassed them long ago. Also fact: He’s NOT Harry Potter. He’s not even much like Harry Potter. He’s a person, a real person as opposed to the Storybook hero that everyone seems to think he is. You, and people like you, are part of the reason that he’s taking this role now. He doesn’t want to spend the rest of his life being called, being thought of as, Harry Potter. It is possible to open your mind and keep your principles. I wish more people would stretch themselves that far. Then maybe we wouldn’t be talking about this so much.

It seems like people like you who feel this way about what this young man is doing (that its wrong) are in the vast minority. Thank God for that. I was afraid I was caught in a time warp. The people above me have me convinced that we are still barreling steadily into the future. Progession is a society’s only hope at survival. We still have a long way to go. And it won’t be long before people who think entirely like you are either extinct, or so outnumbered that you don’t matter anymore.

I do believe that an actor can show the world his/her range without taking his/her clothes off, but honestly, it’s their choice. I have a lot more respect for Daniel Radcliffe’s way of doing it – by appearing in a serious stage performance – than the fake, plastic way a Britney or a Christina does it. Radcliffe’s way just seems less choreographed, less “I’m doing it for the sales figures”.

Hmmmmm, I guess you were planning on taking your children to see Equus had Daniel not been doing it in the nude. Oh!NO! Well then,hmmmm. Oh, you [and they ]just watch him when you go to see Harry Potter films? Then why would you , or anyone else care what he is doing on stage? Since they are two different mediums and will not be seen by the vast amount of people who patronize the movies. Unless you were planning to take your children to see it,the play I mean. Daniel Radcliffe is NOT Harry Potter.He is simply the actor who portrays him, albeit very well. Obviously!!!

I think it is a shame, how sad this World has become. There is no Purity,Chastity or Modesty in People. How quickly we also forget what happened to Paul Rubens (A.k.a Pee Wee Herman). There has to be a line, where parents teach their children Individuality, apart from these “heroes” who in part, are only Actors on the screen. They definitely can’t be role models! that job should be on Parents.

Isn’t it sad that someone thinks they have to strip their clothes off to be a serious actor. Isn’t it even sadder that so many beliefnet readers seem to agree?

The play EQUUS is an allegory for the undraping of ones fears and obsessions and both the doctor and the boy either symbolically or literally are stripped bare. If someone is offended by the play, then don’t choose to see it. But live theater takes chances and enlightens and a nude body is just another nude body, so why do we just listen to the message and get past how it is presented? Grow up, people!

Puhlese! Get a grip people.Why don’t you spend your energy on something constructive, instead of beating up on two kids who are already showing their capability to be actors for the long haul. Jodie Foster has been mentioned, what about Brooke Shields’ long ago adventure as a pre-teen prostitute, in “Pretty Baby”? Find another subject to get worked up about.

In addition to the above, i just want to add: 1) Daniel doesn’t need the money from doing Equus. He’s making an important career move. 2) He is not simply going nude for the sake of doing so. The nudity was written into the play. It’s important because that’s what the character is about. The film version showed that too.

I agree with the post above this, but I just wanted to add something. Harry Potter is not a Disney animation, in which everybody is Oh so innocent. If you read the books, you must know that Harry, besides fighting evil, is a normal teenager, who fancies girls and has naughty dreams. And Dan was almost completely naked in the fourth HP film, in the bath scene. That only makes it even more absurd to say that the young boy who plays Harry can’t perform parts in which he must be nude and trying to have sex with a girl.

I’m disgusted that you equate rape with growing up. Rape does indeed happen to 12-year-old girls, and boys for that matter, and to children much younger than 12. You describe rape as “a brutal physical act with nudity,” and you seem more concerned with the nudity than the fact that rape is an act of power and violence, performed without consent. That’s right, rape and child molestation victims do not choose to be raped, but it happens, and censoring this harsh reality keeps others from knowing how to prevent it.

I was set to make the same comments that so many astute voices have already expressed. Thank you all for those expressions. One of the reasons for so much sexual abberation is the fear of acknowledging our sexuality (yes, children & teens are sexual beings too, albeit in different states of awareness). Our sexuality & sensuality awakens naturally – it’s the suppression of this incredible gift that causes such atrocities as rape to occur. As someone already stated, but is worth stating again, rape is not an expression of sexuality, but of violence & hatred. Creative vehicles raise awareness of the fact that this happens to children, damaging the seat of their humanity & affecting us all. Thank God for the wonderful talent of Dakota Fanning to further bring this issue to light. As for Daniel – how beautiful & natural!

Helloo!!!! He is not “Harry Potter”!!! He is an ACTOR. Harry Potter is not real. He can’t live on the HP crap forever. I applaud him for finding a way to move away from the “good little boy” role. He’s a young man, not a baby.

Before you flip-out about Dakota Fanning and Daniel Radcliff you might consider these Oscar nominated motion pictures
# Pretty Baby© 1978, Paramount Pictures, shows actress Brooke Shields (12 yrs old) partially nude and wholly nude in sexual situations while working as a child prostitute in 1917 New Orleans bawdyhouse.
# Blue Lagoon© 1980, Columbia Pictures, shows actress Brooke Shields (14 yrs old) as a stranded child on a tropical island; however, nude child stand-in actors were featured to portray a nude Brooke Shields in erotic and sexual scenes.
# Romeo and Juliet© 1968, Paramount Pictures, shows actors Leonard Whiting (17 yrs old) and Olivia Hussey (15 yrs old) as main characters with a variety of child erotica scenes; additionally, there is brief nudity in the sexual scene of their wedding night morning.
# Taxi Driver© 1976, Columbia Pictures, shows actress Jodie Foster (13 yrs old) as a child prostitute working in New York City with a variety of child sexual depictions; her older sister, Connie Foster, was a stand-in actress for certain explicit sex scenes.

He’s an actor…bottom line. Just because he ACTED like a young wizard doesn’t mean he should always fall into the same type of role. He’s a very talented young actor, and should, therefore explore other roles. This one happened to be an artsy one, and I must commend him for taking it on. I’m sure it wasn’t easy, but all the same, here’s to you Daniel!

I want to say that a professional essay writing service can be a good assistant on the way of good essay writing. So, students can utilize it anytime they would like to buy written essays.