Allow me to state that a recent episode of Extras, depicting Daniel Radcliffe as a randy, obnoxious tool desperate to get in the pants of an older woman, is TV comedy gold.
Does said Extras episode contain more than one joke? If so, it differs from the Extras episodes I've seen.
You know, he looks sort of like w-lfs-n when he takes his shirt off. Does that make me gay?
A thousand slash writers just died of happiness. (I imagine a thousand more are angrily revising this very moment.)
Does that make me gay?
No, but the placement of your hand while you look at those pictures possibly does.
Oh Ned, that's unfair. All Extras episodes have exactly two jokes, one for each character's storyline. And they are both always really good jokes!
4- biology made you gay, Labs; this just outs you. Again.
And they are both always really good jokes!
Yes, but I can only get the joke(s) if I've read a synopsis of the episode beforehand. It's just too much effort.
Wow, Radcliffe's growing up to be Kerr Smith.
I'm just loving that page. Scroll down for More above the pic. Hee.
'We as parents feel Daniel should not appear nude. Our nine-year-old son looks up to him as a role model. We are very disappointed and will avoid the future movies he makes.' Funny, my HP fan has no problem appearing nude under most circumstances.
'I am curious as to how and why his parents said this was okay.' The guy is seventeen, not seven.
4 implies that one of these things must be true:
A) Radcliffe looks like w-lfs-n when his shirt is off, but doesn't look like w-lfs-n when his shirt is on
B) FL has only seen w-lfs-n when w-lfs-n was shirtless
I think some people complaining about this are having trouble with reality vs. fiction.
'I am curious as to how and why his parents said this was okay'- But his parents are dead! Voldemort killed them! This must be the Dursley's fault.
If God had intended people to run around naked we'd be born that way.
One also wants to remind the parents that Radcliffe isn't Potter, and his stage appearance isn't going to turn the seventh book into Harry Potter and the Naughty Dangly Bits.
Where are the "magic wand" jokes? The length of your wand is very significant, you know.
16: That and the fact that a lot of Harry Potter fans have their own set of naughty dangly bits; it's not like the fact that Harry's a boy is going to be a big shock to most of them.
Haggert's was over 14 inches, before it got broken.
And unless there's something I'm missing, it's not as though if you read the Harry Potter books you have to go to see the play.
"Grasp your wand firmly... swish and flick, swish and flick."
12: B, your kid only runs around nude so that people won't mistake him for a girl.
Shit, that was kinda NSFW. I was surprised. At work.
But nothing's visible! And the text did say "nude and on stage."
Nothing's visible, but it is more like Hairy Potter.
Dumbledore- great man. Did things with a wand I'd never seen before.
I am fairly sure that seeing the nude flesh that would normally be covered by reasonable underwear is NSFW, especially when that nude flesh belongs to someone it would be illegal for any of us to have sex with.
I thought he was 17? I think we're allowed to sex him if we want.
While most US law is flatly incoherent on the subject, the general social trend here is to say that people become legally hot when they turn 18.
It is interesting that this is driven entirely by pornography laws. While the age of consent in many states remains quite low, you have to be 18 to appear nude in movies or on the internets. Thus anyone who lusts after people under 18 is considered a child molester.
It is also interesting that in the UK, you can appear nude at 17, which makes me wonder if anyone in the US has been prosecuted for possessing child pornography because they ogled a page 3 girl.
I think 18 is also a proxy for high-school graduation. Someone who's out of high school may be awfully young, but it seems fair not to react to them as a child.
So we're allowed to sex him, as long as we do not eye him lustfully in the process?
Sausegly informs us that Gavin Newsom, mayor of San Francisco, is dating a 20-year-old.
The role of Alan Strang doesn't seem to have done much for the careers of its previous inhabitants.
Proceed with caution, young Daniel.
I thought Gavin Newsom was married. Huh. He is excruciatingly attractive for a mayor.
32: How could you post that and fail to note the most important detail: her name is Brittanie Mountz.
SAN fRANCISCO? A 20-YEAR-OLD GIRL? AH HA HA HA HA HA HA
Newsome was married--to a very beautiful political journalist who was commuting to DC all the time--and that fell apart about a year ago.
21 -- OMG I can't remember the last time I laughed that hard. I'll never watch that scene the same way again. Wingardium leviosa indeed!
I don't believe this thread has lived up to its comedic potential.
Btw, the article describes Equus as being homoerotic. It's been a while since I've seen it, but I don't remember that at all. I mean, except for the naked guy.
Since the assumed audience of pretty much all journalism is straight men, male nudity is by definition homoerotic.
I thought he was 17? I think we're allowed to sex him if we want.
No. We're allowed to sex him if *he* wants.
Sounds like something from Boynton.
homoerotic s/b hippoerotic
that's what I'm sayin'
33: But one of Peter Firth's later roles was Political Officer Putin. Interestingly enough, that character is now appearing in a long-running Moscow production.
Sneak preview of DR's later career: Harry Potter and the Cardinal of the Kremlin.
I'm going to be interested to see the reviews of this, because rather than being a "rounded actor capable of very different and diverse roles", I think he's shite. Although I guess the "keep frowning and don't say much" method worked for Clint Eastwood.
Age of consent's 16 here, anyone past that's fair game.
40 "all journalism" s/b "everything"
