New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Sean Collier: I sharply disagree with Jim; if one of three becomes successful, I'm betting on Watson. Radcliffe is too identifiable as Potter, and Grint just isn't very good. Watson, however, can act, looks like a movie star and not like an overgrown wizard child, and certainly has the air of a star. Grint would be shocking, Radcliffe would be surprising, but I'm pretty much expecting it from Emma.

Really, though, I want Evanna Lynch to have a career after this. Half-Blood Prince was actually the first Potter film I've seen, and she was my favorite performer by far.

Reagen Sulewski: Were I Rupert Grint's agent, I would advise him to start picking up a pen and writing his own parts. There's a very decent chance of him being Britain's answer to Michael Cera if he has the talent for it.

Rupert Grint's Agent: Oh, I daresay we aim a weeeeee bit higher than Michael Cera...

Sure, he's great with a wand. But can he operate the TARDIS?

Kim Hollis: Finally, on a sillier note, what odds do you give of Daniel Radcliffe eventually becoming Dr. Who or James Bond or both?





Josh Spiegel: I say we should stick with Dr. Who for Radcliffe, of those two choices. I know some people went crazy with a blond Bond, but a boy wizard as Bond? Not so much. Dr. Who is about as quirky as you get, though, so it might fit.

Kim Hollis: I could certainly see him filling the shoes of The Doctor, which would make him only the second actor out of the Potter franchise to have done so. With the direction the Bond franchise has taken, however, with Daniel Craig and "brute force", I just don't see him as ever being considered for that role. I think Robert Pattinson would be more likely, though I don't think he has a real chance, either.

David Mumpower: I like this question a lot, because it requires a projection of what he is going to be rather than what he is. Kim is right that the Bond franchise has taken a darker turn. Having said that, the reason why Bond went that route was as an impersonation of the Bourne franchise and it was done for one simple reason: to make more money. Given that acknowledgment, the presence of Radcliffe in the role at some point 15 years down the road (he doesn't even turn 20 until next week, so this is a looooong time in the future) should mean a lot of potential money for the Broccoli family.

I also think that when we look at the big picture of what the Harry Potter franchise can mean to an actor's career, David Tennant and Robert Pattinson are great examples of how much of a launching platform it is. If those relatively bit players can become the most popular television actor in Britain and the star of one of the biggest films of 2008 (and soon to be 2009 and 2010), just imagine what the combination of Harry Potter as James Bond would be like in terms of box office power.

With regards to Doctor Who, I just can't shake the feeling that this pretty much HAS to happen at some point. It's too perfect to ignore.

Continued:       1       2       3       4       5       6