This Article is From Jul 09, 2014

Rowling Resurrects Harry Potter But Daniel Radcliffe Won't Play Him Again

Rowling Resurrects Harry Potter But Daniel Radcliffe Won't Play Him Again

Daniel Radcliffe has played the title role in all the eight Harry Potter movies

Highlights

  • Daniel Radcliffe has clarified that he has no inclination to reprise his role as Harry Potter on the big screen despite the fact that author JK Rowling has released a fresh story.
  • Daniel played the title role in all the eight movies, which were based on Rowling's seven fantasy novels.
  • "My inclination is to say no," Daniel said on Tuesday while taking part in the Television Critics Assn. press tour at the Beverly Hilton.
  • But he also emphasised that no one has asked him to do anything.
  • "I don't think it's a question - not even hypothetical at this moment," variety.com quoted him as saying.
  • In JK Rowling's latest story, the adult wizard attends a Quidditch World Cup and Radcliffe says he is yet to read the story.
  • "As I understand it it's a very, very short piece, I'm not sure it is of itself worthy of adaptation to film. (Harry) is at least 12 years older in it than I am now. I don't think I'll have to worry about it for a long time," he said.
Los Angeles: Daniel Radcliffe has clarified that he has no inclination to reprise his role as Harry Potter on the big screen despite the fact that author JK Rowling has released a fresh story.(Also Read: I Will Never Date a Harry Potter Fan: Daniel Radcliffe)

Daniel played the title role in all the eight movies, which were based on Rowling's seven fantasy novels.

"My inclination is to say no," Daniel said on Tuesday while taking part in the Television Critics Assn. press tour at the Beverly Hilton.

But he also emphasised that no one has asked him to do anything.

"I don't think it's a question - not even hypothetical at this moment," variety.com quoted him as saying.

In JK Rowling's latest story, the adult wizard attends a Quidditch World Cup and Radcliffe says he is yet to read the story.

"As I understand it it's a very, very short piece, I'm not sure it is of itself worthy of adaptation to film. (Harry) is at least 12 years older in it than I am now. I don't think I'll have to worry about it for a long time," he said.
.