Jump to content
ClubAdventist

Daniel Ratcliff aka Harry Potter


Recommended Posts

Posted

Daniel Ratcliff aka Harry Potter has signed on the dotted line to play Desmond Doss in the feature.

This thing has taken years to pull together. All funding is in place.

http://www.make-believeentertainment.com/producer.html

If you receive benefit to being here please help out with expenses.

https://www.paypal.me/clubadventist

Administrator of a few websites like https://adventistdating.com

 

Posted

What an interesting choice! Are we sure that it will be okay with the Adventist community--as Harry Potter is all about witchcraft?

(Above statement does not reflect my personal beliefs. It is a tongue-in-cheek comment.)

Posted

Whoa, thats a heavy concept... :)

"...the difference between an actor and a witch."

Posted

Well, Daniel Radcliffe is an atheist, not a witch wizard, so there should be no problem, right?

Except with people who can't tell fiction from reality, who shouldn't watch movies anyway.

"Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde

�Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets." - Jesus

  • Moderators
Posted

He's an excellent actor and will do a great job - and get the film a heap more attention than it would have had otherwise, particularly from a younger audience. This is a major coup.

Truth is important

Posted

I think people are hoping that the role will be played either by:

(a) an actor who believes in God and has a clean and moral lifestyle, or

(B) an Adventist actor.

Good luck with that.

May as well look for an Amish computer programmer.

But I admit, it IS funny to see the various reaction(s) when a denomination that believes all movies are evil and all acting is evil, is suddenly faced with the prospect of a movie about one of their heroes.

If the actor ends up being someone who looks realistic in the role and can present the story well, that will be a good thing. If the "star power" of having a famous name means that more people come to see the film, that is even better.

AJ

www.asrc.org.au

(Asylum Seeker Resource Centre, Melbourne)

Helping over 2000 refugees & asylum seekers each month

IMSLP/Petrucci Music Library

The Public Domain Music Score Library - Free Sheet Music Downloads

Looking for classical sheet music? Try IMSLP first!

Posted

I think that's pretty cool. cool1

<p><span style="color:#0000FF;"><span style="font-weight:bold;"><span style="font-style:italic;">"Do not use harmful words, but only helpful words, the kind that build up and provide what is needed, so that what you say will do good to those who hear you."</span></span> Eph 4:29</span><br><br><img src="http://banners.wunderground.com/weathersticker/gizmotimetemp_both/US/OR/Fairview.gif" alt="Fairview.gif"> Fairview Or</p>

  • Members
Posted

I think people are hoping that the role will be played either by:

(a) an actor who believes in God and has a clean and moral lifestyle, or

(B) an Adventist actor.

Good luck with that.

May as well look for an Amish computer programmer.

But I admit, it IS funny to see the various reaction(s) when a denomination that believes all movies are evil and all acting is evil, is suddenly faced with the prospect of a movie about one of their heroes.

If the actor ends up being someone who looks realistic in the role and can present the story well, that will be a good thing. If the "star power" of having a famous name means that more people come to see the film, that is even better.

AJ

Haven't read where anyone has named anybody they'd like to see playing the part. In all the years that I worked for FFT most of the actors they hired were not adventist's and most didn't believe in God, so not sure why a statement like that is being made? I haven't seen that many negative reactions let alone many posts up to this point. Not sure in all my years, probably 50, that I've heard that many members saying movies are evil, I do know a few and still know some now. But I have no problem with people expressing themselves, either way, all have a right to there opinion. And I most definitely agree with your last paragraph

phkrause

When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; But when a wicked man rules, the people groan. Proverbs 29;2
Posted

I haven't heard anybody in MY local church say "all" movies are bad or all actors are evil. Sometimes they have a "movie night" at the church, mostly a family or young peoples gathering, sort of thing. I'm sure the movies have been reviewed and pass muster. I wouldn't personally know though, I never go (old man that I am). :)

But THIS movie, I would like to see. I know I personally struggled with this issue during the Viet Nam conflict, so it's kind of personal.

Like Stan said, "What WAS Viet Nam all about?" I'm still trying to figure that one out... The issues were much more clear cut for WW II. Desmond made the right call, serving in that war, (whether it was voluntary or not), in my opinion.

  • Moderators
Posted

Certainly when we were growing up there was a very clear message that the *cinema* was evil, largely due to application of EGW comments about the *theatre*. There were often dodges like certain mainstream movies being shown in church halls so members didn't have to leave their guardian angels outside the cinema (srsly!)

The advent of video and DVD has clarified the issue that it's more about the content than the venue.

Certainly 'Chariots of Fire' is there as an exemplar of a major movie about faith and belief and heroism.

Truth is important

  • Members
Posted

The advent of video and DVD has clarified the issue that it's more about the content than the venue.

I agree with that if written today, but back in her time it was definitely venue. And as usual when people mention this statement of hers, its pretty much taken out of context.

phkrause

When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; But when a wicked man rules, the people groan. Proverbs 29;2
Posted

I haven't looked closely at the theatre issue myself, so I'm not up to speed on the general counsel there. BUT, if she didn't approve of the theatre/movies shown in her time, why wouldn't that be even MORE applicable today?

For the most part movies are far more risque today than yesterday. As to DVD's and video's, such a message would certainly apply there as well, why not? Watching "Chain Saw Slasher" (or whatever) at home doesn't make it acceptable viewing, theatre or not.

Not to mention TV. Since I've become a christian, there are only a few programs I feel comfortable watching. Sometimes you don't need a prophet to point out the obvious.

Perhaps the theatres were "hot beds" of vice in her time as well? If so, they are "better" now? I don't know, it hasn't been high on my list of research... :)

  • Moderators
Posted

No movies in her day, so she meant live theatre.

As I said, it's about the content, not the venue: watching good stuff in a cinema is good, watching bad stuff at home is bad!

Truth is important

Posted

Ouch, well that hit a nerve. :)

I'm not much a of movie fan, home or where ever, but I rather enjoy live theatre productions. Oop's,,, Maybe I need to brush up on the timeliness of her counsel in that regard, it may be applicable or more so today, to ME!

If it hits to close to home, I guess I could fall back on the classic excuse, "Well, thats only her opinion."

...just kidding, if they shoe fits, I'll figure out how to put it on. :)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.



×
×
  • Create New...