What the fuck happened to him?

What the fuck happened to him?

He was the biggest star for a decade and then all of a sudden he's doing skits on late night talk shows and acting in low budget films.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/aKdV5FvXLuI?t=1m6s
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

He was Harry fucking Potter for over a decade, and they milked the ass out of that shit. Basically he's known for one role which he happened to play over the course of many years, and that's all he's remembered for.

Swiss army man is the best movie this year so far.

Plus you gotta consider that Harry Potter probably made him so ridiculously stupidly rich that he can basically do whatever he wants, which is why he does stage acting and shitty indies now.

>Green room
>The Neon Demon
>Zootopia
>Hail caeser
>Krisha
>The Lobster
Its not even gonna be in the top 10. Theres still all those foreign films that wont arrive until the end of the year

His new Nazi movie looks pretty good imo

>He was the biggest star for a decade
he was and will always just be harry potter

in the minds of plebs maybe

he's done plenty of good shit besides the hp films

He's actually been in some good stuff. He had a minor but well done part in Eternal Sunshine and then was really good in Wilfred (although the show did get a bit weird towards the end). He's also done a bunch of voice acting, Spyro and the like

You sound like a fucking mega pleb

He has hundreds of millions of dollars, is only in his twenties, and can now basically just chill out the rest of his life and do only the things he wants to do. Like Rupert Grint and his fucking ice cream truck.

congrats you had me confused for a moment

...

You're the fucking pleb. The only thing that made him a star at all was harry potter. He's never been the biggest anything in his life

hail caesar was terrible

lol, because he's short

also i wasnt the guy who said he was the biggest star of the decade. even in hp terms that goes to emma.

just saying that only plebs think he's just harry potter. cant have seen many films if you think that shit.

He was never a movie star.

What does your best of the year look like?

This. By definition, if he was a star, he'd be able to sell a movie on his star power alone. The only reason people went to Harry Potter movies is because of the franchise name, not him.

I remember he was naked in that play, I saw horns,saw ads for that dr show and the new movie he's got coming out. He's known but nothing special.

This.

He's a filthy rich single young man who just finished a decade of lifestyle heavily tied to a huge commercial enterprise. Just imagine having the schedule of your life so well-planned with contractual penalties for most deviations. What to wear, where to go, when to go, what to say and what not to say, who to see.

Now that he's free of all that, if doing weird movies and stage plays is his thing, let him do it. That's still much better than blowing his fortune on hookers and drugs, or getting involved with a cult.

I've seen a couple movies he's been in since Harry Potter, I thought they were pretty good. He never really catapulted into stardom from HP, he played the role of Harry very well but it was a role lots of people could have played well, and I think it does credit to his character that he didn't develop a massive ego from getting the role of a lifetime.

Seems like what he does now is projects he finds interesting. He certainly wouldn't have trouble finding higher profile work given his portfolio, so it's obviously a lifestyle choice made by him.

>He was the biggest star for a decade

When did this happen?

He's like beiber; has all them monies at his teens and can go fuck all

Meh, the Neo nazi film looks interesting imho.

Imagine that you got a roll so amazing, so incredible that not only did it put you at the heart of a decade-spanning cultural phenomenon but it also made you so rich you could retire in your teens.

What would you do after that?

The correct answer is whatever the fuck you want. You already peaked at 17.

D R O P P E D

Sure if you're a fucking pleb

More like WHO would you do after that ?
The answer being whoever the fuck you want.

Jesus Christ, is there a single actor not tarnished by the jew gene?

he'll get interesting again when he starts beating his wife or gf like all grown up child actors do

He's like 5 ft tall, he can't beat nobody.

Let's see which one isn't star'd

amazing. they found the one Jew in England.

That movie is literally him being beaten as the dead horse that he is. For crying out loud he's dead in it

What's this picture, tho? Why are these specific actors posing for it? What's the occasion here, what do they have in common?

their studio's anniversary

honestly, the only reason Anton Yelchin got into that pic was because he went to the right Synagogue.

And now he's dead.
Serves him right.

Not really. He's not THAT rich and still rather awkward looking.

I would assume he's in a position to never worry about money and just takes bits he finds to be an interesting way to kill some time

I saw him in a musical on Broadway a few years ago and he was great.

He made bank from HP he just does little roles that are fun, he never has to work for a paycheck again

au contraire OP, out of the 3 he's the doing he best. Emma is such a fucking shitty actress i really don't see her career going anywyere. Ron is a fucking disgusting ginger and Harry has shit loads of money and is basically building up his resume by taking in weird roles. Guy is setting up to take on oscar roles

Based Dan Radcliffe is embracing the Peter Cushing/Christopher Lee niche.

He was a cute kid and was good for playing a cute wizard kid. Now he's a severely depressed manlet with narrow shoulders, so basically he's always good for "homely assistant" or "that irrelevant guy who dies in relevant part of the movie", neither of which sells in selfie obsessed world of people only noticing top 5%

pls stop posting

i can smell your obesity and your Hogwarts scarf from here

He probably knows he's peaked, but like the actor who played Ron: once you've been in 7 movie that were as popular as HP it really doesn't matter what you do.

Those 7+ movies and shit has generated them such infinite money that they don't need to matter anymore.

Best of both worlds. Riches of the celebrity while getting to keep a private personal life.

Of those that you mention, the only actually good ones are Neon Demon, The Lobster, and mayyybe Green Room.

Zootopia was also quite good, admittedly, but I'd put it in a wholly different category. It's not an adult drama, it's a kids' movie. It's really not comparable.

So yeah, as it stands, Swiss Army Man's in the top 5 films this year so far, probably top 3.

Nice try faggot I'm smarter than you

He can be set for the rest of his life much mire than faggot Malvon the sit con stupid

If you didn't like Swiss Army Man you can just stop posting desu

he realized that he's rich as fuck and have enough money to last 10 lifetimes so he's just doing stuff that he thinks is fun

It could be worse. At least his movies make more than double digit figures unlike a certain other Harry Potter actress.

>He was the biggest star for a decade

LOL

You fucking cretins cannot be serious

you okay?

He's not in wilfred
thats frodo you fuck

I never admit to liking a film in case somebody on Sup Forums laughs at me.

It was a foreign art film and not English made. Also it was bought up and distributed weird/not marketed its an indie film shit happens. They didnt want to make any money in theaters in the UK, and screened it for a technicality, its already been released and is on bluray/vod. Came out last year in fact and grossed like 2.5 million.

come on you cant even be bothered to actually check something..its a german production. Also emma was really good in it and its solid. Shes leading a tom hanks film next and singing in batb

Radcliffe and Elijah Wood are having the same career trajectory it seems.

>being "the guy" in "that thing" for fucking ever
>really young
>sort of drop of the radar
>other actors playing in "that thing" are being noticed left and right while you lay low
>instead of taking big shot roles, work your way up
>having fun playing in more obscure films, weird roles
>surprising people
>total bro, surprisingly likeable in interviews, down to earth
>not associated with any of the hollywood lore

Those guys are doing it right.

yeah well they played the major characters of gigantic franchises at a young age making enough money to live out their days in luxury.

but they actually enjoy acting so they take roles that might be low budget/indie just to keep practicing their craft.

he's definitely building his resume to show he isn't just HP and is capable of other roles; he was fantastic in How To Succeed.

emma isnt shitty especially compared to the actresses posted on this board

shes just starting to lead now shes done the same as radcliffe, she hasnt wanted to be in blockbusters yet has grossed 600 mil post potter. i like radcliffe but he still needs to get better roles, emma is leading a tom hanks film and batb when shes made it clear she want to do other thing in her life, acting is something she enjoys, but she likes to write, sing, paint etc says she want to direct.

i thought he said he's done with big budget stuff since he's already done that and now focuses and what he finds interesting.

Fuck i wish i could do that

he starred in a popular childrens series that ended. see: mark hammil.

theyll be throwing money at them in 5-10 and probably and hopefully not for cursed child shit but something legit

i know they dont want to do it, especially unless its proper, but theres only so many billion dollar films out there, WB will make it happen

That's just what happens when you get picked for a role when you're 10 years old that'll last for 10-12 years

He's not a bad actor, it's just that directors and such don't want people to think: "Oh, it's Harry Potter" and risk that to be the only memorable thing about a movie

Watson is so obviously "taking every major role possible to improve her visibility" it hurts.
She's affraid to become a nobody again. She craves the attention.

Radcliffe would be way more famous if he did that, he simply went another direction.

Emma is box office cancer, about the only attention she gets is from Fetishists. Radcliffe actually pursued artistic interests that took off, like theatre and more artsy films. Emma is a "painter" to her instagram fans and picks up supporting roles that she gets forgotten in anyway. There is no real comparison

> That's still much better than blowing his fortune on hookers and drugs
Are you kidding?

>making enough money to live out their days in luxury.
didn't than weasley guy buy an icecream truck and started giving away ice creams for free?

jesus christ youre triggered. all her stuff has been under the radar. Shes mostly done low budget and worked with directors shes wanted to.

Emma is just starting to lead, she wanted to do supporting roles and then lead. She was great in Colonia and is in a tom hanks technothroller. Also has sung since she was little. like i said she has done the same thing as radcliffe and is not box office cancer lmao look at the films shes been in regression is arguably the only one that by its size didnt do well

Somewhere in a alternate dimension where harry potter isn't a faggot.

>Harry potter in Black face, infiltrates the Black Lives Matter terrorist organization Black Panthers before they can commit more acts of terror on American soil.

>all her stuff has been under the radar
lol, yes that is generally what I would call movies that had no audience or critical reception other than that one movie based on that book for high schoolers.
She is on par with Chloe Moretz at this point, the face that people recognize, but not one to actually be a main attraction

You're wrong, The Bling Ring. Noah, Colonia were roles she picked because she valued the filmmaking shes stated she doesn't want to do big productions like Potter, but she did BATB (in leavesden funnily enough) because she's never sung on screen, besides briefly in goblet of fire and was excited/nervous to do so

You're retarded. First off shes made the same amount if not maybe more films than Radcliffe and she attended school. Look at the box office numbers and the fact shes leading a tom hanks film, shes othing like Chloe Moretz you idiot. Chloe is trying to become relevant, Emma acts because she likes to and she got BATB and The Circle two roles any actress would kill for esp Moretz lmao

>she likes to write
So do most literate people
>sing
So do most people
>paint
lol i've seen what she calls painting, she would have no exposure if she wasn't a celebrity.
>says she want to direct
So do the rejects who populate this board, doesn't mean they are actually passable directors.

you cant have it both ways. moretz hasnt made any good films. emma has been in some good ones since potter, that were low budget and shes still getting large roles. that means shes doing well as an actor like radcliffe but studio havent given him much it seems. time will tell

It doesn't matter how many "big" movies she gets shoved into, she is still "the harry potter girl" and gets no critical or audience attention. She's just there, generic actress #9, filling a space in another movie.
At least Radcliffe is making some waves in both his theatre work and his indie films he stars in, he's not just "harry potter" anymore.

okay man. im just saying she doesnt just want to act thats all, she doesnt want people to read her writing though apparently.

>lol i've seen what she calls painting, she would have no exposure if she wasn't a celebrity.
it seeks youre just looking for something bad to say. only one of her paintings has been photographed out of her entire collection and literally probably nobody cares, what exposure are you talking about? nobody talks about her painting im just stating shes artistic like a lot of people. i play instruments, i like film.

no worries tho im not arguing just saying

He literally has more than enough money from the Harry Potter movies to do whatever the hell he wants for the rest of his life.

Feels like he's just doing what he wants without trying super hard to stay relevant.

Okay sure mate, she was hilarious in the bling ring and her good satire had nothing to with her being in harry potter. I dont think you comprehend things you dislike or something. Radcliffe isnt making waves hes acting good in some stuff, as has Emma

Stage acting is great. He's a really good actor, but people in the film industry don't want to give him the kind of non-Potter related roles he wants.

He was also screwed over by studios. The Woman in Black went into re-writing and they added jumpscares and more cgi at the last minute and they cut a shitload of other good stuff. They turned an old school gothic horror into some post-2000s teen supernatural bullshit.

t. Chloe who didnt get considered for Belle

Shes Emma fucking Watson

thats unfortunate i always meant to watch the woman in black but never did, sounds like i shouldnt

dafuq happened to Megan Fox

patrician detected

/thread

>getting shoved into
They are lead roles. They never said big movies mattered. Emma has been doing shit with copolla, aronofsky, gallenberger, amenabar and now something big like beauty and the beast not because shes trying to stay relevant she would have fired her agent years ago but because shes enjoys working on films.

He's still good in it, it's just not as good a movie as it could of been

There's an older version of the movie (from the 80s). It's a tv movie, but it's not bad.

cool

i gotchu, i really wanted a creepy atmospheric horror not jump scares is most of it good besides the end?

Yeah, the acting is good (not just from him, but from most of the actors).

I'm very disapointed with NuHammer studios and what they chose to do with their movies.

>he was Harry Potter for a decade

ftfy

It has the good atmosphere because it was made without the jumpscares planned and the studio have then thrown a few in cause it's what they think kids want to see. So while it has several jumpscares it wasn't made around them

Nah. He got mistaken for an actual ice cream guy.

He dressed up as a girl and lost an Oscar to Leo.

It's not the end that is the problem. There's a good atmosphere, but they put jump scares and cgi apparitions everywhere in the movie because they were scared of people finding it "boring".

So you get good scenes that are ruined by this shit.

He raps youtu.be/aKdV5FvXLuI?t=1m6s
and also goes to conventions and stuff wearing spiderman masks and the like to be incognito

Slightly unrelated and idk of anyone cares. I though he was solid after Yates took over. Apparently Daniel was dunk on set and on probably most of this film. Imo its a brooding masterpiece thats dreamlike and dreary, but found his acting very good. Os it poasoble he was so drunk he didnt care and put any effort into it so much so that his performance seems ever the more natural. Thoughts?

he sounded a little like gambino for a second

>daniel radcliffe will never make drop a dank ass harry potter prosed mixtape