Radcliffe thinks Harry will dieeee

JoouDah · 05-28-2004, 03:08 PM

LONDON (AP) - Harry Potter may never grow up. Daniel Radcliffe, who stars as the daring schoolboy wizard, said Friday that Harry may die in the last book of J.K. Rowling's magical series.

"I'm going to be really unpopular for saying this about Harry, but I've always had the suspicion - with everything that's going on - that he might die," Radcliffe, 14, told a news conference to promote the third film of Rowling's series, "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban."

Rowling has remained silent about the fate of Harry in the seventh and final book. But with each new installment, Rowling reveals more connections between the character and his archenemy, the evil wizard Lord Voldemort.

"Harry and Voldemort have the same core in them, we get to see that in the fourth film," Radcliffe said. "The only way Voldemort could die is if Harry dies as well."

Voldemort was responsible for the deaths of Harry's parents and left the young wizard with the distinctive zigzag scar on his forehead.

The pair have similar powers - including their wands and their fluency in Parsel - and Voldemort has been unable to kill Harry.

Rowling has hinted in the past that Harry may not survive. Asked whether she would write books about the character when he reaches adulthood, she replied: "You have to wait and see whether he survives to be a grown-up."

"Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire," now in production, may be the last time fans see Radcliffe in the role of Harry, which has brought him a fortune estimated at about $18 million. He has yet to commit to a fifth film.

"I'm not going to lie and say it will be absolutely easy to see someone else play the part because it will be extremely strange after four films," Radcliffe said. "But if it happens it will be something I will have to get used to. I'm not saying it will happen but it's a possibility."

"The Prisoner of Azkaban" premieres in Britain on Sunday and goes into general release the following day. The film will open in the United States on June 4.

Whatttttt? Ugh the movie is reversing things. One cannot LIVE while the other is alive, they won't both die. . .

BerserkerAzn · 05-28-2004, 03:16 PM

Hmmm. I don't really like speculating like this. I see the books as wonderful things written by a great author. Just trust J.K. Rowling to do what she's been doing all this time and we'll be all right.

I think that if Harry died it'd be kinda cool; a great ending. Harry dies, the ENTIRE world mourns right after the Wizarding world and Muggles begin to combine as secrets are revealed. Perhaps Ron and Hermione will get together. Who knows? We have a while to wait for it anyways...in the last two and obviously the longest books of the series.

JoouDah · 05-28-2004, 03:31 PM

Yeah but. . . I posted this because of the core thing. It wasn't said in the books that Harry would die if Voldemort did so why would they say that in the movies? Uh maybe I misread it.

hplotr23 · 05-28-2004, 04:22 PM

i think radcliffe might have just gotten his facts wrong... anyway i would really hate for harry to die... i think daniel is just saying this to try and stir up some controversy... i would be so mad if harry dies... i mean it's the harry potter series, what is it without the main character... i don't know we have to leave it up to JK to see what she wants to do...

JoouDah · 05-28-2004, 05:26 PM

Yeah. . . you have a point about facts wrong. It's possible, hopefully that's the case.

MzPeAcHeS · 05-28-2004, 06:00 PM

Am i the only one who thinks that D. Radcliffe may be on to something. It might actually good if HP died at the series.

Think about it:
This would prevent a stupid spin-off series of Harry Potter and would prevent anymore overblown books that should have never been made. I mean, look what happend to DBZ for crying out loud!

Village Dag · 05-28-2004, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MzPeAcHeS

Am i the only one who thinks that D. Radcliffe may be on to something. It might actually good if HP died at the series.

Think about it:
This would prevent a stupid spin-off series of Harry Potter and would prevent anymore overblown books that should have never been made. I mean, look what happend to DBZ for crying out loud!

Yes. Exactly!

And a good example of the hero dying is Braveheart. William died and that prevented a sequel. Much less a crappy excuse for money. So I surport Harry dying.

Detonator · 05-28-2004, 06:20 PM

I don't think he will die. I think it is Neville that is really the one because it would be great to see Voldy get killed by Neville. LOL

Rainking187 · 05-30-2004, 04:24 AM

I don't see the connection with Dragonball Z, Goku was gone at the end, and it was pretty final, but they still made GT.

WoodenCoyote · 05-30-2004, 08:43 AM

Agatha Christie killed off her lead characters in her final book to prevent them from being taken over by other writers. Jk could very well do the same. It would certainly be very interesting. Plus, the way Harry's been going, its amazing he's lived so long as it is. Dying would be entirely likely.

Overlord Zatenks · 05-30-2004, 10:48 AM

The thing is, the prophecy states that one of them must die at the hands of the other. JK Rowling is quite the author, and I do not think that she needs to kill off her lead characters in order to extrapolate emotion from her readers. That would upset a lot of people. I am confident that Harry will live, because if he does not live, then Voldemort will live. And we all know that such a thing cannot happen, as it would result in everyone's destruction. And I doubt that she would write seven books only to have Harry killed off so that way Voldemort wins and everybody dies at the end.

That would be a terrible and unfitting ending, and I think that JK knows this. The way she has been writing these books, she has Harry going through a tough time as he grows up. Harry Potter is not about good versus evil in my opinion, it is a story about coming of age. It is a story of how Harry Potter grows up in the face of adversity. I believe that after a hard fought battle at Hogwarts, Harry will come out on top in the end.

And for all you Harry/Hermione shippers out there, Harry's death would render this pairing an impossibility.

EDIT: Oh yes and one more thing, perhaps Voldemort will die as a result of his own doing, though technically Harry would have been the one to kill him. What I mean by this is that Voldemort's spell was deflected by Harry in their first encounter. And with the Prior Incantato effect due to them both having Fawkes feathers in their wands, Voldemort might use a spell that Harry manages to mimic or deflect back to Voldemort which would kill him. You never know.

NevrMore · 05-30-2004, 11:01 AM

I seriously think my friend got his facts wrong, but he told me that J.K. decided to go on after the 7th book. I doubt it though, anyone want to clarify?

Anyway, Zatenks is right. Any sort of speculation we had of Harry dieing before is gone now, because if Harry dies, Voldemort wins. It's been made painfully obvious that it's now impossible for them to end in a draw and both dieing. Therefore, Harry HAS to live and HAS to kill Voldemort, unless J.K. decides to let Voldemort win, which would turn away MANY of her readers, myself included. I mean, I'm all for violence and stuff, but 7 books and about 10 years (at the rate it's going) of getting to know and love the characters only so you watch all of them get killed? Uh uh. No way. The sympathy factor in that isn't even there. No one will be sad that Harry/Ron/Hermione died, they'll be angry that J.K. did it to try and make them sad.

phew, alright, I'm done.

Slavik81 · 05-30-2004, 12:42 PM

If Harry dies... Well, that would be bad....

But a Tail of Two Cities ending is possible... Hermione chooses Ron and Harry, the isolationist, dies in defeating Voldemort.

You see, all Harry's life he feels alone, and if he died, and/or Hermione chooses Ron, he would feel defeated for a very long time... Perhaps not forever, but for many years...

So perhaps we will get a story in which Harry saves the world at the cost of his own life, whether he dies or not... Or perhaps we will get that Harry/Hermione ending... The first option is rather defeatest... but easier to pull off a strong ending with...

btw, not all sequels suck... Shrek 2 is better than the origonal...

Overlord Zatenks · 05-30-2004, 01:55 PM

Quote:

"You see, all Harry's life he feels alone, and if he died, and/or Hermione chooses Ron, he would feel defeated for a very long time... Perhaps not forever, but for many years..."

This is a reason why I think that Hermione would be an excellent match for Harry. For starters, as RCG perfectly illustrated in his exposition, Harry and Hermione are already very close. They confide in one another, and they are comfortable with one another. Because of their close friendship, they have an excellent foundation to begin a romantic relationship on. I believe this whole heartedly because my wife was my best friend as a child and early teenager before we had gotten together. Secondly, because as you said Slavik, Harry feels alone. If he and Hermione got together, this would alleviate some of Harry's personal anguish and give him somebody to be with, someone to stop him from feeling alone. With Hermione with him, I think he would be a lot happier.

I shall stop there, as I do not want to begin a shipper debate over who will end up with who.

Firestorm27 · 06-04-2004, 12:31 PM

k about the core thing. Voldemort kinda possesed Harry and wanted Dumbledore to kill Harry when Voldemort was still possesing him. But if Dumbledore tried to, Voldemort probably would have left Harry's body before he died.

Harry may die...I have mixed feelings on that

WoodenCoyote · 06-04-2004, 02:46 PM

It would certainly be memorable and an amazing lesson, and there's a whole lot of stuff you you write. You know, "Noble sacrifice" "true hero" etc etc.