Daniel Radcliffe Comments on the New BATMAN Movies, Saying He’d Be “Perfect” for Robin

by     Posted 155 days ago

daniel-radcliffe-robin

Could the Boy Wizard be playing the Boy Wonder?  Well, if Daniel Radcliffe ever decided to get back into a big franchise again, it looks like he’d at least be interested in playing Batman’s sidekick, Robin.  Now before you get your tights in a bunch, this was his answer as part of a rapid-fire question session which included such hard-hitting queries as “What’s your favorite band?” and “Who’s the last person who texted you?”, so it’s not exactly an iron-clad contract.  Then again, the Batman reboot is just getting underway with Ben Affleck set to star for at least two, and possibly three films going forward.  Could Radcliffe follow in the fleet footsteps of Chris O’Donnell and Joseph Gordon-Levitt?  Hit the jump for more.

daniel-radcliffe-robinIn a quick Q&A with Buzzfeed, Radcliffe was asked which franchise he’d like to join next.  He answered with the following:

“Batman. If they reboot that again I’ll do that too. It’s happening, isn’t it? With Ben Affleck. I could be Robin, I’m perfect.”

What do you think?  Would Radcliffe’s Robin actually be a perfect fit?  Or was the Harry Potter star just showing off his wry British humor?  Let us know your thoughts in the comment section, and watch the rest of the interview with the charming Radcliffe below:

For more on the upcoming Batman movies, click here or peruse our recent stories below:

batman-and-robin

 




Like Us


Comments:

FB Comments

  • Manuel Orozco

    To be honest I wouldn’t mind if Radcliffr played Robin

    • Person

      Yeah it’s not a bad idea, but I doubt it’ll happen.

      • Manuel Orozco

        We’ll see

    • Roman

      Radcliff sucks!

      • Manuel Orozco

        No way

      • The Flobbit

        Is your name really Manuel Orozco, or are you named after the character Manuel Orozco from Jack Reacher novel Bad Luck and Trouble? Not a common name…

      • Manuel Orozco

        My name really is Manuel Orozco

      • The Flobbit

        Wow. That is very interesting. I was just reading a novel with a character called Manuel Orozco when I came to this site and found…a commenter called Manuel Orozco.

  • Spiral

    Yeah, if they are going for the campy version then cast him. He’s great in the Potter movies but he doesn’t have the physical presence and coolness or personality to play Robin. Shia is way more qualified for such a role, yeah I said, and you all damn well know I’m right.

    They need a young Tom Cruise.

    • varagor

      Shia can be a great actor in the right role, but he’s no Robin. Radcliffe has way more coolness and physical presence. I wouldn’t choose either of them, but Radcliffe is a better choice out of these two.

  • LEM

    I thought Nightwing was going to be in the movie along with every other character DC can miscast.

  • thebesk8s

    An older Tim Drake to Affleck’s older Bruce Wayne maybe..? (Just spitballing)

  • gar216

    I actually like him as Robin. The problem is that he’ll be eligible for AARP by the time this movie comes out in 2019.

    • Jon Snow

      Daniel Radcliff sucks!

      • gar216

        That’s funny, I heard that Jon Snow sucks.

      • verasgunn

        You know nothing Jon Snow.

  • agent777

    That would be the best casting choice. Period. But they probably cast “young Snape” Adam Driver.

  • agent777

    That would be the best casting choice. Period. But they probably cast “young Snape” Adam Driver.

  • Steven

    His acting has been very suspect in most of the Potter films, even the recent ones.

    I dont think he’d be a good fit at all.

    • Bernard

      His acting is suspect in everything he’s in – because he’s crap.

      Another example of how having parents in the industry can net you a lifetime supply of gigs, and as long as you have one franchise that assholes enjoy you can ride that wave for life. Just look at Keira “Pirates of the Caribbean” Knightley.

      No amount of “serious” roles can hide their insufferable and awful acting abilities. THERE ARE NO WORKING-CLASS ARTISTS AND PERFORMERS, it’s a fucking disgrace.

      • eh

        He’s not a good dramatic actor but he’s fine in comedies. If they do a campy version I can see him in it. Disagree that there are no working class performers and actors who’ve made it on merit, but I agree that Radcliffe is not one of them.

      • Bernard

        I didn’t say there aren’t actors who haven’t “made it on merit,” of course there are. There are a plethora of fine actors, not to be confused with attractive charismatic movie stars, which can be another thing entirely.

        But to “disagree that there are no working class performers” and not list a single one who can (truthfully) be traced back to have grown up in a working-class environment themselves is a bit counter-intuitive.

        The problem isn’t that we have too few great, or good, performers, instead the problem is that one must be of a certain background in order to crack the higher echelons and reach “stardom” (often without much merit, if we are to be perfectly honest.) Awards are a sham, and it’s not that there aren’t enough working-class Oscar winners; no, it is that there is a middle- and upper-class elite who hold the reins to the industries of TV and film and allow only their friends and children into any of the jobs within the creative industry furthering their own wealthy initiatives and pushing their pseudo-leftie capitalist philosophies.

        It’s why most mainstream movies are such a sham – “popcorn” entertainment designed to switch people’s brains off and indoctrinate them with consumerist propaganda.

      • eh

        I didn’t list any counter-examples because your first statement was very broad; no working class performers whatsoever is hard to believe. Now that I see you’re talking about the upper echelons of Hollywood stardom, I see your point. Yes most mainstream movies are consumerist crap, awards are very political, and many actors get opportunities because of their connections or franchise coattails. Hollywood is elitist and money-driven like most any other established institution but we have indie films.

        BTW Ryan Gosling is working-class and Oscar-nominated but I don’t rate him very highly either, heh.

      • Bernard

        Ryan Gosling ain’t working-class, he was a part of the House of Mouse from an early age along with Justin Timberlake, Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera.

        Guy had assholes behind him pushing for him to be big the whole way.

      • Bernard

        Ryan Gosling ain’t working-class, he was a part of the House of Mouse from an early age along with Justin Timberlake, Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera.

        Guy had assholes behind him pushing for him to be big the whole way.

      • Bernard

        I also don’t rate him highly. He is balls.

      • eh

        Dang, too true!

    • The Flobbit

      I disagree. He is a great actor. He showed the pain and the anguish of Potter perfectly. In the first two Potter movies he was crap, but after Azkaban he really matured as an actor.

      • Bernard

        You’re joking, right?

        Radcliffe and Watson are prime examples of how you need little talent to have a career in Hollywood – all you need is a “defining” role that people will always have a soft-spot for (though the rule of diminishing returns is a major problem for the Potter film series) because they are force-fed their visage through eight films over the course of a decade.

        He didn’t show “the pain and anguish of Potter perfectly” – because coupled with a weak-script, a lame double-parter ending stretching its narrative far too thin, and little to no acting ability and conviction, he was derivative, boring and wooden.

        I have a major problem with the series, being that the first book introduces a character who must have IMMENSE difficulties, socially, physically and mentally, as he is a young boy who has been BULLIED and BERATED his whole life by an adopted family who’ve never shown him any love and locked him up in a cell under-the-stairs for most of his life; though neither J.K Rowling nor the film adaptations deal with any of the complex emotional fall-out such an upbringing would contain.

        They are weak films for the weak-minded populated by a weak main-cast with weak motivations who have no idea on how to get to grips with their characters – and the audience don’t care anyway, Harry Potter is a cypher for children to be led into a fantastical world (another major aspect which is never explained; as, how can there be an entire world for wizards going on, literally thousands of them, and yet we see Diagon Alley and Hogwarts and that’s pretty much it – what jobs can wizards have? what’s the point of studying magic if you’re gonna have to go live in the real-/”muggle”-world anyway?) that is cheap escapism by a lazy thieving writer adapted for a lazy audience with little imagination beyond a basic battle of “good vs. evil.”

        Anyone can look sad on-camera when they’re lit with the proper mood-lighting, shot at the right angle, have false tears sprayed onto their faces, have a suitable soundtrack behind them and are playing on the preconceived notions of an audience who have already read the source material – it’s part of the “Kuleshov Effect,” the manipulation of images to render a reaction in an audience that has little (to nothing) to do with the actors.

        And I think the first two Potter films are the best – offering the entertainment and escapism of a blockbuster movie for children, with a wide-eyed group of children at the centre. It’s meant to be awe-inspiring, not some daft melodramatic and self-indulgent nonsense that the series became in an attempt to portray a serious story that is laughable for anyone with half a brain due to its inconsequentiality and ill-thought-out characters. How fucking boring was Hogwarts after the second movie and beyond? It just became another school – albeit one in which children are taught nothing about the real world, the audience is taught nothing about the wizarding-world, and Potter seems to be continually engaging in extra-curricular broom-stick-based activities instead of studying for his A-Levels and exams.

        So, I disagree. He ain’t a great actor. He showed us nothing but his face conveying the emotions of someone getting paid too much for a job that requires too little – and offered all the praise fanboys and girls could muster because it’s easier to go with the brainwashing and consensus, than it is to forge your own opinion based on the flaws and holes in the plot and writing.

      • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

        I thought we got the downvote button back? Oh well… DOWNVOTE!!!

      • Bernard

        Cheers, DNAsplitter, really appreciate the lack of any argument to the contrary.

        Apologies my opinion isn’t the same as yours. Sadder still that you couldn’t find the time (or effort, or perhaps words) to justify why exactly this post wasn’t worth your hard-earned internet time? Then again, maybe I’m just expecting too much from a commentary forum for like-minded film-enthusiasts and cinephiles – maybe the majority on here just like looking at photos of celebrities and talking about their upcoming releases instead of forming and expressing an opinion on the art and industry that actually exists as of now.

      • The Flobbit

        DOWNVOTE.

      • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

        No I’m just busting your balls – don’t take it personal. But it’s more the fact that you seem to find Radcliffe as some sort of hack actor because he was the star of a major blockbuster film series based on an even more famous childrens novels. Yet his improvement as an actor shows in each film. I mean he was 10 years when he started the series and by the time they reached the 3rd film he was genuinley acting the part to a T – most likely because he had a real director like Cuarson guiding him. He nailed what J.K.R Potter was in the books and IMO brought real emotion to what could have been a “run by the #’s” character for WB’s cash cow machine.

      • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

        No I’m just busting your balls – don’t take it personal. But it’s more the fact that you seem to find Radcliffe as some sort of hack actor because he was the star of a major blockbuster film series based on an even more famous childrens novels. Yet his improvement as an actor shows in each film. I mean he was 10 years when he started the series and by the time they reached the 3rd film he was genuinley acting the part to a T – most likely because he had a real director like Cuarson guiding him. He nailed what J.K.R Potter was in the books and IMO brought real emotion to what could have been a “run by the #’s” character for WB’s cash cow machine.

      • The Flobbit

        I can only imagine how many better things you could have done with your life instead of typing a two page formal essay on the lack of talent of some actor you hate, directed at someone you’ve never met, who really doesn’t care what you think.

        So, instead of writing a 500 word, MLA formatted, referenced editorial on Radcliffe’s (and Watson’s) acting talent, let me instead sum it up this way:

        I disagree with your entire opinion, and that doesn’t make yours any less valid. I think Radcliffe shows skill and talent, and you can go keep your Kuleshov effect and your weak-minded films. Good day to you, sir.

      • Bernard

        Took like four minutes – really wasn’t much of a time-sink.

      • Pk

        Haha the fact that this Bernard fucktard thinks the first two hp movies were good sums up his taste in movies!

      • The Flobbit

        I can only imagine how many better things you could have done with your life instead of typing a two page formal essay on the lack of talent of some actor you hate, directed at someone you’ve never met, who really doesn’t care what you think.

        So, instead of writing a 500 word, MLA formatted, referenced editorial on Radcliffe’s (and Watson’s) acting talent, let me instead sum it up this way:

        I disagree with your entire opinion, and that doesn’t make yours any less valid. I think Radcliffe shows skill and talent, and you can go keep your Kuleshov effect and your weak-minded films. Good day to you, sir.

      • Bernard

        You’re joking, right?

        Radcliffe and Watson are prime examples of how you need little talent to have a career in Hollywood – all you need is a “defining” role that people will always have a soft-spot for (though the rule of diminishing returns is a major problem for the Potter film series) because they are force-fed their visage through eight films over the course of a decade.

        He didn’t show “the pain and anguish of Potter perfectly” – because coupled with a weak-script, a lame double-parter ending stretching its narrative far too thin, and little to no acting ability and conviction, he was derivative, boring and wooden.

        I have a major problem with the series, being that the first book introduces a character who must have IMMENSE difficulties, socially, physically and mentally, as he is a young boy who has been BULLIED and BERATED his whole life by an adopted family who’ve never shown him any love and locked him up in a cell under-the-stairs for most of his life; though neither J.K Rowling nor the film adaptations deal with any of the complex emotional fall-out such an upbringing would contain.

        They are weak films for the weak-minded populated by a weak main-cast with weak motivations who have no idea on how to get to grips with their characters – and the audience don’t care anyway, Harry Potter is a cypher for children to be led into a fantastical world (another major aspect which is never explained; as, how can there be an entire world for wizards going on, literally thousands of them, and yet we see Diagon Alley and Hogwarts and that’s pretty much it – what jobs can wizards have? what’s the point of studying magic if you’re gonna have to go live in the real-/”muggle”-world anyway?) that is cheap escapism by a lazy thieving writer adapted for a lazy audience with little imagination beyond a basic battle of “good vs. evil.”

        Anyone can look sad on-camera when they’re lit with the proper mood-lighting, shot at the right angle, have false tears sprayed onto their faces, have a suitable soundtrack behind them and are playing on the preconceived notions of an audience who have already read the source material – it’s part of the “Kuleshov Effect,” the manipulation of images to render a reaction in an audience that has little (to nothing) to do with the actors.

        And I think the first two Potter films are the best – offering the entertainment and escapism of a blockbuster movie for children, with a wide-eyed group of children at the centre. It’s meant to be awe-inspiring, not some daft melodramatic and self-indulgent nonsense that the series became in an attempt to portray a serious story that is laughable for anyone with half a brain due to its inconsequentiality and ill-thought-out characters. How fucking boring was Hogwarts after the second movie and beyond? It just became another school – albeit one in which children are taught nothing about the real world, the audience is taught nothing about the wizarding-world, and Potter seems to be continually engaging in extra-curricular broom-stick-based activities instead of studying for his A-Levels and exams.

        So, I disagree. He ain’t a great actor. He showed us nothing but his face conveying the emotions of someone getting paid too much for a job that requires too little – and offered all the praise fanboys and girls could muster because it’s easier to go with the brainwashing and consensus, than it is to forge your own opinion based on the flaws and holes in the plot and writing.

  • Suave

    He would be a good Robin but I think they are going with Nightwing so Wes Bentley would be my top choice

  • Melwing

    I’m very surprised by how okay I feel about that idea.

    • Fargo

      He is so gay!

      • HORSEFLESH

        So are Batman & robin.

      • Peen

        No one shits on Leon: The Professional, or Kick-Ass, so I don’t understand how people shit on Batman and Robin considering it’s the same story. Both comics and movies have moved past 1960′s Batman, so why keep referring back to it?

      • HORSEFLESH

        I wasn’t referring to the ‘it’ that you are, but the characters in general, they’re just very gay together.

        Not sure what Leon or Kick-Ass has to do with this anyway- they’re both good, well directed and written films, B & R isn’t.

      • Deep End

        “they’re just very gay together” – you might want to at least attempt to clarify and offer some critical basis for this statement, so to avoid sounding like a homophobe, an idiot, and/or a total douche…

      • HORSEFLESH

        I never suggested gay was bad but you just did; congratulations.

      • Deep End

        No, you may not have DIRECTLY suggested it, but your sweeping statement causes confusion because it is difficult to ascertain exactly what you’re trying to say.

        And I didn’t suggest anything, other than that your statement could be perceived as ignorant and mis-guided without further interpretation. Because it comes across that way.

        Then again, it’s much easier to point the finger at someone else and say “they said something bad” (when they didn’t) instead of clarifying your own stupid and rushed comment.

      • HORSEFLESH

        There was nothing ‘sweeping’ about my statement; it was rather specific but it seems that you want to spin it the way you want for the sake of an argument.

      • Deep End

        There was nothing negatively suggestive about my statement; it was very specific.
        You just want to spin it the way you want for the sake of an argument. And avoid clarifying your own thoughts for the sake of others.

      • HORSEFLESH
      • Deep End

        One panel showing them in the same bed does not make them a homosexual couple. I’ve slept in the same bed as some of my male friends, that’s not evidence of anything.

        There is an inference of homosexuality throughout the Batman mythos (as well as permeating through most of the spandex-clad super-heroes of our modern comic mythologies) – that doesn’t make your statement any less ill-worded “they are very gay together” is not the same as saying “Batman has certain homo-erotic tendencies, please let’s explore them.”

        Perhaps you are interested in debating the sexual interpretations of the Batman mythos? Perhaps you are just looking to undermine the work of a hundred other comic book writers who create an interwoven personal relationship between the characters of Bruce Wayne and (his arguably surrogate children) Robin/s, in an attempt to portray the childhood that Batman doesn’t understand as it too was robbed from him in much the same way it happens to (most of the) Robin/s?

        http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=vShYfiP_6sAC&pg=PA13&lpg=PA13&dq=homosexual+themes+in+batman&source=bl&ots=1cDEsouEMs&sig=n4bVS9Bsyj5zsZ294vGO3w6g_AM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eCaoU8GwE9TY7AaIhoBY&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=homosexual%20themes%20in%20batman&f=false

        It’s not to say that Batman (and Robin) at times are not written as gay characters, although DC would obviously put the kibosh on such straight-forward interpretations in an effort to avoid alienating certain bigoted comic readers, because of course they are interpreted in that way by certain writers.

        All of this stems from an ill-worded comment you made that without background clarification could (could!) be taken as homophobic. You have to be careful and intelligent in your comments in order not to alienate or disturb other people you are offering your opinion to.

        I.E: Batman and Robin are not always “very gay together” and it is unfair and, frankly, obscenely childish to write such broad statements on a much more interesting and complex cast of characters without further explanation.

      • HORSEFLESH

        I don’t think anything I could post on a comments thread could undermine ‘the work of a hundred other comic book writers’ or of a multi-billion dollar intellectual property.

        “There is an inference of homosexuality throughout the Batman mythos”

        Yep; very gay, and there’s nothing wrong with that, though some Batman fans may have a big problem with that.

      • Deep End

        Hey, you know what? It’s cool.

        You obviously have no intention on looking at what’s being said here – instead you want to pretend this is about whether homosexuality is right or wrong, instead of debating the real point which is in understanding that words have meaning and that writing something the moment it comes out of your head-hole doesn’t mean that it’s going to translate exactly as you thought it would when interpreted by others.

      • HORSEFLESH

        This is not a debate- there’s proper fora for that elsewhere.

        How you choose to interpret the words of others is entirely your prerogative as you have clearly demonstrated.

      • Deep End

        Yeah, yeah, cool.
        Everything you say is golden.

        Such a good get-out clause for anything that, “you just INTERPRETED it the wrong way.”

        Best part is, and I’ve clarified this time and again above, my problem isn’t that I interpreted it as homophobic, or slanderous, or mean-spirited. No, as I said I interpreted it as ill-thought out and stupid. Like without meaning, without pre-thought, without clarification.

        As in, an empty and asinine statement which you then attempted to masquerade, instead of explain, behind a veil of homosexual defending (by slamming me with the rhetoric of “I never suggested gay was bad but you just did,” which I didn’t; guess that’s just ‘interpretation’ again, right?) instead of admitting you had offered a rushed opinion on something, or better yet, clarifying your statement to be that “sometimes” Batman & Robin can be identified as homosexual, and other times not. Sorry that I chose to interpret the words as you wrote them: their meaning was apparent, yours wasn’t, because you misunderstood what you’d written as what you’d wanted to say.

      • HORSEFLESH

        At least you to got that out of your system.

        I’m fine with what I posted; apparently.

      • Deep End

        “I’m fine with what I posted; apparently.”

        As ignorance is bliss, apparently.

      • HORSEFLESH

        You said it.

      • Deep End

        I did say that, yes.

        Glad you could finally understand something I’ve written.

      • HORSEFLESH

        Agreeing is not the same as understanding- an important distinction.

      • Deep End

        That’s true – you do strike me as the kind of person who agrees with things without understanding them, so long as you yourself have said it. Like how you take whatever you say as fact and ignore any contrariety opinion, in an effort to save face rather than accepting any foolishness on your own behalf. We are blessed to have such strong-willed and ironclad folks such as yourself, to remind us that most of the world is a brick wall – and we are doomed to fail because of blind self-preservation and an unwavering belief in the smell of one’s own hot air.

        Or at the very least, a seeming inability to clarify basic statements beyond hastily put-together short sentences in an effort to either bemuse or infuriate members of an opposing train of thought into leaving you alone for something you did.

      • HORSEFLESH

        So which is it?

      • Deep End

        That’s very clever.

        … And that may be the only time anyone will ever say that to you.

      • HORSEFLESH

        In other words, you don’t know.

      • Deep End

        You’re the only one who knows the answer to the question.

        To be honest, from the way you type, you’re the only one who could even be sure what it is exactly you’re asking. Once again, you’ve confused what you wanted to say, with what you actually typed; saying nothing, or rather asking me nothing.

        So, which is it? Do you know? Or do you not know?
        How to write, that is?

      • HORSEFLESH

        You’ve been reading it fine so far but interpreting it the way you want.

      • HORSEFLESH

        You’ve been reading it fine so far but interpreting it the way you want.

      • HORSEFLESH

        You’ve been reading it fine so far but interpreting it the way you want.

      • Deep End

        Is this a tactic you employ for prospective sexual partners too?

        Wearing them down with empty phrases and lines of questioning made up and going nowhere, in an effort to wear down the defences until they “yes” in the hopes that afterwards you’ll kindly slink away back into the night?

      • HORSEFLESH

        Are you looking for instruction?

        The Collider threads are many things but context is everything.

      • Deep End

        You are dull, in every sense of the word.

      • HORSEFLESH

        Now, after all your ethical pontification, it comes down to posting petty insults.

      • Deep End

        Least I attempted to permeate into the space of your head where the brain still works. Looks like you were too reluctant to engage in an actual discourse and resorted to wandering around the mulberry bush, like a criminal evading responsibility by sticking his fingers in his ears and whistling “Dixie.”

        In other words; you don’t know, jack.

      • Deep End

        Least I attempted to permeate into the space of your head where the brain still works. Looks like you were too reluctant to engage in an actual discourse and resorted to wandering around the mulberry bush, like a criminal evading responsibility by sticking his fingers in his ears and whistling “Dixie.”

        In other words; you don’t know, jack.

      • HORSEFLESH

        You’ve certainly ‘talked’ a lot.

      • Deep End

        I am glad you can find humour in your own ill-judged and difficult to understand insults; offering pathetic rhetoric in the absence of anything substantial to add to the conversation. I’m afraid I have wasted much-too-much time here and must go back to my actual life. Do take pride in the fact that I don’t care, your apparent trolling has been for ought other than to confirm my own suspicions that you are an incorrigible fool who when pushed squarely against a wall of his own ignorance can offer nothing but flatulence you hope to disguise as informed writing, or worse still, sub-par and paradoxical riddling which seem to only run back on themselves and kick you in the rear. What a bore you are, or were.

        After all, the Collider threads are many things, but a forum for serious discussion? Such a rarity would actually be quite scary to find now, after such a length of time around such dullards and fools! And especially one who struggles to compose a paragraph, or a couple of sentences, longer than the usual ‘twit.’ Sorry, ‘twat.’ Good lord!, ‘tweet.’

      • HORSEFLESH

        Nothing I’ve posted has been rhetorical but sincere and for someone who doesn’t care, you put a lot of effort into not caring, that’s commendable –if a little self-defeating– and if I was ignorant I’d not have replied at all.

        Bandying words like ‘trolling’ around is really a defensive term -and I accept that- but its application to any action that doesn’t go someone’s way is severe overuse in comment threads and has worn it of all meaning.

        If I’m difficult for you to understand maybe that’s something for you to ruminate upon before extinguishing the light and turning in at the end of this diurnal passage.

      • gaylord

        gawd, you 2 are like a couple of old poofs!

      • HORSEFLESH

        We really should get a room.

      • HORSEFLESH

        Nothing I’ve posted has been rhetorical but sincere and for someone who doesn’t care, you put a lot of effort into not caring, that’s commendable –if a little self-defeating– and if I was ignorant I’d not have replied at all.

        Bandying words like ‘trolling’ around is really a defensive term -and I accept that- but its application to any action that doesn’t go someone’s way is severe overuse in comment threads and has worn it of all meaning.

        If I’m difficult for you to understand maybe that’s something for you to ruminate upon before extinguishing the light and turning in at the end of this diurnal passage.

      • HORSEFLESH

        Now, after all your ethical pontification, it comes down to posting petty insults.

      • HORSEFLESH

        Are you looking for instruction?

        The Collider threads are many things but context is everything.

      • Deep End

        Is this a tactic you employ for prospective sexual partners too?

        Wearing them down with empty phrases and lines of questioning made up and going nowhere, in an effort to wear down the defences until they “yes” in the hopes that afterwards you’ll kindly slink away back into the night?

      • HORSEFLESH

        There was nothing ‘sweeping’ about my statement; it was rather specific but it seems that you want to spin it the way you want for the sake of an argument.

      • Neep

        Similar stories – similar – they’re not “THE SAME.”

        I mean, Kick-Ass is closer to being “the same” as Batman, but that’s because Mark Millar writes pretentious comic-books riding on the coat-tails of better comic-books by better comic-book-writers anyway.

        But “Leon” is quite a different story altogether to the dynamic of “Batman & Robin” – by your logic any buddy-team-up featuring a child is just “Batman & Robin”.

        Fuckin’ “Cop and a Half,” anyone?

      • Neep

        Similar stories – similar – they’re not “THE SAME.”

        I mean, Kick-Ass is closer to being “the same” as Batman, but that’s because Mark Millar writes pretentious comic-books riding on the coat-tails of better comic-books by better comic-book-writers anyway.

        But “Leon” is quite a different story altogether to the dynamic of “Batman & Robin” – by your logic any buddy-team-up featuring a child is just “Batman & Robin”.

        Fuckin’ “Cop and a Half,” anyone?

  • GrimReaper07

    It’s pretty obvious he said it as a joke.

  • yrulaughing418

    While perhaps it’s expected that Robin be shorter than Batman, Radcliffe is still too much of a manlet for the role.

    Radcliffe is 5’5″, Affleck is 6’4″. There would be a comical height difference between them

    • HORSEFLESH

      He could sit on his shoulder.

  • Kevin Carter

    Dream on Danny……

  • Davis

    Give him some cruise shoes and he’ll be fine

    • The Flobbit

      …Introducing the Cruise Shoes: Making short fellas tall since 1989.

  • Royale With Cheese

    No.

  • DEADP00L

    His ego is taller than his actual height.

    • The Flobbit

      Those who have met Daniel Radcliffe call him a courteous gentleman and a humble guy who hasn’t let the fame of Potter get to his head. I haven’t met him, so I can’t verify his personality, but he seems like a nice guy.

  • The Flobbit

    Clearly a joke, but for some reason I am kind of cool with this…

  • The Flobbit

    Clearly a joke, but for some reason I am kind of cool with this…

  • ʝoe ßloggs

    I wouldn’t mind if Harry Potter was played by Robin.
    Voldemort would have been dispatched in the first movie.

    • CARR71

      joe ,why do you use kanwars site? you do know he ran adverts for the sun on his site and refused to pay up his donation ,as well as being banned from twitter on over 10 occasions for being abusive to ex posters on his site

      • ʝoe ßloggs

        Hey Jase. Ok I didn’t know that at all! To be honest, I’m relatively new to this commenting gig and generally I’m not site discriminatory. Jaimie’s always been fair to me as well.

        But now that you mention this (I also did a quick google), I shall exercise greater discretion.

        I’m usually only on TIA or DT and sometimes on LK. I’m posting less on DT seeing how much of a putrid cesspool it’s become. Looks like I’ll have to add LK to the list for the history you mention.

        Thanks again.

        P.S. Why are you posting this on my comment in Collider?? Does Jaimie monitor commenter accounts?

      • CARR71

        he barred 4 of us for replying to a comment about him ,he will also accuse you of being a stalker and threatening to rape his niece,hes a nasty piece of work thats why he has been banned of twitter so many times ,but yet he claims on his site he hates twitter ,i asked him about the sun advertisements and from then on he barred me every chance he got ,you may have noticed a lot more comments not getting modded on his site lately ,he needs all the posters he can get,finally check out some of his posters the have never posted on any other sites even though they have over 2000 posts ,on twitter he creates aliases to back up his abuse ,many think he does the same on his site ,when he got rid of me anteater and zantos ,they was another poster that was alwayss on (max) who could say anything and it would always go live ,when he barred the 3 of us max dissappeared never to be seen again strange to say the least,when if he sees this he will get it removed ,he will tell you different up to you who to believe ,but either way i will not be sending you threatening emails like kanwar does or abusing you

      • ʝoe ßloggs

        Wow, that’s some nasty business that went on there. Yes, I don’t see much ‘modding’ going on on his site. But as you say, it could be because he needs regular visitors after this debacle you mention.

      • CARR71

        he even banned someone for life for asking were i was ,also ask yourself why does he never mention hillsborough even on remembrance day ?because he would get ripped to shreads by the the majority of english lfc fans

  • ʝoe ßloggs

    I wouldn’t mind if Harry Potter was played by Robin.
    Voldemort would have been dispatched in the first movie.

  • Pingback: Daniel Radcliffe Thinks He’d Be “Perfect” To Play Robin In The Batman Reboot

  • http://www.discogs.com/ AdamShitwood

    Honestly, this is a better option that what all these “fantasy casting” douches come up with. They usually go with the hottest name when they act like they are putting the movie together.

    I hope they’d take another crack at doing a good version of Robin before abandoning him.

Click Here