Prodigious

2 March 2007



Daniel Radcliffe Praised for Equus

Daniel Radcliffe is known the world over as Harry Potter, having played the boy wizard in four films. At 17 years of age, though, he risks being type cast, or worse, never working again, because of the role. So, he has taken something of a risk to play in a revival of Peter Shaffer’s Equus, which premiered at the Gielgud Theatre in London on Wednesday. The nude scene garnered the attention of the tabloids in recent days, but the reviews are in, and Mr. Radcliffe may well be an actor with a long and varied career ahead of him.

Equus is not for kids. Mr. Radcliffe plays Alan Strang, a boy who blinds six horses in a rather horrid fashion, and whose motive is revealed through a series of interviews with a shrink. Richard Griffiths plays Dr. Dysart, the psychiatrist, and he has been Uncle Vernon in the Potter films, so Mr. Radcliffe is among family on stage. While the reviewers are tepid to mildly warm with regard to the entire production (some suggesting the play is dated or worse), they like Mr. Radcliffe’s efforts.

Charles Spencer of the Telegraph wrote, “Better yet, Daniel Radcliffe brilliantly succeeds in throwing off the mantle of Harry Potter, announcing himself as a thrilling stage actor of unexpected range and depth. Those of us who have watched the Potter films with our families have always liked Radcliffe, who has a rare natural charm about him, and he has improved greatly as an actor as the series has progressed. Despite minimal previous theatrical experience Radcliffe here displays a dramatic power and an electrifying stage presence that marks a tremendous leap forward.”

Benedict Nightingale over at The Times was positive, though more constrained in his praise. “Radcliffe proves an assured actor and makes a perfectly able equimaniac. He can do aggression and pain, and, oddly, is lacking only in the sense of magic and wonder the part demands.” His column closes, “His [Radcliffe’s] Alan is pale, vulnerable, defensive, surprisingly tough; but he’s supposed also to find an exhilaration bordering on religious ecstasy in the company and, especially, the secret riding of horses. This, Radcliffe misses. Yet I can’t wholly regret his failure, because it makes an enjoyable play just a bit less morally meretricious.”

David Lister of The Independent echoed those sentiments, “Film critics have been divided on whether Radcliffe's deadpan expression in the Harry Potter movies was a requisite for playing a boy wizard sanguine in the face of adversity, or a limited repertoire of emotions.” Later, he adds, “In the event, Radcliffe acquits himself well. He is not the most expressive of actors, and his stage presence will take time to evolve; but from the moment he enters the psychiatrist's office, shoulders hunched, eyes narrowed and singing advertising jingles to avoid questioning, he cuts a compelling figure. As the evening goes on, there are moments when he touches, even if not tugs at, the heart strings. One feels for this boy because one senses from his performance a repression hiding a reservoir of feelings desperate to burst.”

Michael Billington of the Guardian agreed, “The revelation of this revival is that Daniel Radcliffe really can act, proving that his screen appearances as JK Rowling's boy-hero are no flash in the magic pan. His performance also helps to camouflage the fact Peter Shaffer’s celebrated ritual drama sometimes betrays its early 1970s origins.”

Congratulations, Mr. Radcliffe, on avoiding the child star disease -- the inability to grow and move on.

© Copyright 2007 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Fedora Linux.


Home

Google
WWW Kensington Review







Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More