Equus

From Fandom wank wiki

In a revival of the Tony Award-winning 1973 play Equus, opening February 2007, Daniel Radcliffe will play a "troubled young man with a religious-erotic obsession with horses," Newsweek magazine reported.

"Part of me wants to shake up people's perception of me, just shove me in a blender," Radcliffe told the magazine in an exclusive interview on the set of the fifth Harry Potter film, "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix."

This shouldn't really be news, except the role includes a nude scene (among other sexual content), and you know that this will spark wank by Potterfen.

Of course, the real topic for debate: Is "religious-erotic obsession with horses" the greatest juxtaposition of words in the history of the English language?

[edit]

Links and Wanks

Wikipedia article on Equus
Official site of the 2007 revival
"Naked stage role for Potter star"
"As Strang, Radcliffe will perform a sexual act while riding naked on a horse."
MSN report on the play
IMDb article for the Equus 1977 movie
Fandom Lounge post [1]
First Clairvoyantwank report [2]
Second Clairvoyantwank report [3]
Finally, a Fandom Wank wank report
Yet another Clairvoyantwank report, this one expecting wank (and shippy photomanips) from the play's promotional photos
Naturally, Raunchy Radcliffe pictures upset parents
Spitting Image lets us know the manips have arrived!

[edit]

Quotes

The IMDb bulletin board includes, in discussion about Radcliffe:
- "Actually I think it is a good move...so he is not type cast. He will also get to show his depth as an actor."
- "Oh ... he'll be able to show much more than depth on that horse."
"But No please Dan not nude... Because if you do that,you have a big chance that you end up in porn movies or so..." - Witch_Eva, quoted in one wank report [4]
The play's female director, Thea Sharrock, was impressed by his physique. [Producer] Pugh told the Evening Standard: "We had never seen him with clothes off before. We all went, 'wow'. Thea went, 'Oh my God.'" [5]
"I've been reading reports today that some parents are horrified that 'Harry Potter' has no clothes on and will boycott the remaining films because of this. Why is it that some adults have less sense than young children? Whilst I was gawping - ahem I mean looking, of course, - at these pictures yesterday my 6 year old appeared behind me and asked 'Mummy, why has the boy that plays Harry Potter got no clothes on?' I told him that before he makes the next HP film he's doing a play that's for grown-ups and part of the play needs him to have no clothes on. 'Oh' he said and trotted off to carry on playing with his toys. Now if a 6 year old child can a) understand that Daniel is a real person who plays Harry, a pretend person, in films and b) accept that Daniel will do other things apart from HP and c) see a semi-nude picture of him without being traumatised or scarred for life, why on earth do so many so-called adults fail to grasp any of these points? Sorry to rant but this sort of thing does annoy me beyond reason sometimes!" -amazingly sane TLC commenter Karen