Ten years and six movies later, our beloved Harry Potter series ended this past July. We were all heartbroken to admit that our adventures with Harry, Ron and Hermione were over. But what if the boy wizard himself Daniel Radcliffe DIDN'T play Harry? A crazy thought, but it actually almost happened!
Daniel revealed to The Hollywood Reporter that initially his parents weren't going to let him audition for the role because they didn't want him to have to move to Los Angeles to make the planned six films. Chris Columbus, the director of the first Harry Potter film, had seen Daniel play David Copperfield and decided he wanted Daniel to audition for the role of Harry.
"They went to my parents, and, at the time, the deal was to sign on for - I think - six films, all to be done in LA, and my mum and dad simply said, 'That's too much disruption to his life. That's not gonna happen'," Daniel explained to THR.
"I didn't know any of that had gone on. And then, maybe three, four months down the line, the deal had changed, and it was gonna be to shoot two films, and they'd both be done in England, and so they said, 'Okay, we'll let him audition.' And then it all went from there, really."
Whew! Thankfully his parents ended up caving in and allowed DanRad to audition. We don't know how an HP movie sans Daniel would have turned out!
Had Daniel Radcliffe not been allowed to play Harry Potter, which other actor do you think would have made a good Harry?