SKetchy
05-01-2006, 01:30 PM
I just read an interview that Chris Rankin gave (read it here: http://icsurreyonline.icnetwork.co.uk/0600whatson/theatre/tm_objectid=16996726%26method=full%26siteid=50101% 26headline=reaching%2dnew%2dheights%2dafter%2dharr y%2dpotter-name_page.html ).
In which he says he's been casted for the next two films after being cut from this last one. My new theory is they wouldn't bother adding him to the next two films (although I know he plays an interesting tangent story line in the books) if he wasn't central somehow to the plot in book 7. Because as interesting as it is how his relationship with his family developes in books 5 & 6, its not really a central part of the book. Its more of a side line. And the filmmakers have already said they feel completely free to ax anything that isn't central to Harry. (Like SPEW...) ...so the fact that they don't want Percy to disappear from everyone's memory completely says to me that he does have an important role, something central to Harry, something yet to come.
What do you think?
In which he says he's been casted for the next two films after being cut from this last one. My new theory is they wouldn't bother adding him to the next two films (although I know he plays an interesting tangent story line in the books) if he wasn't central somehow to the plot in book 7. Because as interesting as it is how his relationship with his family developes in books 5 & 6, its not really a central part of the book. Its more of a side line. And the filmmakers have already said they feel completely free to ax anything that isn't central to Harry. (Like SPEW...) ...so the fact that they don't want Percy to disappear from everyone's memory completely says to me that he does have an important role, something central to Harry, something yet to come.
What do you think?