|
JULY 9, 2007 at 8:05 PM
Posted by CHEESER
Source: HPANA
At the U.S. premiere of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix Sunday, producer David Heyman confirmed to HPANA the casting of two 11-year-old red-haired children for the next film, Half-Blood Prince, which is set to begin filming in September.
The actors -- Taylor Triphook (a boy) and Katie Head -- will play minor twin characters who are not culled from JK Rowling's sixth novel. Heyman did not elaborate further. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is expected in theatres November 2008.
HPANA's complete coverage from the red carpet of the Order of the Phoenix premiere will be posted soon.
Reader Comments (154)
Your Thoughts
click to write...
Copyright © 2002-2009 HPANA. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. 
HPANA is an unofficial fan site, in no way affiliated with J.K. Rowling,
Scholastic Books, Bloomsbury Publishing or Warner Bros. Entertainment. All
trademarks and copyrighted material are the property of their respective owners.
About HPANA | Movie 6 | Send a news tip | Contact us | Privacy policy
Keeper of Harry's Fate
Points: 8934
TheOneWhoMustBeNamed says:
Interresting that the parts are already cast. That must mean that they are further along on the film. They need to finish that and start to work on Book 7. It will help for them to know the attend as that may effect the tone of the 6th film.
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 9:28 AM EST
Auror
Points: 2076
Feelin' Felix Felicis says:
At first I thought the children might be the ones from the orphanage that Tom Riddle took to the cave to torture, but it's says they are not from the book. So I don't understand. I don't like made-up characters in the Potter films. I like it to be as canon as possible.
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 9:50 AM EST
Student
Points: 263
WombatPotion says:
Hmm... I wonder where they'll go with this? Kinda fun for them to add their own stuff to it. I mean...Nigel is a bit annoying, as he's way too much like the Creevey brothers, but otherwise... Well, we'll see.
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 10:01 AM EST
Squib
Points: 112
AranelAlasse says:
HPANA fans: Wait! Stop! I think that the two characters actually ARE from the book! The summary said that they are characters who "are not culled" from the book!
What does "culled" mean? In my understanding, it means to kill or remove. In a livestock setting, you cull (kill) the sickly animals, because you know that they're not going to make it anyways.
So if these two characters are not culled from the book, then I take that to mean that they're not removed from the book.
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 10:45 AM EST
Points: 136
rilian4 says:
"What does "culled" mean? In my understanding, it means to kill or remove. In a livestock setting, you cull (kill) the sickly animals, because you know that they're not going to make it anyways."
Culled means more like harvested...he meant the characters were not book characters.
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 10:49 AM EST
Prefect
Points: 366
Ayesha***Yumna says:
Hm, its interesting, but I wonder what could they possibly have added....
And I hope it doesnt ruin the true imagination...
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 10:50 AM EST
Witch
Points: 923
expectogirl says:
hmmm...could they maybe be fred and george at a younger age... flashback maybe when they almost made ron do an unbreakable vow hmmm I think it was Fred who said his left buttock has never been the same since heeeheee
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 11:15 AM EST
Witch
Points: 575
frannie says:
That's very interesting. Can't wait to hear more about the HBP film.
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 11:22 AM EST
Squib
Points: 112
AranelAlasse says:
rilian4, With all respect, I'm still going to disagree with the final interpretation that most people here are using for the word "cull".
Cull can mean harvested or selected, but I'm of the believe that in this situation, it means to select an object out from a larger group, for the purpose of improving the group that the object came from. With animals, you "select" the sickly ones, and remove them. (For many, many reasons, actually. It could be because they're likely to die anyways, and it could be because they're likely to make the other animals sick (and therefore die). There are other reasons, too, which I won't go into.)
Any time you make a movie from a book, you have a large set of information (like a large herd of animals) to deal with. The movie-makers have to trim down (cull) the information by removing pieces that won't have maximum impact (or whatever criteria they use). (A farmer trims down (culls) a herd by removing the defective animals.) In the end, the hope is that the movie has a higher percent of good-quality information it it. (And in the end, the hope is that the herd has a higher percent of good-quality livestock in it.)
But, I could still be wrong, and that would be ok with me, too. Here's an interesting article about the word "cull", and how it has been used in the past, and how it has changed. I admit that the other interpretation of the word (the idea of "selecting the good stuff, in order to keep it" would indeed make it sound like these characters were not selected from the book. I just think that in the context of making a movie from a book, it makes more sense to think of the livestock/culling analogy.
But really I don't mind either way. :) I kind of liked Nigel. :) And until we have more info, I think we won't know for sure which interpretation we should use. In the meantime, though, my conclusion is that the two new characters are in fact in the books, and have not been removed.
I also conclude that it's not Fred and George Weasley, because one of the children is named Katie. Which, in my experience, has never been a boy's name... ;)
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 12:03 PM EST
Squib
Points: 112
AranelAlasse says:
Aah! I forgot the link to the article I mentioned. Sorry! Here it is: http://www.worldwidewords.org/topicalwords/tw-cul2.htm
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 12:05 PM EST
Auror
Points: 3252
Tenshi says:
Hmmm that's odd... I wonder who they'll play? And how minor is minor?? hahaha And I wonder what Jo said and how about the green light for this? =D
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 12:05 PM EST
Order of Merlin, 2nd Class
Points: 1608
~Harry's true love~ says:
WHAT!!! Hmmm, this is very interesting. I don't see why they would need them. I don't understand
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 12:21 PM EST
Muggle
Points: 64
blondebouncingferret says:
I read about the boy being in HBP in my local paper a few weeks ago (he's local). I just assumed he was one of the children Tom scared/scarred for life in the cave.
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 12:23 PM EST
Charms Mistress
(Moderator)
Points: 5162
Weesa says:
I thought that's what he said when I was watching but wouldn't know the phone rang just at that moment.
Wonder what the purpose of these twins will be....
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 12:42 PM EST
Squib
Points: 112
AranelAlasse says:
Hi again, everyone. I was too curious about this, so I had to go look for more info about it. Indeed, I was wrong, and the two children are actually not from the book. I found an interview with David Heyman, where he specifies that. http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2821&Itemid=99 (click on the "Click Here - David Heyman" link to see the video.) So I was interpreting "culled" wrongly. Weird.
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 1:03 PM EST
Head Girl
Points: 463
houses_unite says:
I was thinking that maybe the two new characters were from a memory. Dumbledore takes Harry through those memories in the pensive, they might have added another one.
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 1:28 PM EST
Witch
Points: 509
luna_moon says:
Now, I don't really mind when they change things a little. The book and the movie are two different things and I don't expect them to be identical. However, adding two characters (and red-headed twins at that)....I just hope they can pull it off without attracting the wrath of Potter fans everywhere. It could work, if done smartly...I guess we'll just have to see.
~Abby
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 1:38 PM EST
Head Girl
Points: 418
spunkygrl says:
I don't think they would introduce new characters to the movie without JKRs approval. There has to be a reason for it even if we don't see it right now. I think I will reserve judgement till I hear more.
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 1:44 PM EST
Student
Points: 267
HappyCthulhu says:
"There are 2 new characters in this next film that aren't in the book which we put in for atmosphere and mood which I think you'll like."
- David Heyman (interview)
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 1:49 PM EST
Student
Points: 267
HappyCthulhu says:
"There are 2 new characters in this next film that aren't in the book which we put in for atmosphere and mood which I think you'll like. I don't know if everything's done with them yet."
- David Heyman (interview)
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 1:50 PM EST
Order of Merlin, 2nd Class
Points: 1675
lissir10 says:
Who will they play? I can't think of it at all.. before I found out that one was a girl and the other was a boy I was thinking it could be a flash back on Fred and Geroge, but that makes no sense at all...
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 2:08 PM EST
Auror
Points: 2108
phoenix_feathers says:
Wow that's rather different... I wonder why it is that they are going to have two red-headed kids when they already have Gred and Forge?
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 3:22 PM EST
Order of Merlin, 3rd Class
Points: 1550
the_girl_who_lived89 says:
What is that supose to mean? Culled from the book...Well sooner or later we'll find out :)
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 3:33 PM EST
Points: 3
ssu says:
Is this her?
http://www.portkey.it/galleries/displayimage.php?album=186&pos=0
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 3:47 PM EST
Muggle
Points: 9
emmababy says:
culled means to
1. To pick out from others; select.
2. To gather; collect.
3. To remove rejected members or parts from (a herd, for example).
got it at dictionary.com
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 3:50 PM EST
Snape's Patronus
Points: 14986
Potions Mistress says:
...what?
That is...beyond stupid. I am agreeing with all you folks who have commented that this is a horrible idea. WHY can't the moviemakers stick to canon? I understand that they need to cut the movies down for time and clarity, and that that can involve combining scenes and cutting out secondary characters and plots, but new characters just for no reason? WHY? That is a little insulting to the book series and it also leaves less time for the actual book characters to get their thing done.
Posted Jul 10, 2007 at 3:51 PM EST
Back to top of page