TIME

Daniel Radcliffe Says He Probably Won’t Return As Harry Potter

Daniel Radcliffe
Daniel Radcliffe attends the American Theatre Wing's 68th Annual Tony Awards at Radio City Music Hall on June 8, 2014 in New York City. Bruce Glikas—FilmMagic

The star hasn't read the new story yet—but he will

Updated: 2:45 p.m. ET

While fans may have turned rabid Tuesday at the news of J.K. Rowling’s new Harry Potter story, they shouldn’t expect to see Daniel Radcliffe star in a film adaption anytime soon, according to the actor.

Radcliffe said Tuesday during a press event in New York he would probably not return to the big screen as Harry Potter despite the snapshot of grown-up characters published this week on Rowling’s website, Pottermore.

“My inclination is to say ‘no’ because I don’t think it’s even a hypothetical at the moment,” he said at the Television Critics Association summer press tour, according to The Hollywood Reporter. “What she’s written — and I haven’t read yet but I will — I understand it’s a very short piece.”

The former boy wizard added that the story is set when the characters are older than his current age. In the 1,500 word piece, Harry and his friends are in their 30’s, and the Boy Who Lived now has “a couple of threads of silver” in his hair. “He’s 12 years older than I am now,” Radcliffe said.

The new story, which Rowling timed to coincide with the World Cup in Brazil, is written as a gossip column in the Daily Prophet from infamous Harry Potter character Rita Skeeter. It tells all about the golden trio, as well as several other characters’ adult lives as they gather for the Quidditch World Cup.

On Wednesday, Radcliffe spoke to Extra about his thoughts on the new story. He emphasized that, at this point, he has no special knowledge and is watching just like the rest of the world to see what Rowling does with the characters.

But the star did take a jab at Skeeter and reassured audiences he believes Harry and Ginny are doing just fine.

“The idea that he’s having marital problems—if it’s like a Rita Skeeter report, then that’s probably nonsense anyway,” Radcliffe said. “So I’m sure they’re perfectly happily married.”

Watch the video below:

[THR]

 

TIME Television

Gone Girl Writer’s First Novel Is Heading to TV

Random House

The best-selling author's debut novel, Sharp Objects, is being made into a television series

As the world waits with bated breath for the big-screen adaptation of Gone Girl, which hits theaters in October, Gillian Flynn fans just got something else to look forward to: The best-selling author’s debut novel is heading to the small screen.

Entertainment Weekly reports that Entertainment One Television is in the process of adapting Flynn’s novel, Sharp Objects, into a one-hour serialized drama. The 2006 novel is a dark, psychological thriller in the vein of Gone Girl, about a journalist who is sent back to her home town in Missouri to report on the murders of two young girls. Flynn has signed on to executive produce the show, along with Jason Blum and Charles Layton, which is bound to make fans happy. Also a good sign is the fact that Buffy the Vampire Slayer’s Marti Noxon has agreed to write the script and will also serve as the series’ showrunner.

And let’s not forget that Flynn’s second novel, 2009’s Dark Places, is also being made into a film starring Charlize Theron. It will open in theaters on Sept. 1. All around, it’s a good year for Flynn — and her fans.

[EW]

 

TIME

Daily Mail Takes Down George Clooney Article After Actor Blasts it in Op-Ed

Omega Le Jardin Secret
Actor George Clooney arrives for the red carpet of Omega Le Jardin Secret dinner party on May 16, 2014 in Shanghai, China. Feng Li--Getty Images

The actor slammed the "Daily Mail" for a false story about his fiancee's family, prompting the publication to apologize and remove the piece

What a week for celebrity op-eds!

First, we have Taylor Swift opining on the future of the music industry for the Wall Street Journal and now we have none other than George Clooney sounding off in USA Today. The subject of Clooney’s op-ed? The Daily Mail, which Clooney essentially chews up and spits out. Clooney rages against a story in the publication that claimed his upcoming nuptials to human rights lawyer Amal Alamuddin was a major source of contention for his fiancée’s family, particularly her mother, Baria, who supposedly opposed their engagement on religious grounds.

Clooney writes:

It says Amal’s mother has been telling “half of Beirut” that she’s against the wedding. It says they joke about traditions in the Druze religion that end up with the death of the bride.

Let me repeat that: the death of the bride.

First of all, none of the story is factually true. Amal’s mother is not Druze. She has not been to Beirut since Amal and I have been dating, and she is in no way against the marriage.

Clooney goes on to write that an incorrect story about a celebrity isn’t the issue — as he’s apparently “used to the Daily Mail making up stories” about him — but that this particular story goes beyond celebrity gossip: “The irresponsibility, in this day and age, to exploit religious differences where none exist, is at the very least negligent and more appropriately dangerous.”

The actor, who is the son of retired broadcast journalist Nick Clooney, explains that he has respect for right to freedom of speech — and knows that it will interfere with his private life from time to time — but he seems to view the publication as far more sinister. He writes:

The Daily Mail, more than any other organization that calls itself news, has proved time and time again that facts make no difference in the articles they make up. And when they put my family and my friends in harm’s way, they cross far beyond just a laughable tabloid and into the arena of inciting violence.

For its part, the Daily Mail denies fabricating the story. In an email to TIME, a MailOnline spokesman said that the “story was not a fabrication but supplied in good faith by a reputable and trusted freelance journalist … However, we accept Mr. Clooney’s assurance that the story is inaccurate and we apologize to him, Miss Amal Alamuddin and her mother, Baria, for any distress caused. We have removed the article from our website and will be contacting Mr. Clooney’s representatives to discuss giving him the opportunity to set the record straight.”

Yet Clooney certainly isn’t the first person to strike back at the British publication, which was named the most widely read news website in the world in 2012 with upwards of 52 million visitors a month. Just a few months ago, Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling won a libel lawsuit against the paper; singer Elton John and business mogul Alan Sugar have also won libel suits against the Daily Mail.

And then there are those who have leveled their criticism specifically against the publication’s website, Mail Online, which traffics largely in celebrity gossip. The site’s “Femail” section, which tends to focus on women celebrities and their bodies and what they may or may not be wearing at any given moment they’re caught by the paparazzi, is known for being petty or cruel or demeaning.

Though criticism lobbed at the website’s “Femail” content doesn’t tend to center on whether the stories are factual or not, many do view them as destructive in another way. In 2012, Observer columnist Eva Wiseman wrote that she was partaking in a self-inflicted boycott of the Mail Online, because “I was boring myself with my constant outrage at the sidebar’s dissection of women, and worried that it was making me more judgy … As judgmental as the sidebar, whose camera is constantly focused on pop stars’ thighs.”

While it might be hard to reconcile the denunciations of the Daily Mail and its extreme popularity — again, 52 million visitors a month on the website — it appears as if Clooney has struck a fresh cord of outrage. Online and social media comments, including many from journalists and editors, are almost unanimously and forcefully in support of the actor. As Clooney himself notes, the Daily Mail “must be so very proud.”

TIME Television

David Letterman Walks Out During Joan Rivers Interview

This time, the actress got a taste of her own medicine

Just last week, Joan Rivers walked out of a live interview with CNN, frustrated with what she deemed “very judgmental, very nasty, very opinionated, very negative”questions.

But Tuesday night, it was David Letterman’s turn to walk out during an interview with the 81-year-old actress.

As the late night host teased Rivers for her on-camera behavior, he suggested that perhaps the whole affair was a PR stunt to promote Rivers’ new book, Diary of a Mad Diva. But Rivers said: “just the opposite.”

Watch the clip above for more on the exchange.

TIME Television

REVIEW: Halle Berry Stars in CBS’s Extant

CBS

This summer drama mashes up a lot of sci-fi premises we've seen before, but in a way that shows potential.

The first episode of Extant (CBS, Wednesdays) establishes with several quick cues that you are looking at the future. When astronaut Molly Woods (Halle Berry) washes up in the bathroom, she pulls up a news feed on the mirror. The garbage can outside her house is a transparent prism that compacts trash elegantly. Also, the show seems to posit an alternative universe in which CBS airs high-profile new dramas and they’re not about cops or lawyers.

That particular aspect of the near-term future has been ushered in by Under the Dome, the loopy but successful Stephen King adaptation that, now in its second season, has turned a small town in Maine into a menacing butterfly garden under glass. Now CBS is premiering Extant, a Steven Spielberg-produced joint about the eerie aftereffects of a long-term space mission; next summer, the network will air Zoo, a James Patterson thriller about a when-animals-attack pandemic. For the law-and-order-bound CBS, the summer season is like the sleepaway camp in The Interestings, a place where it can let its hair down and pretend to be a different, more adventurous network for a few weeks.

I’ve only seen one episode of Extant, but if that means we get more intriguing experiments like this in years to come, then long live the Dome. (I say this with the caveat that Under the Dome looked intriguing after one episode too.) Extant also has a high-concept mystery at its center: Molly has just returned from a 13-month mission on a space station, alone–yet she’s pregnant. But from the early looks of things, what’s driving Extant is not a single who-or-what’s-the-daddy mystery, but the show’s ideas.

Granted, most of those ideas are nothing new under–or rather orbiting–the sun. Molly’s predicament, explored through flashbacks to her lonely time working in space, has elements of 2001‘s austere spookiness, with a touch of Gravity and Solaris thrown in. There’s an element of high-tech corporate conspiracy that recalls Alien and any number of other sci-fi films. And the series’ compelling Earthbound plot is straight from Spielberg’s (and Stanley Kubrick’s) A.I.: the family Molly has returned to is her husband John (Goran Visnjic), a cybernetic scientist, and their son, or “son,” Ethan (Pierce Gagnon), an artificially intelligent, lifelike robot and the crowning achievement of the ambitious John’s career.

But the sci-fi mashup at least comes together promisingly. The first hour hints at eventually tying together forces involved in John’s research with Molly’s immaculate conception. But what’s really interesting in the restrained, pleasantly cool debut are the dynamics in the unusual Woods family. John, we eventually see, seems more fully accepting of having, and loving, a son who has a battery pack between his shoulder blades.

Ethan serves a research purpose; he’s an experiment in “teaching” service androids to socialize with humans by “giv[ing] them the human experience.” Even other scientists are skeptical; John, meanwhile, may be blinded to warning signs both by professional ambition and by paternal protectiveness: asked at a presentation if he has a plan to disable Ethan should something go wrong, he snaps, “Do you have a child?… Do you have a plan to kill her?” Molly, meanwhile, is clearly more dubious of how human, or safe, Ethan is, even as she works to bond with him and reconnect with her family. Spielberg handled this material wrenchingly in A.I., which may be the most emotionally disturbing movie he ever made; if a CBS series became nearly that raw, that would be something.

It’s way too soon to say whether this jumble works, but it’s promising that Extant‘s premiere seems confident enough to play it cool and mysterious rather than hammer us with holy-crap moments. Surprisingly for a TV vehicle for an Oscar winner, the pilot doesn’t give Berry a string of showy, actorly moments. Her performance is reserved, bordering on seeming a little shell-shocked, as Molly works on getting her Earth-legs back under her; the show’s direction is quiet and composed. And the teases we get about the possible cause of her pregnancy have the potential to become either a compelling enigma or starchild hooey.

In the end, Extant may simply be boldly going where many other sci-fi stories have gone before, all at once. But for a summer network drama, it’s at least charting a bit of a different course.

TIME movies

Google Says Search Results for D’Souza’s America Film Being Fixed

Premiere Of Lionsgate Films' "America" - Arrivals
Filmmaker Dinesh D'Souza attends the premiere of Lionsgate Films' 'America' at Regal Cinemas L.A. Live on June 30, 2014 in Los Angeles. Imeh Akpanudosen—Getty Images

But fixing conservative author Dinesh D’Souza’s film search results will take time

Google said Tuesday that problems with the search results for the film America, from conservative writer Dinesh D’Souza, are being remedied but that the fix will take some time.

Google search results for the film make it difficult to find theaters where the movie is showing, apparently confusing the recently-released film with D’Souza’s earlier movie 2016: Obama’s America, which was in theaters in 2012.

On Monday, D’Souza’s lawyer wrote Google demanding that the problem be fixed and asking if human error was involved in the mixup.

“Our systems have unfortunately confused the title of the movie America, because it’s a common term and appears in many movie titles,” a Google spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter on Tuesday. “We’ve updated the Knowledge Graph, our database that stores this type of information, but it will take some time to display showtimes and other details for this movie. We’re always working on improving our systems, and we appreciate the feedback.”

[The Hollywood Reporter]

TIME Trademark

John ‘the Duke’ Wayne’s Heirs Sue Duke U Over Booze Label

Chevrolet Presents Glen Campbell and The Musical West
John Wayne a.k.a. the Duke NBC—NBCU Photo Bank via Getty Images

The famous actor’s family has been tangling with the university over the use of Wayne’s nickname for years

The descendants of cowboy-movie icon John Wayne have sued Duke University over the school’s objection to their use of Wayne’s nickname, the Duke, on alcoholic beverages.

Last year, Duke University filed an objection with the U.S. Trademark Office after John Wayne Enterprises attempted to trademark all uses of the term Duke on alcoholic beverages except beer, according to the Hollywood Reporter.

In response, the family of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance has now sued Duke over the objection on the grounds that “Duke University is not and never has been in the business of producing, marketing, distributing, or selling alcohol,” according to the complaint. “Duke University does not own the word ‘Duke’ in all contexts for all purposes,” the family charges.

According to the family, John Wayne, who was born Marion Robert Morrison, got the nickname as a child from local firefighters in his Iowa hometown, who gave the kid that moniker because that was the name of his dog.

[THR]

TIME

Brazil’s Having A Bad Day

In just 30 minutes, Germany had virtually ensured that Brazil, the host country's own team, would be going home with their heads hanging down, scoring five back-to-back goals for a score of 0-5

TIME

Lindsay Lohan Should Win Her GTA Lawsuit

Lindsay Lohan in 2007; Lacey Jonas in 2014
Lindsay Lohan in 2007; Lacey Jonas in 2014 Clark Samuels—Startraks; Rockstar

I'm no legal expert, but I know my tabloid stars, and I see the evidence that Grand Theft Auto's Lacey Jonas shares some Lohan DNA

I don’t think anyone in their right mind would suggest that the lawsuit Lindsay Lohan filed last week against the makers of Grand Theft Auto isn’t annoying. Yes, it would be nice if Lindsay would go back to being an actual movie star, rather than wasting precious time insisting that her “unequivocal” similarity to Lacey Jonas, a minor character in Grand Theft Auto 5, entitles her to compensation. And yes it would be nice if this weren’t Lohan’s third similar lawsuit. But the fact is, like her or not, the 28-year-old actress/docu-drama subject/paparazzi bait might in fact have a bare, slightly bruised leg to stand on.

Lindsay Lohan is not someone you’d want taking care of your grandmother or even your guppy. But that’s not what’s in question here. What is—put so well in Forbes by intellectual property attorney Kim Landsman—is this: “How recognizable is Lindsay Lohan as the Lacey Jonas character? Would it be recognized specifically as her or as a generic, blond, bimbo actress?” It seems to me that the answers are a. very and b. yes.

Obviously there’s the fact that the hotel in the game, Gentry Manor, brings to mind Chateau Marmont, a place Lindsay has frequented. Then there’s the whole running away from the paparazzi thing that’s pretty Lilo-esque. But let’s get to the stuff that’s more exclusively her. First of all, Lacey’s voice. The way that she makes a declarative, despairing statement “This is a disaster!” and then rambles “Oh my God, I’m so f—ing fat. Oh my God! They cannot get a shot of me!” and then throws out a generally desperate and kind of unanswerable question “How’s my hair? Do I look cute?” Sorry, Rockstar — that is not a “generic” voice, or “generic” speech patterns. No one else sort of wails at the end of everything she says quite like Lohan. And if you don’t know what I mean, please enjoy this clip of Lohan on her reality show upbraiding her assistant for not getting her new keys made fast enough.

Then there are the outfits, which Lacey wears not only in the game but also in promotional material, that the lawsuit mentions explicitly and at great length as being Lohann-y. If I were the Lohan legal team I would forget about the stuff that sort of looks like Lohan would wear it — Lohan did not invent or perfect the short-short, high-heels, 800-necklace look — and concentrate instead on the image for Grand Theft Auto’s cover, which is a blonde model in a bikini giving the peace sign and taking a selfie. Model Shelby Welinder posed for the ads in 2012, but the Lohan photo that looks EXACTLY like it was taken in 2007. Also, if you said to three million people, “Hey, you know that picture of a blonde chick taking a selfie and giving the peace sign, in a bikini? Who is she?” two million of them would say “What?” but the other million would say “Lindsay Lohan,” and the number of people saying, ‘Oh, isn’t that Shelby Welinder?” well, that would be zero.

Finally, there’s Lacey’s personality. She’s demanding, yelling to the poor motorcycle racing protagonist she’s forced into giving her a ride “Go faster! Go faster.” But demanding is pretty basic. Lacey could just as well be channeling Mariah Carey. Or even Katherine Heigl, if Heigl weren’t more of a stay-at-home complainer, with no personality to rip off. If demanding is too broad a category to make GTA 5’s work “unequivocally” Lohan-inspired, then there’s the arrogance: Lacey shouts “I’m really famous!” and is generally appalled that the motorcyclist doesn’t know who she is. Only a few actors have been caught pulling the fame card, Lindsay among them. (Lindsay’s mother Dina even asked someone “Do you know who I am?”)

Lindsay Lohan might not be the classiest person around, but she’s special in other ways. Not everyone can say theyowe the Chateau Marmont $46,000. Not everyone can claim to be America’s sweetheart and then run over it all with a limo. And not everyone can lie to Oprah. There is only one Lindsay, and surely, at this point, she’s at least got a right to that.

Sarah Miller writes for NewYorker.com and The Hairpin, among other outlets, and has published two novels, Inside the Mind of Gideon Rayburn and The Other Girl.

TIME Books

How Harry Potter’s Characters Have Changed

Check in on 'the Boy Who Lived' to see how his thirties are shaping up

It’s only been seven years since J.K. Rowling finished Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, but the titular boy wizard would turn 34 this year, according to a new story by the Scottish author.

Rowling treated Potter fans in June when she penned dispatches for a 2014 Quidditch World Cup on her site Pottermore in Ginny Weasley’s voice, but it was Rita Skeeter who broke the big story on Tuesday.

Writing as her gossipy animagus journalist, Rowling follows Dumbledore’s Army as they watch the Quidditch World Cup, giving readers a glimpse into their favorite characters’ futures without so much as a crystal ball for divination.

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser