Ginny was horribly casted, amirite?

Well, I don't think it was that she was horribly cast, but I don't she and Daniel had the chemistry to convey what Harry and Ginny were supposed to be.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

There really really wasn't anything else they could do, as they needed to cast her wayyy back when the first movie came out when she was only ten years old. At that point there was absolutely no way of figuring out if, ten years from then, she would have chemistry with Daniel Radcliffe, who at the time was also only 11. All they could go on was how she looked, and if she could act. I think it's better that they kept the actors constant throughout the movies rather than recasting for when the part became bigger.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

In my opinion, they shouldn't have left their relationship out in the 6th movie. It would have had time to build then.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

The past tense of "cast" is just "cast". Ginny was horribly cast. And I disagree. I think she has a lot of bad writing to work with and poor direction.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I agree, they should have cast(ed?) me!

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I only disagree with this because I have a weird hatred for Ginny in the books and so I was happy that she turned out so poorly in the movies.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Bonnie Wright <3

by Anonymous 13 years ago

"casted...?" Really?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

No even when she was a kid she was just a little too blahhh. But maybe thats how she was supposed to act.. But in the sixth and seventh movie it was just weird and couldve been done better.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I think the main problem is that she's had such a little part in the movies and thy screwed up her relationship with Harry. In the books, she's loud, funny and confident but in the movies she's just kinda there.

by Anonymous 13 years ago