Daniel Radcliffe’s parents initially rejected Harry Potter role for their son

Daniel Radcliffe was offered the role of Harry Potter after a chance meeting back in 2000, but his parents were not so keen on the idea.

Anyone who read J.K Rowling’s books before Harry Potter broke onto the big screen will agree Daniel Radcliffe was the picture-perfect lead.

The then 10-year old burst into the blockbuster realm in the titular role in the first film, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, back in 2001, scoring the part out of thousands of candidates.

But it may have never been the case if Warner Bros. didn’t woo Radcliffe’s parents, who weren’t keen on the idea of their young son filming away from their UK home for six months.

Radcliffe’s parents, Alan and Marcia, initially declined the opportunity, citing concerns production was going to film in Los Angeles.

Warner Bros. was forced to bargain by offering Radcliffe with a two-film contract, with shooting to take place in the UK. Of course, this eventually turned into a contract comprising eight astronomically successful films.

Fast forward two decades and Radcliffe is set to reunite with his co-stars for Harry Potter 20th Anniversary: Return to Hogwarts, which premieres express on Binge at 7pm on January 1.

The reunion special will see the gang return to the set in London for the first time since wrapping Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 more than 10 years ago.

Stream Harry Potter 20th Anniversary: Return to Hogwarts on BINGE January 1. New customers get a 14-day free trial. Sign up at binge.com.au

Daniel Radcliffe was only 10 when he won the role of Harry Potter. Picture: AP/Warner Brothers, Peter Mountain

A young, bright-eyed Radcliffe was first discovered by Harry Potter producer David Heyman and writer Steve Kloves sitting in a theatre in London in the summer of 2000.

Despite the fact he wasn’t even performing, the duo were immediately captivated by his presence.

“There sitting behind me was this boy with these big blue eyes. It was Dan Radcliffe,” Heyman told Los Angeles Times writer Geoff Boucher in 2009.

“I remember my first impressions … He was curious and funny and so energetic. There was real generosity too, and sweetness.

“But at the same time he was really voracious and with hunger for knowledge of whatever kind.”

Heyman was thrilled to spot Radcliffe, having been into a seven-month search for his lead without success.

He was far from a household name but Radcliffe had still notched up impressive experience in the 1999 BBC series David Copperfield, in which he played the child years in the title role.

Radcliffe was brought in for his Harry Potter audition and the decision was unanimous, with Rowling declaring at the time: “Having seen Dan Radcliffe screen test, I don’t think (director) Chris Columbus could have found a better Harry.”

Harry Potter director Christopher Columbus with actor Daniel Radcliffe in 2001.

Around the same time, Warner Bros. had also cast the then unknown British actors Emma Watson and Rupert Grint, who won the parts of Hermione Granger and Ron Weasley, at ages 10 and 11, respectively.

Heyman said their casting was “especially impressive in hindsight. The trio’s selection was arguably one of the best show-business decisions over the past decade … They have shown admirable grace and steadiness in the face of teen superstardom.”

Given the success of the books and the big-budget backing of Warner Bros, Radcliffe was thought to have made about $1.3 million for his first film.

But by the final film, the now 32-year-old pocketed a $26.5 million pay cheque – and a worthy spot in blockbuster history.

We think his parents are probably relieved they didn’t pass that one up.

Originally published as Daniel Radcliffe’s parents initially rejected Harry Potter role for their son