banner-spacer-08.gif

!! omg blog !!

music LOL gay politics movies tv
cute fail gossip art fashion candy
banner-spacer-08.gif
banner-spacer-05.gif banner-spacer-05.gif

« Previous entry: 'OMG, The Empress's New Clothes: Palin's Wardrobe'
x Back to homepage
x OMG, more nude male celebs!
» Next entry: 'OMG, he's drunk and shirtless and touching another shirtless guy: Miley Cyrus' Boyfriend'


!! OMG, naked Daniel Radcliffe video! !!


daniel-radcliffe-equus-pose.jpg

Finally someone was smart enough to take a proper video of Harry Potter star Daniel Radcliffe's nude performance in Equus on Broadway. And yes, he is 18 in case you were wondering.

Enjoy the NSFW video after the jump.

Loading the player...


(Thanks to CB for the video!)

(Click for more nude male celebs)


» READ THESE RELATED ENTRIES:
OMG, he's naked in 'Vogue': Daniel Radcliffe
OMG, manjungle: Daniel Radcliffe lets his grow wild
OMG, more naked Daniel Radcliffe
OMG, he's got the moves: Haggis the kitten
OMG, a glimpse into his future: Daniel Radcliffe to play a younger Jon Hamm


» posted by Frank on Friday, October 24, 2008
comments: 52 | category: Candy |


omg-post-separator.jpg


comments



I would love to see Daniel in that play - Even though I am straight - he has nice looking body that is sexy

» posted by True_Laker_Fan | August 24, 2012 2:37 AM
___________________

I love it.

» posted by flex faropaldino | July 13, 2012 1:20 AM
___________________

um... Well I thought Daniel Radcliffe was fit as! I just wanted to see him with his top off but came out with this! You must be a hell of a great actor to get naked on stage! Just think how many people would judge him for that or how many people saw is penis !

When was this play on??? It looks like it was around 2010 - 2011 because of how old he looks. I never really thought he would get naked on stage really he just didn't seem like that you know when you watch all those things on TV or youtube with him talking he just doesn't seem like the kinda guy that would do that!

I mean I've only ever seen him in Harry Potter years 1 - 8 so I've always thought of him as playing the main character who saves the day! I have to admit it's kinda weird to see him like that on stage!

I still think he's fit tho oh and Rupert Grint of course!!!

» posted by Unknown ??? | January 3, 2012 8:49 AM
___________________

He is a beautiful talented young man, and that is all I care about. My wife is an OB-Gyn and leaves circumcision decisions up to the parents. She said it is down to about 30% and there is no medical reason to do it.

» posted by Carroll A. Peterson | July 10, 2011 11:31 PM
___________________

I'm hot for him now.
Please love on me Dan.
o.o


I'VE LOVED YOU SINCE I WAS LIKE, TEN!

D=

» posted by Realistic_Dove | January 20, 2011 3:20 AM
___________________

I just sorta skimmed the comments on here and don't know why it turned into circumcision.

In the US, circumcision is the norm for "sanitary" reasons from a long time ago. Some of it makes a little sense; I guess, something could get trapped under foreskin and make into urethra later. I don't know.

I think the whole idea of uncut having better sex than cut makes a lot of sense. Think about it. The head is the most sensitive part. It's covered by this extra piece of skin, so it's not rubbing up against clothes or whatever. You cut off the skin and it's getting all kinds of stimulation it never would have had.

» posted by me | November 5, 2009 1:13 PM
___________________

Just fyi. It is true that there is one study that suggest that circumcision cuts down the chances of transmitting HIV a little. (not 90% like someone in this thread said)
But by now there are more studies that came to the conclusion that there is absolutely no difference between circumcised and uncircumcised males, regarding HIV-transmission.
So wear a condom and don't mutilate your childreen. They have a right to decide over their own body once they are old enough.

» posted by Miles | September 19, 2009 2:15 PM
___________________

daniel should play on horror movies, suspense movies and mystery movies, he would be good to be in them

» posted by MK | August 7, 2009 6:51 AM
___________________

This scene isn't about the nudity it's about the story. It is really sad how people have twisted this around in an extremely sick way.

» posted by GGC | May 4, 2009 7:04 PM
___________________

Actually, the word you're looking for is "cornification." And study after study has found nothing other than circumstantial (ooh- a near-pun) evidence of any impediment to sexual function due to circumcision. I'm against the procedure, myself, but strictly due to ethical considerations. None of the people I know who have had the procedure after infancy have reported any problems.
Since you haven't actually contradicted anything I said, I'm trying to figure out why you're being so high-and-mighty or calling me "ignorant." Cornification is not the "wearing away of nerves"- it's the build up of keratin tissue.
The whole post mainly seems like a long excuse to revive a dead topic and flash your asserted credentials.
Oh, and by the way, I too am a medical professional, but I learned a long time ago that being a doctor doesn't make anybody smarter or more correct, so I typically avoid pulling it out as a trump card, just as I never say to a kid, "When you're older, you'll understand." Facts is facts, no matter what your degree is in. And the facts are that, over and over, studies have found now preponderance of data to suggest that circumcized males are suffering in any way (except in the case of botched operations, of course.)
We now return you to your local programming.

» posted by AC Walker | May 2, 2009 2:09 PM
___________________

Wow, where to begin? I come here to see one of the most gorgeous males in all their glory and find this. The ignorance expressed here is quite amazing. In this blog, one person making assertions that are illiterate at best and another attacking one for one's ignorance with their own ignorance.

For your insight and information, circumcision, if one is not Jewish, is for presumed sanitary reasons as well as the old school thought that it would prevent excessive masturbation. Most doctors are now either indifferent towards it or are advising against it unless it is part of a religious act.

As to the sexual performance, circumcision does desensitize a man to some extent, which varies by person as does almost anything else. This is due to keratinization of the glans of the penis since the penis is exposed and abraded on a constant basis. The amount of keratinization and resulting desensitization depends upon the individual and their lifestyle.

And, yes, I am a medical professional. Why don't you both leave the criticism to someone who is actually trained?

» posted by in_love_with_daniel | May 2, 2009 4:50 AM
___________________

If Daithi is a doctor, I would fear a prescription from him. His writing skills are atrocious.

» posted by Grammar Doctor | December 16, 2008 6:34 PM
___________________

Incredible; D.Radcliffe's penis has caused a debate!!

» posted by rita | December 2, 2008 3:36 PM
___________________

For anyone who's seen this play, the fact that Dan is nude is the last thing on your mind..this scene is disturbing and haunting.

» posted by SoftObsidian74 | November 16, 2008 3:43 PM
___________________

What happened? The first time I watched the vid it was a MUCH longer clip. The girl was there; he was pretending to hump her. There was much more nudity as Daniel was running about. Now it is a 1 minute + clip with very little there. Hmmmmm? Puzzling.

» posted by Jon | November 14, 2008 10:10 AM
___________________

I need some pics of this show to see his clearly LOL

» posted by Karen | November 6, 2008 4:41 AM
___________________

Behold! Anyone notice that in all Dan's works he does "madness" and "distress" best?

» posted by thecortni | November 2, 2008 9:00 PM
___________________

Onto a completely different topic: Equus! It was an unbelievable great show. I think orchestra-house-left has the best views of Daniel's willy. Unfortunately, by the time it was unvieled I was so riveted by his performance that I ended up focusing on the story instead.

» posted by steve | November 1, 2008 9:48 PM
___________________

I agree with skyriven....save the argument over circumcision; behold the beauty of the boy

» posted by Todd C | October 27, 2008 11:47 PM
___________________

Oh, I almost forgot, "doctor"- even foreskin activists don't make the absurd claim that nerves are "worn away" in the glans after circumcision. There isn't any evidence of that- NONE. Some claim that the removal of the foreskin itself constitutes removal of nerve receptors, but once they're removed, they're removed- there's no further "wearing away" of anything once the act has been done. If people's nerves "wore away," "doctor," from use, then senior citizens would be walking around unable to pick things up due to the numbness in their hands (and yes, seniors do often have reduced reaction to stimulus, people, but that is because of blood flow issues, and diseases like diabetes, not due to nerve endings "wearing down.")

I will repeat once more- studies that show a definite increase or decrease in sexual pleasure after circumcision are strictly anecdotal- the ONLY people whose opinions matter are those who've had the procedure at a late enough stage in life to describe a difference- oddly, very few of those people seem to be the ones leading the foreskin reconstruction and anti-circumcision movements. Those movements are instead populated by people who are convinced that they are "better" for having a foreskin and people who are convinced that they "lost something" when they were circumcised and that somehow losing their foreskins is responsible for their traumatic lives. If I had a son tomorrow I would not get him circumcised because I think it should be his choice (plus, there is a statistically small chance that the operation could be botched.) But it has NOTHING to do with whether the procedure makes a man or his sex life "better" or "worse"- there is simply no evidence that that is the case and plenty of evidence that it is not. (And yes, if I had room I'd be happy to direct you to actual medical studies rather than anecdotal opinion.)
Bye bye, "doctor." If you're actually practicing on people with that level of knowledge of biology, I fear for them and your continued freedom.

» posted by AC Walker | October 27, 2008 11:24 AM
___________________

Okay, "Doctor." Since you're obviously a trained medical professional (do I really have to keep dignifying this fiction? Oh well, I'll go on...) you are aware that pain and pleasure can only be based on a scale of self-assessment. Meaning, a doctor has to rely on the patient to say where his pain (or in this case pleasure) falls along a self-described ten point scale. As a "doctor," you should know that the prescription of pain medications, for example, is based on this self-assessment, and not on the "doctor's" best guess as to how the patient "should" be feeling. So, since you're a "doctor" and not a mind-reader, I'm sure you'd be willing to admit that the ONLY people qualified to describe whether their sex is "better" or "worse" are people who've had a medical procedure that might possibly affect their sex lives.
Oh, and "doctor," are "spreading shit around" and "retarded practice" technical terms, or are you just an illiterate liar who is trying to win a stupid argument by puffing up his own credentials?

» posted by AC Walker | October 27, 2008 11:07 AM
___________________

this is just a comment for AC Walker, when a man is cut the glans is not protected so in cut men the nerves are worn away after not being protected hence a un-cut man does have better sex and his nerves in his glans are not damaged. i know this as i am a doctor. dont be spreading shit around u know nothing about. cut men's penis's are damaged hence why circumcision is the most retarded practice every performed for absolutely no reason. if ur born with it why do u's have to chop it off

» posted by daithi | October 27, 2008 9:26 AM
___________________

"All the people I know who saw Equus in London say that Daniel is circumcised. Yes, he's British - but his mother (Marcia Gresham) is Jewish."

What right does his mother have to mutilate his genitals just because she is Jewish?

» posted by Ryan | October 26, 2008 11:21 PM
___________________

we have a video of a nude Radcliffe, and all we can talk about is uncut vs cut?

Wow, I think some people need to get their priorities straight!

» posted by skyriven | October 26, 2008 9:01 PM
___________________

The people on both sides of this false "issue" need to get over themselves and quit with the hyperbole.

Anti-foreskin people- the majority of the world's men are uncircumcised, and as long as they know basic hygiene have no problems (though it is true recent studies are showing that circumcision reduces the risk of HIV infection, you should all be practicing safe sex anyway, so who cares?). They also have the security of knowing they didn't have a choice imposed upon them.
Anti-circumcision people: enough with the nonsense about having better sex because you have a foreskin- you have NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT unless you're into possessing bodies. Moreover, by taking the same superior attitude the ignorant anti-foreskin people are taking, you are inadvertantly or deliberately being Anti-Semitic, Anti-Muslim, and anti-much of America, the Philippines, Australia, and other countries where circumcision is or was recently the norm. Zip it.
The ONLY people qualified to talk about the sexual "differences' between being circumcised and not are those who have had the procedure at an age one can compare at. I know at least three- one Filipino who had it done at 13 (after he'd started masturbating) said the procedure was horrifying but has reported no difference in sexual sensation, one man who converted to Islam at 30 and likewise says that his sexual response has not changed for the worse, and one person who had medical issues with his foreskin at 23 and so is predictably happy with the results. It is true that the foreskin has a lot of nerve endings, but since foreskins are largely retracted during sex they don't seem to make a whole lot of difference.

You ALL need to be better informed, less hysterical, more polite, and less sensitive about your own equipment (or lack thereof.) Jesus- you know, there are REAL issues in the world. Go donate some money to No on Prop 8 if you really want to argue about something that MATTERS.

» posted by AC Walker | October 26, 2008 2:03 PM
___________________

MMMM i want to deep kiss his anus hole. Oh and circumcised is much better, apart from the obvious health benefits cut cocks are preferable to suck. No uncircumcised penis is going near my mouth, gross. Foreskins are ugly and moist and disgusting. Get it sorted.

» posted by Lord Baskerville | October 26, 2008 4:07 AM
___________________

John isn't an uninformed twat, he's a lying moron. "Every man he's been with who is uncut has had problems". I think the only men he's been with must have been in his head.

I'm uncut and I too have never had a single issue, nor have my brothers or any of the fellers I knew whilst growing up in my home country of England.

End of.

» posted by Ian M. Walker | October 26, 2008 2:30 AM
___________________

Dear John,
You have lots of arguments about uncircumsized men and how unsanitary it is. You mention all the uncircumsized men you have been with and seem quite able to compare them with circumsized men. So how many men have you been with and tell me what is more unsanitary, an uncircumsized penis or the number of men you have been with? You also reference your kid. Please do not tell me you have kids, because you have the market cornered on unclean.
Male genitalia in all its variety rules! I love small men and big men and cut men and uncut men and old men and young men (legal of course) and White men and Black men and Hispanic men and Korean men and Australian men and British men and ..........oh!,oh!,oh go away John!

» posted by t0m0 smith | October 25, 2008 7:00 PM
___________________

I haven't read all the comments on the circumcision debate, but it should be known: research shows that the removal of the foreskin reduces the threat of HIV infection 90%.

Get it done.

» posted by Matt | October 25, 2008 6:31 PM
___________________

All the people I know who saw Equus in London say that Daniel is circumcised. Yes, he's British - but his mother (Marcia Gresham) is Jewish.

» posted by circumcised_brit | October 25, 2008 9:59 AM
___________________

I try not to get in to these cut and uncut arguments but come on people. It's the only organ in the body that can be removed while it's in text condition. Medicaly it's not needed and has no proven good side other then looking "normal" in the US. And for the kids that get UTIs....wouldn't happen if someone changed a dipar once in a while. The forskin is fused to the head to pervent "waste" from damaging the sensitve nerve endings and it also help protect from infection. I myself have restored my forskin and now have 2 sons that are healthy and uncut :). None have had even one problem not one. The US should inform parents alittle more before they sign to have it done. I didn't even know there was a difference until 10th grade.

» posted by DrakeCovend | October 25, 2008 9:31 AM
___________________

John is an uninformed twat.

Natural is better, and I wish I were uncut too. John seems to be the one who needs to "get the fuck over it already".

» posted by gjack71 | October 25, 2008 3:02 AM
___________________

To comment on the first comment, you have NO clue if being uncut makes you have a better sexual experience. Just as I, as a person who is cut can't say that my sex life is better. Unless you go cut that nasty foreskin off and go have sex, quit making false statements. To comment on the cutting without consent comment, I would be pissed off if my parents didn't have me circumsized. And I actually have never slept with anyone, nor seen anyone who WASN'T circumsized. So maybe it's just some freak family thing of yours.....

» posted by Brad | October 25, 2008 1:46 AM
___________________

For those wondering. Yes, Daniel is cut. His mother is Jewish. Daniel is quoted stating that he is "very proud of being Jewish" but is not religious.

As Frank noted, for those of you who are sqeamish, this was taken at the Broadway production. Daniel is 19. How many nude models have you looked at, that are 19?

» posted by CB | October 25, 2008 12:23 AM
___________________

Yeah, because only the "gays" care about how good sex feels. Those straight frat boys don't care at all! Heh, you're funny, John.

His acting was very good. I have no idea what was going on, but I could tell the character was not in a good place.

» posted by Danielle | October 24, 2008 11:49 PM
___________________

Wow, I am amazed at how uninformed many people are... yes I am talking to you John, I am uncircumsized as are most of the men I know including my brothers and nephews, and not once... again, NOT once have any of us had such problems with being uncircumsized, yes i'm sure there are some that have, I'm not about to dismiss that altogther but if you are a civilized person who uses soap and water to bath and not just splash a lil water here and there and be done with it you shouldn't have such issues.
Also it is just wrong to multilate ones body without his consent, even more so when you find that those that have their penises intact experience more heightend sexual pleasure since their penis are more touch sensitive than one who has been cut, now i dont know what filthy pigs you hang with but considering your named after a toilet, i'll let you stupidity ride.

» posted by CleanPeen | October 24, 2008 10:12 PM
___________________

The play is very, very good and worth seeing in person. Radliffe and Mulgrew's performances are superb.

And yes, Daniel is average size and uncut.

» posted by Steve | October 24, 2008 9:40 PM
___________________

I almost didn't even focus on the nudity in this clip because of his intensely fantastic acting.

ALMOST. haha

But he really does seem to be doing an awesome job in this play.

» posted by hbblover | October 24, 2008 8:28 PM
___________________

Gee, that's funny, someone I know that saw it said he's NOT cut.

And John, I'm not gay. You obviously know nothing about circumcision. Do some research and then you can tell me how wonderful it is.

» posted by alf | October 24, 2008 8:04 PM
___________________

Can you make more videos or photos (with bigger zoom?) :P It's nice! :D

» posted by me | October 24, 2008 7:46 PM
___________________

ALF says the Brits are smarter than us for NOT cutting their boys? Every friend I have who has kids that decided they wanted to leave their sons "natural" and non-cut have all had to take multiple trips to the doctor for anything from urinary tract infections to skin infection, etc.. Why are the British smarter than us? Every guy I've been with who is uncircumsized has complained about the same things when they were growing up, not to mention the uncleanliness factor of some of the more lazier of the male population.
I guess the grass is always greener on the other side but I'd rather not put my kid through all the trips to the doctor than have him live his life by how good his penis feels during sex. Get the fuck over it already, this countries gays are obsessed with the head in their pants and they think with is as much as the one on their shoulders. The moment we stop putting so much emphesis on getting off in public bathrooms, bars, sex clubs and white parties perhaps the religious right wont have much to look down their noses at. I'm happy with my cut dick, no cheese please!

» posted by John | October 24, 2008 7:29 PM
___________________

If you have RealPlayer installed on your computer. You can right click on the video and then click on download. that works for any video in any format. including songs.

» posted by Hans | October 24, 2008 6:23 PM
___________________

Yeah, he's circumcised. I had on-stage seats last weekend. He's not packing huge heat, but he's very much average. He did a great job. And he seems like a great guy.

» posted by Marc | October 24, 2008 6:19 PM
___________________

we can now all embrace the inner pedophile in us after watching that.

» posted by darrell | October 24, 2008 6:07 PM
___________________

He's British, 99.99% chance he's not cut. They're smart enough not to cut their kids unlike us in the States.

» posted by alf | October 24, 2008 5:15 PM
___________________

It doesn't look like ha has anything to be embarrassed about, nor does it seem he has anything to brag about, especially, either. Can anyone finally settle whether he was circ'd or not?

It was a nice attempt, especially since whomever filmed it could have had his camera confiscated or even had legal trouble. Too bad you can't actually see much.
Anyone find any full-frontal shots of the recent opera production of the Fly? That guy is hot, and even the reviewers say he's hung....

» posted by AC Walker | October 24, 2008 1:01 PM
___________________

at loooong last ! thanks.
how can i save it onto my pc now ?

» posted by laurent | October 24, 2008 12:32 PM
___________________

Lovely and talented. Can't we clone him so there'd be enough for everyone??

» posted by J.P. | October 24, 2008 12:22 PM
___________________

Congratulations Frank - you have uncovered a need in me that I didn't know I had. Now I must find a cell phone with a zoom lens.

» posted by Alan down in Florida | October 24, 2008 12:11 PM
___________________

i just got to say... i love that accent.

» posted by rich | October 24, 2008 12:00 PM
___________________

you know.. its a smart move on his part i mean if he didnt do this for years to come he will always be known as harry potter. kinda like how debra messing will always be grace.

» posted by will | October 24, 2008 10:31 AM
___________________

The boy has talent, bits are too far away, but has potential!

» posted by d | October 24, 2008 10:31 AM
___________________

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _


add a new comment