Rumors are swirling around the UK that both Robert Pattinson and Rupert Grint are being eyed to play Prince Harry in an upcoming biopic directed by Peter Kosminsky (White Oleander). Now you might think that at 25 years of age, Prince Harry really hasn't lived the kind of life worthy of a big-screen biopic. Kosminsky, however, feels differently. On why he's attracted to the project, Kosminsky told the Telegraph the following: "His parents break up in the most spectacularly public way, his mother dies in the most tragic and, again, public way and everything is picked over. He's a man born to no role, the heir and the spare."
Harry is the younger of Prince Charles' two sons, and the one who's usually causing headlines – whether it's because he dressed as a Nazi for Halloween or because he decided to ditch University in order to join the military and serve in Afghanistan on the front lines. He's an interesting fellow to say the least, but part of me definitely gets a movie-of-the-week vibe here instead of envisioning all the fabulous big-screen possibilities.
Despite the rumors that both Pattinson and Grint are in the running for the role (I personally see the latter over the former, though the former would probably help sell more tickets), Kosminsky claims he won't think about casting until he (and the producers) have read the script. He also said that he wouldn't rule out an American playing the Prince (though I can imagine how a move like that might infuriate the British).
What do you think: Should Prince Harry be played by Robert Pattinson or Rupert Grint?
