J.K. Rowling won't adapt her "Harry Potter" short story to film because it's too short, Daniel Radcliffe explained to The New York Daily News.
The actor skyrocketed to fame at 12-years-old after taking on the role of Harry Potter in the multi-million dollar franchise. Despite not reading the author's latest short story, Radcliffe remains adamant he is no longer part of the franchise.
"I haven't read it yet, though I will," Radcliffe told the Daily News. "But my understanding is that it's very short, not worthy of adaptation to film."
Radcliffe added he wouldn't be the right age for the film adaptation, as the Potter in the story is about 12 years older than he his now.
The actor also revealed to MTV News back in 2010 Rowling claimed there would be no more "Harry Potter" novels.
"Basically, it amounted to the fact that she felt I had been very good in this Harry Potter film, and as a reward for that, she wasn't going to [write] any more Harry Potter [books]," Radcliffe told MTV News, according to Entertainment Wise.
"I'm sure she will be writing other books," he added. "But I can pretty much guarantee that Harry will not be a feature."
Many people assume Radcliffe is attempting to disassociate himself from the franchise. However, Radcliffe doesn't expect fans to forget his connection to the iconic role, according to the Daily News.
"People may think that's why," Radcliffe said. "But it was more that after playing the same character for such a long time, I'd look at actors like Ben Whishaw, who I admire, playing a variety of roles...So I thought I'd like to do it while the going is good.
Check out the 1,500 word short story about Harry Potter and his friends on the Pottermore website here.
