The Wall Street Journal: The roles you've played outside of Harry Potter don't have much in common with the boy wizard. Are you consciously looking for parts that are a departure from the role you're best known for?

Daniel Radcliffe: Realistically, if another seven-film fantasy series came along tomorrow I probably wouldn't do it. I don't think that would be the smartest career move in terms of separating myself and having people see me as an actor as opposed to a character.

WSJ: Your character in "My Boy Jack" enlists in the military at 17 and is forced to grow up quite quickly. Can you relate to that as a child actor?

Mr. Radcliffe: I think the difference between myself and Jack in that respect is that I grew up in an age where the idea and the concept of "teenager" existed. When Jack was around, it really didn't. You were either a child and in school, or an adult. And there was nothing in between really... But there are similarities in that we both had to grow up slightly faster than would be expected.

…I think in America you produce a very special breed of child actor. I see these kids at nine and ten and they're amazing, some of them. And I don't know how it happens. Dakota Fanning, for example… if she were physically older, she could sort of play anything. I didn't have that maturity at that age. In England, if you're a child actor, I think people don't expect you to be able to do it past age ten. It comes as a surprise if you're really interested in doing it aside from just getting rich or whatever.

WSJ: What types of film roles are you being offered these days?

Mr. Radcliffe: Right now it's very tricky because of Potter. I don't have a spare moment to make something until at least 2010 somewhere. I do the sixth Harry Potter…then I'm going to have a break, then I'm going to New York to do "Equus" on Broadway, which will be great. Then I'm going to do "Harry Potter 7" and by the time that's over I'll be 100 years old. I'm just kidding.