Oh no you di'int, Daniel Radcliffe.

The former Harry Potter star, who's out promoting his latest film, 'The Woman in Black', told Radio Times he was disappointed ("miffed" as the Brits would say) that the final film in the franchise - 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2' - wasn't nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards.  Especially "miffed" when you consider another certain Best Picture nominee.

Radcliffe said:

I was watching 'Hugo' the other day and going, 'Why is this nominated?," the actor said.  "I don't think the Oscars like...kids' films, unless they're directed by Martin Scorsese."

Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences?  You just got served. (Albeit in a very proper, British manner.)

Is Daniel right?  Considering that 'Deathly Hallows' was critically-acclaimed and the top-grossing film of 2011, many would agree with his assertion that it's a stronger film that 'Hugo' or, say, the much-maligned 'Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close.'

So why do you think the Oscars snubbed 'Potter'?  Could it be that, at 130 minutes, it was too long?  Maybe they should've taken the advice of this video you can watch below (created by some 'Potter' fans), cut the story down to 60 seconds and submitted it as Best Live-Action Short Film.