Fantasy A Harry Potter series for HBO?

[Primal Slayer]

People are going to be so confused and think a Harry Potter reboot series is coming about lol

 

[Detective Conan]

Will this be a spin-off of the movie franchise or will this show just retell the main story from the books again? Probably too early to tell.

 

[Gothamsknight]

Well I must say I'm curious about this. Hopefully it grabs more people than the Fantastic Beasts films.

 

[NHawk19]

Winx was about as generic as you could get and went outvof its way to skirt around its own source material.

I agree, but despite that it managed to get up to #1 on Netflix.

My point is that if this show can do that without the depth, imagine what a well done Potterverse could do.

 

[Primal Slayer]

I agree, but despite that it managed to get up to #1 on Netflix.

My point is that if this show can do that without the depth, imagine what a well done Potterverse could do.

It's brand new and people are checking it out. It isnt that surprising. You dont know what the show will bring you until you check it out.

 

[terry78]

We've been saying do this **** for years.

 

[writer0327]

Someone at HBO Max read this thread:

'Harry Potter' TV Series in Early Development at HBO Max - Variety

Will this be a spin-off of the movie franchise or will this show just retell the main story from the books again? Probably too early to tell.

I would hope they aren't insane enough to reboot the original books as a TV series. Just build upon the films by extending the universe with new stories, new characters, new adventures. Keep the possibility of Harry and Co returning as adults, but give us new stuff. That's what the people are looking for.

 

[Kirmit]

I know this isn’t uncommon but the movies really had nothing on the books and I actually find them quite hard to watch due to the bad acting and dull palette they used. A show could really explore the books as they should have been and to be honest I feel is more suited than movies. I’m one of the very few people who enjoyed the first movie the most, it felt the most magical, the actor’s performances weren’t so bland, it captured an exciting world and maintained the fun that the latter movies so dearly missed. I would hope a show would follow in the first movies steps but perhaps that wouldn’t be dark, gritty or have the teen angst to fit today’s world.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I know this isn’t uncommon but the movies really had nothing on the books and I actually find them quite hard to watch due to the bad acting and dull palette they used. A show could really explore the books as they should have been and to be honest I feel is more suited than movies. I’m one of the very few people who enjoyed the first movie the most, it felt the most magical, the actor’s performances weren’t so bland, it captured an exciting world and maintained the fun that the latter movies so dearly missed. I would hope a show would follow in the first movies steps but perhaps that wouldn’t be dark, gritty or have the teen angst to fit today’s world.

The first two films have the same palette. The last two movies had their own. The other 4 have all very different, distinct palettes. So that's 6 palettes over 8 movies.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I find it utterly fascinating that every time Harry Potter news comes up, we have to hear about how much the TERF is or is not involved. Makes it clear Warner knows she is toxic ooze.

 

[DarkKnight88]

I think the films are Wizard of Oz at this point. And like the Lord of the Rings films, there could be future adaptations and they may be more faithful to the books, but it doesn’t mean they’re going to be better. I think they should leave it alone.

The books are books. As the late great William Goldman said;

"You should not be literally faithful to the source material. It is in a different form, a form that does not have the camera... You must be totally faithful to the intention of the source material."

 

[DarthSkywalker]

JKR's controversial social commentary aside, I actually think it was a "good story/bad execution" situation with the Fantastic Beasts films. There's definitely a good story and interesting characters there, but she's not a screenwriter and she never should have been allowed to craft her scripts alone. Now that WB is stepping in and giving her some much needed help, I actually have high hopes for FB3.

But she's a novelist at the end of the day, she's written mostly good detective fiction post-HP, and that's her wheelhouse. That's all I'm saying. She can and should continue to add to the HP Universe as a novelist, not a TV or film screenwriter.

Who are the interesting characters? What is the good story?

Also interesting to write "being a bigot" as a "controversial social commentary".

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think the films are Wizard of Oz at this point. And like the Lord of the Rings films, there could be future adaptations and they may be more faithful to the books, but it doesn’t mean they’re going to be better. I think they should leave it alone.

The books are books. As the late great William Goldman said;

"You should not be literally faithful to the source material. It is in a different form, a form that does not have the camera... You must be totally faithful to the intention of the source material."

I loved the books, but I am one of the crazies who prefers the films. Not in every way of course. But when I think Potter, I think of those faces. All the "changes" they made for the films are what sticks in my head. How magic works in the films, sticks in my head. So while my favorite Harry Potter scene is the book version of the Department of Mysteries battle, it is the movies that rule my soul. Warts and all.

 

[writer0327]

Who are the interesting characters? What is the good story?

Also interesting to write "being a bigot" as a "controversial social commentary".

I think Newt Scamander, Tina, Kowalski, and Credence are well drawn, and I'm enjoying seeing the younger version of Dumbledore and Grindlewald dealing with their former relationship, and also delving into this mystery of why Dumbledore couldn't confront him directly.

And, just me, but I don't call people I don't personally know, or have not had personal conversations with, a bigot.

 

[OtherwiseKnownAs]

I think Newt Scamander, Tina, Kowalski, and Credence are well drawn, and I'm enjoying seeing the younger version of Dumbledore and Grindlewald dealing with their former relationship, and also delving into this mystery of why Dumbledore couldn't confront him directly.

And, just me, but I don't call people I don't personally know, or have not had personal conversations with, a bigot.

I'm going to say the vast majority of bigots in the world are people you don't know personally.

 

[MadVillainy]

I'm going to say the vast majority of bigots in the world are people you don't know personally.

Yeah I don't get what point was being made when they said that. That's nonsensical to me. Like what?

But I'll leave it alone

 

[writer0327]

I'm going to say the vast majority of bigots in the world are people you don't know personally.

Correct. And unless I know them personally, or have had a personal conversation with them, its not my place to confirm their bigotry.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think Newt Scamander, Tina, Kowalski, and Credence are well drawn, and I'm enjoying seeing the younger version of Dumbledore and Grindlewald dealing with their former relationship, and also delving into this mystery of why Dumbledore couldn't confront him directly.

And, just me, but I don't call people I don't personally know, or have not had personal conversations with, a bigot.

I think they are all pretty awful. Uninteresting caricatures, who find themselves in a two very different stories, forced together because they decided to turn a film about fantastic beasts into a backdoor pilot.

Correct. And unless I know them personally, or have had a personal conversation with them, its not my place to confirm their bigotry.

I feel safe in saying that even as you probably haven't met the current leader of the KKK, that you'd probably be able to confirm their bigotry.

With Rowling I will just say she confirmed her own bigotry with what she wrote. No one put words in her mouth. She gave it to us, the people.

 

[writer0327]

I think they are all pretty awful. Uninteresting caricatures, who find themselves in a two very different stories, forced together because they decided to turn a film about fantastic beasts into a backdoor pilot.


I feel safe in saying that even as you probably haven't met the current leader of the KKK, that you'd probably be able to confirm their bigotry.

With Rowling I will just say she confirmed her own bigotry with what she wrote. No one put words in her mouth. She gave it to us, the people.

Gotcha. We're all entitled to our opinions.

 

[Sithborg]

I think the fundamental difference here, between Rowling and Lucas, is that Rowling is an author whereas Lucas was a director. Star Wars, from the very beginning, was a work of movies, wherein every single movie was a collaborative effort. Lucas may be the name associated with the movie, but it wasn't his sole work even in the beginning, it was a team effort. To the extent that Star Wars became solely the product of one man, it was because of a general failing of Hollywood culture in terms of attribution. Harry Potter, by contrast, is a book series, and it absolutely was written by JK Rowling. Aside from the help of editors ( who are important but not nearly so as the vast number of people involved in any movie production ), the IP really is the creation and product of one single person.

Thus, the talk of "WB really needs to get Harry Potter away from Rowling", feels a lot less like a desire for new management in a business operation, and a lot more like "Lets take the property that belongs to someone and confiscate it for our own benefit". That is more than a little skeevy. "This person isn't doing what we want with a thing they own, so lets steal it from her!"

Harry Potter is Rowling's creation. She deserves all the profits and praise for it. I am not advocating for it to be taken away. The original books and the movies are a complete story. Let it rest there. You do not need to keep on expanding a franchise. Especially when doing so gives even larger loud speaker to a voice of hate. I know many who feel that continuing the Dune books was a big mistake.

Gotcha. We're all entitled to our opinions.

Its not opinion. She outright called trans women men who are cross dressing in order to sexually assault women. Not all sides of a debate are equally valid. Add in the fact that her transphobia has been included in her new books, yeah, there is concern of having her write new stuff for a younger, more receptive audience.

And to be frank, the competing nature of how far up her own ass Rowling is vs how much important it becomes to attempt to distance her from any project, working any more in this universe is going to be a mess.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

If you told me in the 00s that I would be coming to terms with George while wanting JK to disappear into a cave somewhere, I'd honestly not have believed you.

But yeah, I think it is important to recognize how obviously toxic Warner feels Rowling is. Her transphobe might fly in the UK (Hi BBC!), but after the last half a decade, it is going to be question that constantly comes up in the US wherever she is involved. These leaks come from Warner, and they are the ones who try to build walls where they might not even be. No TV show happens without her permission at least, and she is the kind of vain where she probably would want to be involved.

 

[writer0327]

Its not opinion. She outright called trans women men who are cross dressing in order to sexually assault women. Not all sides of a debate are equally valid. Add in the fact that her transphobia has been included in her new books, yeah, there is concern of having her write new stuff for a younger, more receptive audience.

And to be frank, the competing nature of how far up her own ass Rowling is vs how much important it becomes to attempt to distance her from any project, working any more in this universe is going to be a mess.

Fair enough. You folks seem pretty fired up in your genuine hatred of JK Rowling. I know she's made some comments that many deem atrocious and unforgivable. I get it. As a Potter fan I'm just hoping this doesn't detract from WB making good HP content. If they are smart, they'll ensure she doesn't inject any political opinions into her work so fans can just enjoy the content without getting beaten over the head with a political message.

 

[Green Goblin]

People calling JK Rowling a bigot seriously need to wise up. The Harry Potter books were very progressive for their day and as a member of Generation Z I can say I speak for many people when I say that their philosophy has greatly influenced the values which my generation generally hold.

 

[DarkKnight88]

Harry Potter is Rowling's creation. She deserves all the profits and praise for it. I am not advocating for it to be taken away. The original books and the movies are a complete story. Let it rest there. You do not need to keep on expanding a franchise.

Well, that's what it comes down to right there in the end. They want to have their cake and eat it too. WB/actors/producers can voice their disagreements with JK Rowling, but if they continue to profit from it, it's just empty words. WB will never stop milking this cash cow.

To be fair, even if George Lucas was found to have murdered puppies the past 30 years, Disney would release a statement how appalled they are while simultaneously announce 80 more Star Wars spinoffs.

 

[Sithborg]

People calling JK Rowling a bigot seriously need to wise up. The Harry Potter books were very progressive for their day and as a member of Generation Z I can say I speak for many people when I say that their philosophy has greatly influenced the values which my generation generally hold.

There is nothing remarkably progressive in the Harry Potter books. That's not to be dismissive of the books and their impact, but they aren't. They are good books, sure. But the story does not really tread that much new ground, much less progressive ground. She gets to credit for Gandalf, as it is clear from later stuff that she is uncomfortable actually going with him being gay.

She is a transphobic bigot. You cannot deny that.