TheHarry Potterfranchise, property ofJ. K. Rowlingand Warner Bros. Discovery, is proud to say that everything is business as usual, thank you very much. However, theHarry Potterfranchise isn’t exactly telling the truth. Despite a best-selling video game andthe promise of a new seven-season-long television series, the franchise hasn’t been in such a weird place ever since it was the star ofsome bizarre book burnings in the early 2000s. This time, however, it’s hard to point fingers and laugh at those asking people not to consume merch associated with the Wizarding World: as Rowling’s views on transgender rights become more and more bigoted, it has become clear to many fans that supporting her work may actually pose a threat to human rights all over the world. After all, the author is known for fundingtrans-exclusionary initiativesand for taking thecontinuous relevance of her work as a support of her views. Furthermore, she continues to beheavily involved in every Potter-related project that comes out.
Rowling has more than alienated a considerable part of her fanbase. Namely, she has alienated queer and queer-supportive fans that saw the story of the abused young boy who found out he was a wizard as a defense of a better, more tolerant world. And, yet, nostalgia for theHarry Potterfranchise is still going strong. Stores are still selling tons of merchandise related to the Boy-Who-Lived, and, alienated or not, many fans just can’t let go of the love they once had for Hogwarts and all its surroundings. This nostalgia is certainly one of the core reasons why Warner Bros. Discovery has decided to adapt Rowling’s seven original novels into a TV series,to be released over the span of a decade.
But is nostalgia really enough to get such an ambitious series off the ground? How much love is there really out there for new Potter projects? Is aHarry Potterreboot really what fans want from the franchise? And, in the end, does it even matter?
The Numbers of ‘Hogwarts Legacy’ and the ‘Fantastic Beasts’ Franchise Tell Two Very Different Stories
One thing that is important to understand about how theHarry Potterseries has managed to stay alive in the hearts and minds of its fans is that it never truly ended. Sure, the original saga’s last book,Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, came out in 2007. As for the movies, the last one to featureDaniel Radcliffeas the titular boy wizard,Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II, was released in 2011. However, Rowling has kept the franchise alive through the publishing of in-universe books, such asThe Tales of Beedle the Bard, and through thePottermorewebsite. Filled with stories, character descriptions, and personality quizzes that promise to sort readers into their Hogwarts houses or select their wands,Pottermorehas certainly done more than a little to keep the flame ofHarry Potterbright.
But the most well-remembered projects to come out of the franchise are its biggest enterprises: theFantastic Beasts and Where to Find Themmovie series and the recentHogwarts: Legacyvideo game. One of these tales is a success story. The other, not so much.
StarringEddie Redmayneas magizoologist Newt Scamander, theFantastic Beastsseries of movies was conceived as a prequel to theHarry Potterseries centering on the rise of dark wizard Gellert Grindelwald (Colin Farrell/Johnny Depp/Mads Mikkelsen). The first movie came out in 2016 and was generally well-received by critics and audiences alike. But due to problems that go from poor storytelling to questionable behavior by people in front of and behind the cameras,the second and third installments of the franchise didn’t reach the same level of success.Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledorehit a franchise low in the box office. Initially, the prequel franchise was supposed to be five movies-long, but, so far, there are no fourth or fifth movies on the horizon.
Hogwarts: Legacy, on the other hand, is considered a massive success for the games branch of Warner Bros. Discovery. The action RPG, in which fans play as a student in 19th century Hogwarts, was, as of February,the best-selling game of 2023, surpassing titles likeCall of Duty: Modern Warfare 2andFIFA 23. How the game reached this level of success is still anyone’s guess. Some will claim that it has better storytelling than theFantastic Beastssaga, while others will simply say that whatHarry Potterfans truly want is to go back to Hogwarts. There are still those that will claim that the boycott requests from transgender fans actually fueled the games sales, but that sounds more like victim-blaming than anything else. No matter which narrative you choose, the important thing is thatHogwarts: Legacyshowed that there is still a market for Potter-related things, as long as they have nothing to do with Newt Scamander.
RELATED:How to Watch the ‘Harry Potter’ Movies in Order (Chronologically or by Release Date)
Is a ‘Harry Potter’ Reboot What Fans Want?
But, that being said, is aHarry PotterTV reboot even what fans want? Ever since the saga first rose in popularity, fans have been begging for a sort of Expanded Universe. More specifically, Potterheads have been asking for a long time for a show or even just one measly moviebased on the Marauders. This hypothetical series would focus on the quartet formed by Harry’s father, James Potter (Adrian Rawlins), and his friends, Remus Lupin (David Thewlis), Sirius Black (Gary Oldman), and Peter Pettigrew (Timothy Spall). The story would follow them through their Hogwarts’ years and Lord Voldemort’s (Ralph Fiennes) subsequent first rise to power.
Other common requests include, again, a movie or a TV show about the foundation of Hogwarts or about the children of the series’ protagonists. This latter request was met a few years back when theHarry Potter and the Cursed Childstage play hit the theaterson the West End and Broadway. The show was nothing if not a hit, but, apparently, it wasn’t enough for it to be adapted to the screen. So far, at least, there are no plans for aHarry Potter and the Cursed Childfilm or TV version, even thoughsome names associated with the original movie franchisehave already made their interest in the play quite clear.
But if you take a tour of pre-2023Harry Potterdiscourse online, you would be hard-pressed to find any meaningfuldemands for a TV series based on the seven original books. And that’s because the books have been adapted into movies relatively recently, between the years of 2001 and 2011. TheHarry Pottersaga was a major theatrical success, with three of its eight films among the 100 highest-grossing of all time,according toBox Office Mojo.
Apart from the financial returns, the cast and the overall looks of the movies are a great part of currentHarry Potternostalgia. Whenever we imagine the Boy-Who-Lived, it’s Daniel Radcliffe’s young face that comes to mind. Professor Snape isAlan Rickman, Hagrid isRobbie Coltrane, and so on. Even though they aren’t film originals, recasting these roles feels a lot like recasting Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill): it feels wrong. These aren’t faceless characters like superheroes, but characters that have been ingrained with a very distinct appearance in the minds of viewers all over the world. One could argue that other kids book-to-movie franchises of the early 2000s, such asHis Dark MaterialsandA Series of Unfortunate Events, have been successfully adapted into TV shows, and you wouldn’t be wrong. However, none of these franchises came even close to the cultural juggernaut that was (and, to some extent, still is)Harry Potter. Furthermore, bothHis Dark MaterialsandA Series of Unfortunate Eventsnever made it past the first movie.
Is Nostalgia Really What Warner Bros. Discovery Is After?
So, with all that in mind, will aHarry PotterTV series actually be able to cash in on the franchise’s nostalgia factor? On one hand, there sure seems to be a market for stories set at Hogwarts, even with everything J.K. Rowling has done to alienate her fanbase. On the other, the nostalgia fans experience forHarry Potterisn’t just for Rowling’s books, but also for the movies directed byChris Columbus,Alfonso Cuarón,Mike Newell, andDavid Yates. An effort to replace the movies with another visual format doesn’t seem to be the right choice, at least, not as far as old-time fans are concerned.
But perhaps we’re being a little short-sighted about this whole affair. Perhaps Warner Bros. Discovery isn’t trying to cash in on nostalgia, but to create a whole new generation of Potterheads from scratch, captivating an audience that is still too young to fully grasp the implications of what Rowling has been saying online. An 11-year-old audience falling in love withHarry Potternowadays wouldn’t be that different from the manyEnder’s Gamefans that grew up to find out thatOrson Scott Cardis a raging homophobe. By the time the kids are old enough to come face to face with Rowling’s transphobia, they will have already spent buckets of money onPottermerch. And considering justhow vocal the franchise’s current face has been about defending the rights of trans people, well… It’s a painful conclusion, but, from a certain standpoint, changing the face of the franchise doesn’t seem that bad of an idea.
