Harry Potter reboot

Re: New Generation; Perhaps, that is one of the justifications being used for Disney's live action adaptations of animated classics.

P S. WB had a gigantic hit with Game of Thrones, which demonstrated the virtues of miniseries for adaptation of novels. I suspect an LOTR series is tabled at the moment. So, that leaves Harry Potter. Which, let's face it, is probably the most binged film series of all time.
 
This seems like a big money grab and nothing more. The last movie came out just 12 years ago. Is Warner broke already?
It's not that uncommon. Spider-Man: 2002. Amazing Spider-Man: 2012 (10 years later), Spider-Man - Homecoming: 2017 (5 years later).

Part of that may be licensing. Agreements to license properties for work in other areas usually have a time limit. If you aren't doing anything with the property within the limit, then the rights can revert. FOX had rights to X-Men and Fantastic Four until 2019 when Disney assimilated FOX. And you saw crappy movies from FOX every so often because they didn't want the rights to lapse.
 
N
NoShip
So painfully true.....
A new version will catch those people and the next generation as it'll take that long to complete! So the kids that are 10 now and have parents as fans can watch it together, and then when its finished they'll be around 20, and it'll be fresh still for when they have their own kids.
That would be a real advantage of a TV series, allowing kids to grow up with it. They were able to do that with the books when they first came out, but now it's a problem that the later books are not really appropriate for the 9-12 year olds who can enjoy the earlier books.
 
It is much more cost-effective to make money from an IP you know is popular than a new one. Or that appears to be the prevalent line of thought anyway! And I guess it can often be true.

It’s also worth noting that Warner Bros is actually struggling financially.

It started when they merged with AT&T back in 2018, which resulted in the acclamation of AT&T’s debt at the time. They also merged with Discovery in 2022, acquiring even more debt. As of June of this year, the company was reportedly over 41 billion (with a b!) US dollars in the hole, with only about 4 billion dollars of cash on hand.

David Zaslav came in back in 2022 as the new CEO to clean things up. Since his arrival, countless ideas or projects have been absolutely massacred, streaming services have been culled and rendered into something almost unrecognizable, and works in progress or upcoming products are focused on profit first and foremost.

Their games division has pivoted towards heavily favoring “live-service” titles, which promote keeping play times high whilst providing a constant influx of new cosmetic purchases, resulting in revenue deriving from in-game shops. Entire films have been deleted, such as Coyote vs ACME or Joss’s Batgirl film, to save money. Other projects are unceremoniously dumped on the “Max” app, which has expanded beyond providing exclusively quality curated content to now having an entire smorgasbord of content (namely tons and tons of low-cost TLC and HGTV programs).

This Harry Potter reboot is a big attempt to further gain funds, I would imagine. Hogwarts Legacy proved the fan base is still there (massive success last year, even beating Call of Duty sales-wise if I recall properly), and their Harry Potter land(s) in Universal Studios are still wildly popular additions. After the complete abject failure of the DC cinematic universe and the critical and commercial fall from grace that Game of Thrones suffered from in later seasons, Harry Potter is their next big bastion of success.
 
After the complete abject failure of the DC cinematic universe and the critical and commercial fall from grace that Game of Thrones suffered from in later seasons, Harry Potter is their next big bastion of success.

Although, going by that, there seems to be a good chance of describing it as the next IP they are going to ruin.
 
I think Game of Thrones is technically back, people seemed to like HotD S1, and are willing to forgive S2. HBO has like six or so GOT spin offs in pre-production at any given time, with Dunk & Egg (series of short stories about a heroic Knight that takes place on really small scale.) So, they are having some success.

My understanding is that Joan would have grounds for terminating her contract with W-D if they wreck the commercial value of Harry Potter. Tolkien Enterprises, or Embracer, and GRRM may have similar options. DC Comics were made as works for hire, they usually own their IP outright. But, I would agree. They are getting desperate.

Of course, the best story would be the Marauders. A coming of age story set against a war where four dashing, yet morally grey teenage boys live and love over their short lives as a 1960s period piece.
 
John Lithgow has apparently confirmed to play Dumbledore. My trouble with him is whenever I hear his name I think Lord Farqua from Shrek!
 
John Lithgow has apparently confirmed to play Dumbledore. My trouble with him is whenever I hear his name I think Lord Farqua from Shrek!
I like him a lot, but can’t picture him as Dumbledore. For me he is either comedic or villainous.
 
Michelle Fairley as Professor McGonagall.

It would be a hard act to follow the actors in the films, even with their flaws all the adult actors had an amazing screen presence.

I also think that by law Pedro Pascal has to play a mentor to Harry (a special child) in some way.
 
I like him a lot, but can’t picture him as Dumbledore. For me he is either comedic or villainous.
I think that might be why I can see him in that role. Dumbledore is villainous in his early days, comedic later on, and also can be dark or troubled. I can see Lithgow doing all that. Only thing, I think a lot of fans would want British actors chosen.
 
I think that might be why I can see him in that role. Dumbledore is villainous in his early days, comedic later on, and also can be dark or troubled. I can see Lithgow doing all that. Only thing, I think a lot of fans would want British actors chosen.
I do think it should be a British cast, however Lithgow has done British characters before, so hopefully he will have a decent British accent.
 
I saw that Paapa Esseidu is confirmed as Snape, and I like that they’ve gone for someone younger (34).

While no one can compare to Alan Rickman both he, and the actors playing Harry’s parents, were always too old for their roles. I hope they go younger with flahbacks to the Potters as well.
 
I saw that Paapa Esseidu is confirmed as Snape, and I like that they’ve gone for someone younger (34).

While no one can compare to Alan Rickman both he, and the actors playing Harry’s parents, were always too old for their roles. I hope they go younger with flahbacks to the Potters as well.
I tire of all this stupid posturing in place of sensible casting. I don't actually have any objection to a black cast... or a mixed race cast... or even 'creative casting' but the man Esseidu is hot in a movie star way unless he's the kind who can go 'full ugly' he's just not going to be believable.

Please note that I'm black, and I love seeing when more black folks appear in entertainment... but just stuffing them in randomly is a disservice to black folks as well as to existing stories that have characters that are really strongly defined. Yes, JK could have been more diverse.

BTW, I could more easily see a black Dumbledore or a black version of McGonnagall or almost any of the other members of staff... because the dynamic of race would not play the way it will in a portrayal of someone like Snape who was TORMENTED by characters we are supposed to end up LIKING or even LOVING.

I don't want a series about Harry Potter to become about the racial torment of Snape.

Of course, Alan Rickman was attractive too... but I think there's a much longer stretch to make Esseidu look fugly. By the time Alan was playing the role, he was past his leading man days and he was able to look the part physically... as well as playing it. And the residual attractiveness gave his 'ugly' an 'Ugly-Glamour' that really works for the role... He's dynamic and kind of scary and even when he's ugly, he's kind of sexy. It takes a lot of actor and a lot of presence to pull that off!

I think there's stringy, not so attractive black actors who could probably believably play an unattractive man who creeps people out... without it being utterly about race (assuming Padfoot, Prongs et al are white). If they cast 4 white boys to go after a young black man, it will look like a race thing... There is plenty of class-ist and other prejudice in the HP world...

Casting someone black is not a problem for me. I loved having Kingsley who happened to be black (I can't honestly remember his race in the books - Whenever I read them, I see the actor who played him in the movies) because he INHABITED the character.

I don't know enough about the actor who is supposed to become the major 'object of hate' for both Harry and his father and his father's friends, but unless the TV cast is a lot more racially varied than the book or the movies, the Marauders picking on Snape will become about 4 privileged white kids picking on a poor black one... which... makes them even harder to redeem than the original version, maybe impossible.

Sirius, James and Remus are hard enough to like after seeing how they treated Snape in the original tale (I don't think Peter is ever likeable, he's a lickspittle from day one, all that changes is whose toady he is).

Peter and Snape are two sides of the same coin... both outsiders, both unlikeable, but one 'fits in' and the other grows a hostile demeanor and 'lashes out' (and eventually joins the 'rival' gang to find somewhere to belong, even if it's somewhere bad).

Mean kids can be screwed up and grow up into nicer people... racist mean kids... well that's a much heavier lift and unless the story is ABOUT that HUGE transformation, racist bullying becomes a much bigger and more front and center issue than 'mere' bullying.

(NOTE: Bullying not being remotely 'mere' for anyone who has considered, attempted or actually comitted suicide as a result. Not meant to minimize Bullying!!) I hate bullies.

I do agree that the parents of Harry were wrong in the movies and probably too old... The problem might have been that they didn't want to budget for 'expensive' 'real actors' with actual presence, so they got pallid characterless placeholders. Perhaps they should have asked Daniel Radcliffe's actual parents (assuming they resembled him/could have been made up to look enough like the book descriptions). Anyway not relevant now... we will see.

I really wish that we would get some new stories... there's so many great writers out there. Even a next gen of HP might be interesting if done right. In spite of their imperfections, I really do love Harry Potter the books, and (maybe i'm in the minority here?) but i mostly enjoyed the movies too... but maybe in 10 or 20 more years before a reboot? shrug.

If they'd had SMG for seven or eight great movies about Buffy after seven great books, I'm not sure I'd have wanted a TV show too...
 
Last edited:
T
thrasherpix
If it remains true to the story then a black Snape takes on a racist theme absent before, and the suits rarely think (or think evilly) about that. Suits know WHAT works, but not WHY, and it shows.
Taake
Taake
He is too attractive, on that I can agree, otherwise I have no strong feelings on the casting
Yes, there's a lot of talk online about this, how almost any other character could have been changed but Snape.

Neville would have been an easy one I feel to change race from white, or as you say any of the other teachers.

I know they aged up the characters in the films so that they were more in line with Alan Rickman, as they were supposed to all be the same age, so I am glad for younger castings.
 
T
thrasherpix
To be fair, no one is going to measure up to Alan Rickman. Whoever gets the role of Snape has my sympathy (though I doubt I'll watch it).
As a 60 something and one who had teachers of various ages over time, i am not married to 'younger casting' though it does make it less likely they'll have to replace someone because they die in real life of old age. 😛 I actually loved having Maggie Smith and really enjoyed Dumbledore as a man of age... because he feels as though he should be grandfatherly... (and if he were any younger, he'd be kind of creepy, not grandfatherly because of some of the choices he makes) If he were a young man of say 30 in WWII (1940) he would be older anyway... 70s in the 70s/80s and 80+s by the time Harry comes to school which i believe is the 1990s.

I never got the idea that McGonnagall was a spring chicken in the books. Maybe because she, like Snape and Kingsley have become so identifiable with their actors? The rest of the cast can be any age, IMO.

Snape is the only one who should would be youngish... He'd be the age of Harry's parents, so he'd be early 40s probably. Honestly, I think that Alan was playing such a dour, crotchety man that he did not look too old for the role, but I liked Alan's portrayal a lot.
 
Though it's meta, I find the idea humorous if Dumbledore was the one race swapped (or gender flipped, whatever) as he was already replaced (necessarily) in the original movies. Though it's unlikely I'll watch it, I'd be fine with this. (But ultimately it comes down to the writing, no matter who they swap.)

Still, I would rather have something original (which they can make diverse to their hearts content and unlikely to face backlash over it) than another once successful IP ruined by clueless suits.
 
Back
Top Bottom