General Entertainment Harry Potter in the works at HBO. How quickly should major franchises be rebooted?

[TwinIon]

The long rumored Harry Potter HBO TV series seems to be moving along, and at this point I think it actually makes some sense. The only attempt on screen to grow the Potter franchise hasn’t been a success, and my understanding (I never read the books) is that there’s enough material to turn each book into a season of TV. It would re-tell a story that is one of the most successful film franchises of all time, but I have little personal doubt it would be a ratings hit, assuming it’s any good.

 

The broader question it brings to mind is how quickly (if ever) a mega franchise can or should be rebooted. My first instinct was that it’s far too soon, but after a quick google search reminded me that Spider-man, Batman, and James Bond were all among the highest grossing film franchises of all time, I re-considered. All three of those franchises had some of their greatest successes after a reboot, so maybe Potter could find similar success. My personal opinion is that there’s only one excellent Potter film, so there’s certainly room to improve.

 

Of course, while the three franchises I named above are all adaptations, there’s a marked difference in being adapted loosely from a whole array of source material, and a second direct adaptation of the same books. Batman may have kept losing his parents and Spider-man his uncle, but they had leagues of stories to pull from. Potter would be telling the exact same story in a different way.

 

 

So what do you all think? Is it too. Soon to reboot Potter? Has the new game shown us that the franchise should continue trying to outgrow the original story? Is there really any statute of limitations on telling the same story?

 

[TheLeon]

As much as I love the books and want to see them adapted “correctly”, I would be fine waiting longer. Love them or hate them, those movies were massive and probably still get a ton of play. Trying to directly adapt the books again at this point seems like a tall order. A spin-off would be much more enticing for me.  Too bad they burned a great potential TV series with Fantastic Beasts. That could have been a fun, fairly low stakes series about a guy traveling around the wizarding world, discovering and caring for magical creatures. Instead, they made those baffling movies. 

[Kal-El814]

I dunno that this would be a hit to the point that the juice would be worth the squeeze, honestly. The Fantastic Beasts franchise is potentially stalled. Hogwarts Legacy did jump out of the gates but I dunno that really made an impact? It's a weird time for the franchise.

[Bacon]

Since this is HBO, I'm assuming we'll see Dumbledor's saggy balls and McGonagall's tits

[Fizzzzle]

I'm honestly down for it.

 

You know what I would love for the series that the books couldn't do? Bottle episodes. Have a self contained flashback episode every season that tells a different story that reflects on Harry's story. 

 

1st season: an episode about Malfoy's childhood, or somehow an episode about Quirrel's travels (though I don't see how you could do that without spoiling the reveal)

2nd season: an episode about Lockhart's time at Hogwarts that juxtaposes how Lockhart craves exceptionality while Harry rejects it

3rd season: a flashback episode of the marauders

4th season: the Quidditch world cup

5th season: Regulus Black and Kreacher

 

A TV series has the opportunity to tell stories within the story that the books only hint at. The Last of Us has proven to me that you can truly make an epic series with episodes that are mostly their own self-contained stories wherein the overall plot doesn't move that much. The themes are more important to the storytelling, and being able to mirror what the actual main characters are going through can be very powerful.

[Jason]

2 hours ago, TwinIon said:

My personal opinion is that there’s only one excellent Potter film, so there’s certainly room to improve.

 

Is it

 

Spoiler

 

[Brick]

I've thought for a long time that a series on BBC (or yeah I guess HBO, but BBC would give a more authentic British feel) would be great, and suit the story better, but it does seem too soon, and Rowling has been so toxic that I would've hoped WB would just pull a Disney and buy the IP from her. 

[Keyser_Soze]

ITT Brick likes the authentic feel of a BBC

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

It’s been 12 years since the last mainline Harry Potter movie, and 22 years since the first movie. we’ve definitely seen shorter turnarounds into a reboot. 

[TheLeon]

13 hours ago, Fizzzzle said:

I'm honestly down for it.

 

You know what I would love for the series that the books couldn't do? Bottle episodes. Have a self contained flashback episode every season that tells a different story that reflects on Harry's story. 

 

1st season: an episode about Malfoy's childhood, or somehow an episode about Quirrel's travels (though I don't see how you could do that without spoiling the reveal)

2nd season: an episode about Lockhart's time at Hogwarts that juxtaposes how Lockhart craves exceptionality while Harry rejects it

3rd season: a flashback episode of the marauders

4th season: the Quidditch world cup

5th season: Regulus Black and Kreacher

 

A TV series has the opportunity to tell stories within the story that the books only hint at. The Last of Us has proven to me that you can truly make an epic series with episodes that are mostly their own self-contained stories wherein the overall plot doesn't move that much. The themes are more important to the storytelling, and being able to mirror what the actual main characters are going through can be very powerful.

I like this, and this would never happen, but I say if you’re going to retell the story of the books, make it entirely side stories. Do it like the Star Wars short story collection From a Certain Point of View, and follow the plot of the books from every perspective except our main characters. 

[Greatoneshere]

33 minutes ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

It’s been 12 years since the last mainline Harry Potter movie, and 22 years since the first movie. we’ve definitely seen shorter turnarounds into a reboot. 

 

Have you seen such turnarounds with a beloved, classic IP where the fans loved the original movies? This would be like remaking Lord of the Rings movies, which would be sacrilege, which is why Amazon didn't court fate by remaking LOTR and instead focused on the Second Age.

 

I have never cared about Harry Potter, so I don't care about a reboot or remake, but I'd definitely feel it is too soon if I was a fan. 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

Comic book franchises reboot more frequently. Even if people loved the current run. Spider-Man has had 3 runs in the same time frame. 
 

it’s not about whether anyone loves the movies. It’s about making money. 

[Fizzzzle]

I fucking LOVE Harry potter. I even have a Harry potter tattoo.

 

I also think the movies are mostly kind of shit.

 

Take John Williams out of the equation and you have Twilight with more established actors. Hell, at least two of the HP movies are actively really bad. And that's a shame. I grew up with the series. I'm tied to it. 

 

Maybe I'm just optimistic, but I think telling the story through a TV series is the way it always should have been done and the movies are kind of shit anyway so who really cares

 

It's definitely not like trying to remake Lord of the Rings. Those are some of the best movies ever made, there's no point trying to remake them. Watch Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and tell me it's not an absolute piece of shit. It is a very, very bad movie. Go ahead and remake it.

[Keyser_Soze]

49 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Have you seen such turnarounds with a beloved, classic IP where the fans loved the original movies? This would be like remaking Lord of the Rings movies, which would be sacrilege, which is why Amazon didn't court fate by remaking LOTR and instead focused on the Second Age.

 

I have never cared about Harry Potter, so I don't care about a reboot or remake, but I'd definitely feel it is too soon if I was a fan. 

 

I don't think anything is sacred with Harry Potter anymore. A reboot, a sequel, something related to it, people will eat it up. We saw it with Hogwarts Legacy and it would be the same thing for any movie released in the Harry Potter universe.

[Guest]

A Harry Potter TV series rebooting the books would be a juggernaut. And it probably would be much better than the movies were.

[Brian]

[CitizenVectron]

But will they be able to squeeze in more of her transphobia and antisemitism?

[Brick]

3 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

ITT Brick likes the authentic feel of a BBC

 

You son of a bitch lmao 

[Mercury33]

2 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Have you seen such turnarounds with a beloved, classic IP where the fans loved the original movies? This would be like remaking Lord of the Rings movies, which would be sacrilege, which is why Amazon didn't court fate by remaking LOTR and instead focused on the Second Age.

 

I have never cared about Harry Potter, so I don't care about a reboot or remake, but I'd definitely feel it is too soon if I was a fan. 

There’s a bit of a difference in that those movies(especially the extended editions) are near flawless adaptions of the books. You really can’t do much better. 
 

Harry Potter movies, while certainly beloved, are objectively bad adaptions of the books. I think Harry Potter fans would love to see a more accurate adaptation and it’s HBO, they’ll crush it. 

[Kal-El814]

1 hour ago, CitizenVectron said:

But will they be able to squeeze in more of her transphobia and antisemitism?

Yes.

[Greatoneshere]

2 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

I don't think anything is sacred with Harry Potter anymore. A reboot, a sequel, something related to it, people will eat it up. We saw it with Hogwarts Legacy and it would be the same thing for any movie released in the Harry Potter universe.

 

1 hour ago, Mercury33 said:

There’s a bit of a difference in that those movies(especially the extended editions) are near flawless adaptions of the books. You really can’t do much better. 
 

Harry Potter movies, while certainly beloved, are objectively bad adaptions of the books. I think Harry Potter fans would love to see a more accurate adaptation and it’s HBO, they’ll crush it. 

 

My wife is a huge Harry Potter fan and while I know most fans agree the movies didn't do a great job adapting the books in full, she really didn't care about the announcement. I do think the show will do gangbusters, my only argument was that it is too soon. Just cause something can make money or be successful doesn't mean it's not too soon. 

 

Everyone would tune in to a LOTR remake in TV form, there's plenty the movies changed or left out too, but I'd feel it was too soon. I'd watch it, but seeing such iconic characters played in such memorable ways in the films would throw me off since it's only been 20 years. 

 

Also games based on IP's doesn't mean anything, LOTR has been getting lots of games since 2003. A reboot TV show is a whole other league. I'm not against this, but we've barely let things simmer. 

[Moa]

The Harry Potter movies were perfectly cast and it’s going to be hard to come up with something that doesn’t feel like a cheap knock off of the original actors. Buuuuuut, the Harry Potter movies also sucked ass and the story could’ve been told much better. 
 

Inb4 the internet literally lights on fire when black Hermione happens. 

[GeneticBlueprint]

5 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

But will they be able to squeeze in more of her transphobia and antisemitism?

4x the runtime, 4x the antisemitism

[johnny]

they should do this and have more asian and black characters. i know it’s in the UK but damn there was like 4 black characters in the movies with hardly any presence. and 3 asians? cho chang and the patil twins? 

[Kal-El814]

1 hour ago, johnny said:

they should do this and have more asian and black characters. i know it’s in the UK but damn there was like 4 black characters in the movies with hardly any presence. and 3 asians? cho chang and the patil twins? 

 

South Asians? In England? Wizards I can accept, along with hooknosed, shekel obsessed Je... I mean goblins. More than 3 brown people? No.

[Keyser_Soze]

They should make Hermione black. At least Rowling is ok with that or at least she was 6 years ago.

[thewhyteboar]

So long as they keep the Nick Cave scene.

[Mercury33]

The casting for the movies was really good(except hermione and second dumbledore) but I think the only character that would have a real uphill climb to winning people over is whoever they cast for Snape. Good luck my dude. 
 

People underestimate fans willingness to accept new actors in rolls. As long as they’re good they’ll be accepted within the first few episodes. 

[Guest]

The average person does not care about recasting. At all. Or things be rebooted. Or most of the stuff we hand-wring over 😂 

[Moa]

3 hours ago, Mercury33 said:

The casting for the movies was really good(except hermione and second dumbledore) but I think the only character that would have a real uphill climb to winning people over is whoever they cast for Snape. Good luck my dude. 
 

People underestimate fans willingness to accept new actors in rolls. As long as they’re good they’ll be accepted within the first few episodes. 

 

This one's actually super easy.

 

Spoiler

 

[CastlevaniaNut18]

I was gonna say, I like Adam Driver for Snape. 
 

 

Harry’s parents and all their classmates should be casted younger, the way they were meant to be. No 50 year olds. 

[Fizzzzle]

Harry's parents were like 21 or 22 when they were killed. Sirius, Lupin and Snape were in their 30's while harry was in school. Sirius might look older because, y'know, psychological torture, but I didn't like how old they cast those roles. I'M the same age Lupin would have been when he became Harry's teacher, and I've done horrible things to my body, and I still look much younger than Lupin in the movies, let alone Snape.

 

That being said, I can't imagine anyone besides Alan Rickman being Snape. In the books, Snape commands the attention of a room without saying a word, and Rickman captured that perfectly. Same with Richard Harris.

 

Those are big shoes to fill.

 

But they should go younger for the casting this time around. Not necessarily for Dumbledore, he's like 100 years old when the story begins. He may have dabbled with the philosophers stone.

[Greatoneshere]

7 hours ago, sblfilms said:

The average person does not care about recasting. At all. Or things be rebooted. Or most of the stuff we hand-wring over 😂 

 

I agree, I was just saying what I'd feel if I was a fan. Like most things, the average person will do whatever.

[Kal-El814]

7 hours ago, sblfilms said:

The average person does not care about recasting. At all. Or things be rebooted. Or most of the stuff we hand-wring over 😂 

 

Oh yeah for sure.

 

I would say that some of the movies aren't great adaptations of their respective books, but they work fine as supplemental material. One of the things that I appreciate about how the books are written is the extent to which you feel that the Wizarding World sort of deliberately doesn't make sense. Arthur loves muggles and isn't a moron, but seems to not understand basic subtraction when he has to handle muggle money. In print this comes off as sort of charming, fish out of water sort of thing, in the movies he often seems stupid. A lot of the earlier books are sillier and goofier than the movies leaned into, and the later books are more angsty than the movies became.

 

That said, I think the last three movies are just... not good in general. I don't think Half Blood Prince works even a little bit at all as a movie, and the book is quite good.

 

Anyway. I think they caught lightning in a bottle with the cast of the movies AND with how long they ended up being able to hang onto them. I dunno they can stick that landing twice? It would be interesting to see how they did it. I don't think there's enough meat in the first three books to justify anywhere close to a season each,  but who knows.

[CastlevaniaNut18]

Half-Blood Prince was my favorite book in the series and they just made it a goofy teenage love fest for the movie. Blahhh.

 

I did enjoy the final two movies, though. Sure, there's stuff missing, but they worked for me. I loved the Battle of Hogwarts. Only thing I really hated was how Voldemort turned to ash in the end. The book was very specific on his death and for good reason. Oh, and Harry just snapping the Elder Wand in two and not fixing his own with it prior to returning it to Dumbledore's tomb. Just pointless changes that made for the worse.