Can HBO's ‘Harry Potter' Series Save Fantasy TV?
I've struggled with my feelings about the upcoming Harry Potter series currently in development at HBO. Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows: Part 2 released in 2011, which feels both incredibly recent and like some distant time from another world. Is it too soon for a reboot? Or does it make sense to create a new version of these stories in the hopes of bringing in a new generation of Potterverse fans?
Perhaps the answer to this question is that both things are true, and this is why I have such mixed feelings. Kids born in 2011 are 14-years-old now. They didn't grow up with the books and films in the same way we did. I was 16 when when Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone was published – a lifetime ago – just two years older than these kids are now. I was only 20 when the first movie hit theaters.
While it's easy to look at the reboot as a cash grab – and certainly Warner Bros hopes to make bundles of money and massively boost HBO Max subscriptions – there's also something exciting about the new format. Giving each book an entire season of breathing room means the novels can be adapted more faithfully than the films, with fewer cuts and changes to the source material. Modern technology and filmmaking can lend the stories more magic, at least from a technical standpoint, though obviously much rests on the quality of the scripts and direction. On the other hand, the movies were excellent for the most part, and we've come to associate all these characters with the actors who played them.
Casting is, of course, the biggest controversy so far, for both good and bad reasons. Still, the more I sit with all the choices, the less worried I become. Paapa Essiedu is certainly too good-looking to play Severus Snape, but he's a talented actor. It's possible that flashbacks with James Potter and the bullying element of the story will be more uncomfortable because he's black, but it's also possible that the racial undertones will lend more weight to the story. The same goes for Hermione and the 'mudblood' themes.
Speaking of which, the three kids they cast for the main roles (pictured above) look like great casting choices. They also have terrific names that would be at home in any Harry Potter story: Dominic McLaughlin will play the role of Harry Potter, Arabella Stanton will play Hermione Granger and Alastair Stout will play Ron Weasley. They cast an actual redhead for Ron! Eat your heart out Netflix's The Witcher. You are not forgiven for Triss Merigold.
Hopefully the internet surprises us all and is kind to these three young actors, who will undoubtedly face backlash from all sides, both because they are not the actors we know and love from the movies and because J.K. Rowling and her creations have become deeply controversial over the past decade – and because Arabella Stanton is not white.
The only real casting concern I have is John Lithgow as Dumbledore, and that's not because he isn't a terrific actor, but because he is old and we have many years of filming ahead of us. It would be a shame to have to recast the Hogwarts schoolmaster all over again. Still, Lithgow ought to make a great Albus Dumbledore. Hopefully HBO will bang out a new season every year and break this trend of two to three years between seasons.
All of this gets me, by way of rambling, to the question posed in the headline. Can this project save fantasy television?
I was thinking about this after the unfortunate cancellation of The Wheel Of Time at Amazon. In many ways, it was the best remaining epic fantasy series out there. Sure, we have House Of The Dragon, but after that show's second season I have such grave concerns with the direction of the show that I'm not even particularly excited for Season 3. I remain hopeful that they'll course correct, but what a snooze-fest it's become. As far as big-budget epic fantasy (that isn't animated) that leaves us with The Rings Of Power, perhaps the most disappointing television series ever made, geared squarely at the most casual audience. It has all the trappings of epic fantasy, of course, but none of the substance. It is Tolkien written by ChatGPT.
Only one fantasy series of note is in the offing, and it's yet another Game Of Thrones spinoff: A Knight Of The Seven Kingdoms, which is set to release next year, though with a slim six-episode first season. I'm beyond excited for this one, but it's looking awfully lonely. The raft of fantasy shows that followed in the wake of Game Of Thrones has all but disappeared after a long string of disappointments and cancellations.
Could a new Harry Potter series breathe new life into the fantasy genre, inspiring other streamers like Amazon and Netflix to invest again in chasing this particular dragon? The last time around was a bit of a letdown. Shadow and Bone was cancelled at Netflix after two seasons. The Dark Crystal: Age Of Resistance only survived for one. The Witcher has limped along three seasons but will end after its fourth and the recasting of Henry Cavill's Geralt of Rivia. Sci-fi has fared better, but the fantasy boom has all but ended unless Harry Potter can turn the tables. I wondered all the way back in 2011 in The Atlantic when fantasy's spell on pop culture would wear off. It appears we are on the precipice, though audiences seem at least as weary of comic book movies, Star Wars and countless other once-booming subgenres and franchises. The thrill isn't gone, but it's diminished.
When it comes to fantasy, perhaps it's for the best. The books are almost always better, after all. Our imaginations spin better and more magical worlds than even the best camera work and CGI. But like the Harry Potter show itself, I have mixed feelings. I'm willing to be convinced.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gov. Cox defends Utah Senate president
Utah Gov. Spencer Cox stood by state Senate President Stuart Adams on Thursday, defending the top lawmaker's decision not to disclose his personal connection to a law inspired by the criminal case of his granddaughter. During a tense exchange with reporters, Cox said there is no need for an investigation into Adams' behavior because he and Senate Majority Leader Kirk Cullimore, R-Draper, have openly stated the extent of their involvement in the law's passage. 'There's nothing to investigate,' Cox said. 'The facts of this are very, very clear.' What is the new law? The provision, which passed in 2024 as part of SB213, allows 18-year-old high school students to be charged as 17-year-olds if they engage in noncoercive sexual activity with teenagers who are 13. In a stated effort to keep the process fair, Adams did not tell legislators, except for Cullimore — the bill's primary sponsor — that his granddaughter was currently the defendant in a Davis County criminal case falling into that category. Cullimore has said that after Adams told him about his granddaughter's situation in 2023 he contacted her defense attorney, Cara Tangaro, to identify statutory changes to prevent high school students from being charged with child rape when no force was involved. The change was discussed in committee hearings and floor debates before passing as part of the 49-page criminal justice omnibus bill. The law did not apply retroactively to Adams' granddaughter, but it was referenced at her sentencing. Court observers disagree on the extent to which the law may have shaped the eventual plea bargain that let the granddaughter avoid a prison sentence and sex offender designation. 'I don't think there are any facts in dispute,' Cox said. 'He talked to the Senate majority leader. The Senate majority leader took that information and he proposed a piece of legislation.' Calls for Adam to resign State Sen. Nate Blouin, D-Salt Lake City, Utah Democratic Party Chair Brian King, and activist groups across the political spectrum have called on Adams to resign, alleging that he abused his power. But Cox said these criticisms are unfounded. This is the process taken by many pieces of legislation, the governor said, and by not disclosing his personal situation, including to Cox, Adams allowed lawmakers to focus on the policy's merits. 'Every single legislator has experiences in their life where they see something that they feel may be unjust, and that influences the way they bring legislation to the table,' Cox said. Cox pushed back against some legislators who have said the provision was snuck into the bill late in the process. It was part of the initial draft and was debated by stakeholders, Cox said, adding that those who say they didn't know about the provision are 'lying to you, or they're a terrible legislator.' Review will happen Cox repeatedly said he was 'grateful' that Adams had not told him 'this was impacting someone in his family' because it may have changed how he 'reacted to the bill.' But Cox said he and others now have a chance to revisit the legislation if needed. On Friday, Utah House Speaker Mike Schultz announced the creation of a working group of policy experts to 'review' SB213 and analyze state laws related to unlawful sexual activity among high school students. In an interview with Deseret News and last week, Adams said he had no participation in the drafting of the provision, or its placement in SB213, and said the way the bill became law 'was done ethically and morally perfect.' Cox said on Thursday that Adams made the right call by staying out of the legislative process as much as he could as it related to the provision — even if it was initiated by his concerns tied to a family connection. 'I think it was appropriate for the top person in the Senate not to weigh in on this bill, which is exactly what happened,' Cox told reporters. 'He did not weigh in on this bill — I can only imagine what you would have written if he had.' Play Farm Merge Valley
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration not eyeing equity in companies that are increasing US investment, WSJ reports
(Reuters) -The Trump administration is considering taking equity stakes in companies receiving funds from the 2022 CHIPS Act but has no plans to seek shares in bigger semiconductor firms that are increasing their U.S. investments, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday, citing a government official. The development follows comments made by U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who on Tuesday said the government is continuing to work on the possibility of taking a 10% stake in troubled chipmaker Intel. However, the administration does not intend to take equity stakes in companies like TSMC, which are ramping up investment, the official told the Journal. Businesses not increasing their commitments may need to offer equity to the government in exchange for subsidies. "The Commerce Department is not looking to take equity from TSMC and Micron," the official told WSJ. TSMC executives have already had discussions about giving back their subsidies if the administration asks to become a shareholder, according to the report. The White House and TSMC did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment. TSMC, which counts Nvidia and Apple as key clients, announced plans for a $100 billion investment in the United States during an event with President Donald Trump at the White House in March. This investment is in addition to $65 billion committed for three manufacturing facilities in the state of Arizona. The U.S. Commerce Department, which oversees the $52.7 billion CHIPS Act, formally known as the CHIPS and Science Act, late last year finalized subsidies of $6.6 billion for TSMC to produce semiconductors in the United States. Besides Intel, Micron, TSMC and Samsung were among the biggest recipients of CHIPS Act funding. In the past, the U.S. government has taken stakes in companies during periods of economic uncertainty to provide financial support and restore confidence. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'It's alarming': Education Department revokes guidance on English learning services
The U.S. Education Department has rescinded critical guidance to schools regarding how they provide English language learning services for roughly 5 million students in U.S. schools. The Education Department on Tuesday rescinded a 2015 Dear Colleague letter on its website, which served as a guide for school districts that are serving English learners to ensure they're providing adequate resources to their students under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In a statement to ABC News, the Education Department said the document was "overly prescriptive" and that it micro-managed states. MORE: Immigrant families fear Trump's deportations as children return to school "States have vastly different needs for this important population of students and are best equipped to determine how best to educate these students while following all applicable federal laws," the department said in the statement. The document is still available online for "historical purposes only," according to a notice. The Washington Post was the first to report the guidance had been rescinded. Advocates worry the decision removes federal oversight and accountability, which could lead to school districts opting to discriminate against English learners. Despite those concerns, removing the guidance does not strip resources from schools nor does it alter state curriculums, which are handled by state and local agencies. Roxanne Garza, director of higher education policy at the Education Trust, suggested the move could further the fears of immigrant students wary of returning to school amid the Trump administration's measures to curb illegal migration. "I think it could add to the overall feeling of fear -- like making these people, these families, feel like they don't belong in their communities." MORE: Education leaders split on how Department of Education cuts will affect families Montserrat Garibay, former assistant deputy secretary and director of the Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA) during the Biden administration, equated the now-rescinded English-learners document to the Bible for English language instructors. During her tenure, she said the letter was instrumental to her office in providing resources to the students who needed it most. Garibay, who said nearly three quarters of students in English Language Acquisition programming are U.S. citizens, argued the move could have a lasting impact if it results in scaled-back resources. "These are children who eventually are going to be paying our Medicare and Medicaid, right? Our Social Security, because they are U.S. citizens. And it's outrageous that we are not providing them with the resources that they need to be successful in the 21st century." Garibay also said lifting the long-standing guidance appears to fly in the face of an executive order Trump signed earlier this year designating English as the official language of the United States. Education advocates decried the agency's decision. MORE: Trump admin live updates: US, European Union announce 'Framework Agreement' on trade ImmSchools Co-Founder Viridiana Carrizales told ABC News "It's alarming because, you know, it feels like this administration is stripping away every right, every protection, funding, access to resources etc. that are so critical for those 5 million students in the country who are learning English." Carrizales, whose organization partners with school districts to create more welcoming and safe schools for K-12 immigrant students, said the recent move is a significant shift for classroom educators because immigrant protections, overall, are "diminishing." "We're hearing a lot more concerns from educators themselves, who're trying to figure out how they can meet and support this population when their resources and protections are being taken away," she said. Anne Kelsey, senior policy analyst for disability rights at the Young Center for Immigrant Children's Rights, argued the decision will harm immigrant children and families. "Language access is a fundamental right that builds safer, smarter, and more connected communities, and ensures children can receive a full and fair education while keeping their parents actively involved," Kelsey wrote in a statement to ABC News, adding "These programs welcome parents and families fully into the school community and we know it leads to stronger educational outcomes for students." The effort to return education responsibilities and decisions to the states is arguably President Donald Trump's top K-12 education priority. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon kicked off her 50-state "Returning Education to the States" tour last week.
