HBO’s upcomingHarry Potterseries has been mired in controversy since it was announced. The series’ creator, JK Rowling, isone of the most influential transphobes in the world, and whilenobody is obligated to give up on an IP that means a lot to them just because its legacy has been marred, many have serious misgivings aboutsupporting media that puts money into her pockets.
One of its stars, Paapa Essiedu,recently signed an open letter supporting trans rights, sparking discourse about paying lip service to the community while profiting off the work of an avowed and vocal transphobe.
This is avery valid reason not to watch the HBO reboot, but I’m here to offer a different one: the first looks we’ve seen are incredibly uninspiring.
Why Does The Show Look Just Like The Movies?
TheGamer Editor-in-Chief Stacey Henley predicted in 2023 thatremaking Harry Potter at all would be a terrible idea. Obviously, from a profit-making perspective, it’s quite smart – Harry Potter is a part of the global consciousness and appeals to millennials with money (well, some of us have money, I guess) while being accessible to a new generation of kids.
But from a production standpoint, she argues, it’s quite stupid. The books vary in length, meaning that any television adaptation would inevitably have pacing issues. The movies are still popular, and any adaptation is likely to annoy fans because of what it leaves out, what it changes, and what it repeats. And, most presciently, she identified that the series is likely to look just like the movies.
It turns out that Stacey was right, at least from the first looks that HBO has shared of the show. HBO first shared a picture of Dominic McLaughlin in full costume as Harry Potter, complete with Hogwarts uniform, round glasses, and scar. He’s holding a film slate, and the post announced, “The HBO Original Harry Potter series is now in production.”
Anybody with a passing knowledge of the Harry Potter films will note that this actor has an uncanny resemblance to a young Daniel Radcliffe. The uniform looks pretty much exactly the same as it did in the movies. There is very little reinterpretation here, in terms of how Harry looks or in the costume design.
A few days later, HBO shared another behind-the-scenes look – this time at Nick Frost, who plays Hagrid in the series.
This post received far more criticism. Commenters said that the wig and beard looked unnatural, and many pointed out that it looked more like cosplay than an actual costume. That latter theme points to my argument: the show seems to be trying to emulate the costumes from the movies instead of reinterpreting the books. If you want to get pedantic about it, the books largely describe Hagrid as wearing handmade clothes, stitched together from animal skins. Neither the movie nor the show are entirely faithful to the books in this sense, but the show sure seems to be referencing the movies quite heavily.
Of All The Things You Could Do With Harry Potter, You Chose This?
All this to say, if the point of the HBO series was to adapt the books, why does it seem instead like it’s trying to remake the movies? An adaptation of something that’s already been adaptedcanstill be interesting and new – there are countless classic texts with countless reinterpretations, and many of them add something new and interesting.
The creativity comes in how a showrunner looks at a text and sees something that’s never been done before. There are countless adaptations of Shakespeare’s plays. The Wicked movies exist as an interpretation of a reinterpretation of a reinterpretation. HBO looked at Harry Potter and its rich world, ripe for a fresh look after years of established canon, and decided to make its characters look exactly the same?
I must implore the series to pick a struggle. You can be morally bankrupt, or you can be creatively bankrupt, but for god’s sake, you can’t be both.
