Harry Potter TV Series in the works

[mrbellamy 6,287]

The first season is a bigger task than it might seem because the whole thing is about introducing Harry to a world he's never seen before. The first movie had the advantage of actually doing that to the audience, whereas it will be hard to avoid deja vu. There's enough remaining even in the early books that there will be some cool stuff they can do for the first time, but it also has to have satisfying covers of the greatest hits...

 

If they can make this feel surprising and worth anticipating every season and preserve continuity without ruining the kids' lives, my hat will be off to them because the odds are stacked against this going as planned and there's no real reason to do this if it's not clear early on that it'll be a huge improvement. And for all their flaws, the movies set a pretty high bar. 

[Pieter Boelen 740]

2 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

-Haiku by Pieter Boelen

 

 

I put white lines after every sentence to force myself to be short.

Does kind-of make my posts look like poems.

[mrbellamy 6,287]

Pieter? More like Poeter

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

9 hours ago, Pieter Boelen said:

I also worry about the art design.

To set itself apart from the movies, it needs to look different.

But the Hogwarts we have is already absolutely iconic!

How are they supposed to improve on that??

 

They should stick to the description of Hogwarts in the book I reckon - aesthetically the film castle is beautiful but I always imagined the real Hogwarts as a little more ramshackle. Not quite the Weasley's house, but still not as graceful as the film; kind of like a fortress with towers coming out of it in not-quite-right ways. It should look as if it was made with magic and not from human engineering. The book version of the castle is much smaller as well, as there's only around 850 students; realistically the film version would feel perpetually empty with that number of students spread over its enormous grounds.

 

The biggest challenge is giving the castle an iconic silhouette, which is something the film version did perfectly.

[Holko 9,529]

43 minutes ago, Docteur Qui said:

 

They should stick to the description of Hogwarts in the book I reckon - aesthetically the film castle is beautiful but I always imagined the real Hogwarts as a little more ramshackle. Not quite the Weasley's house, but still not as graceful as the film; kind of like a fortress with towers coming out of it in not-quite-right ways. It should look as if it was made with magic and not from human engineering. The book version of the castle is much smaller as well, as there's only around 850 students; realistically the film version would feel perpetually empty with that number of students spread over its enormous grounds.

 

The biggest challenge is giving the castle an iconic silhouette, which is something the film version did perfectly.

I always thought the interior was a bit dull in comparison too, and too mechanical/logical in the one place they tried to be magical, the invented moving stairs. Same with Hogwarts Legacy.

Cuarón got it the most right with the portrait gallery and by making it busy and full of life! And with the rickety wooden bridge. In the book there are tapestries, secret passages behind them, suits of armor Peeves can hide in, tons of staircases, some of which lead somewhere different on a random day of the week, a step on a staircase you have to remember to skip or your foot will get stuck in it... they never had enough fun with it! Just go full British fairytale absurdist! Make it, you know, magical?

[bollemanneke 3,349]

9 hours ago, mrbellamy said:

The first season is a bigger task than it might seem because the whole thing is about introducing Harry to a world he's never seen before. The first movie had the advantage of actually doing that to the audience, whereas it will be hard to avoid deja vu. There's enough remaining even in the early books that there will be some cool stuff they can do for the first time, but it also has to have satisfying covers of the greatest hits...

 

If they can make this feel surprising and worth anticipating every season and preserve continuity without ruining the kids' lives, my hat will be off to them because the odds are stacked against this going as planned and there's no real reason to do this if it's not clear early on that it'll be a huge improvement. And for all their flaws, the movies set a pretty high bar. 

But we already know everything, we're not going to be surprised I think, whatever they try. I'm much more interested in them filling gaps that the movies left. Re-reading the series and just started Half-Blood Prince. Man, they have stuff to rectify in that one. Such a cheery book and such a dull film.

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

21 hours ago, Holko said:

I always thought the interior was a bit dull in comparison too, and too mechanical/logical in the one place they tried to be magical, the invented moving stairs. Same with Hogwarts Legacy.

Cuarón got it the most right with the portrait gallery and by making it busy and full of life! And with the rickety wooden bridge. In the book there are tapestries, secret passages behind them, suits of armor Peeves can hide in, tons of staircases, some of which lead somewhere different on a random day of the week, a step on a staircase you have to remember to skip or your foot will get stuck in it... they never had enough fun with it! Just go full British fairytale absurdist! Make it, you know, magical?

 

I feel the same way about virtually all of the Wizarding World as portrayed in the films post PoA. Instead of absurdist, magical, interesting architecture we just get... retro real-world buildings. The Ministry of Magic is deliberately modelled after the London and Moscow undergrounds and it shows - on one hand I see how suggesting a time and place can be effective visual storytelling, but it also contradicts the social structure of the magical society as it's portrayed in the books. The buildings are supposed to be weird - most witches and wizards look down on Muggles (whether that's affectionately or sinisterly) so it doesn't make much sense that their aesthetic is virtually the same. It's the same with the clothing/robes - they're supposed to be flamboyant but in the films they're either nonexistent or just lightly tailored suits/variations on Muggle fashion.

 

Don't get me started on the portrayal of actual magic/spells. As @Holko pointed out everything's strangely mechanical and logical when it should be bizarre and absurd. We never see any interesting spells or charms, especially from GoF onwards - it's all just generic jets of light, shields and explosions. Yates is squarely responsible IMO, for going with the "realistic, grounded and gritty" aesthetic that dominates the franchise. I hope the show goes to someone with vision and flair, someone weird - imagine Terry Gilliam (who Rowling originally wanted to direct) producing this show, it would be amazing!

[Richard Penna 3,694]

I think part of the reason I didn't like the later films much is exactly what you detailed - everything is cold, clinical and modelled over architecture we recognise. Potter was never that for me from the books - it was surprising, unpredictable, with rooms that seemed to go on forever and a sense that if you stepped on the wrong thing, the floor would collapse like Indy, or inanimate objects that started talking to you. Almost a sense that no one, not teachers, not Dumbledore really knew where everything was, and they'd have to cancel potions until tomorrow because the room's disappeared...

 

The first film was actually a bit disappointing in that respect as well. They shot the interiors at a couple of Cathedrals in part iirc, and it looks it. It needs to look like a huge posh boarding school but where everything's gone a bit strange and the set designer has taken inspiration from the Tardis, i.e. bigger on the inside  

 

I Guillermo Del Toro version would be interesting, after Pan's Labyrinth, one of the most imaginative films I've ever seen.

[Datameister 2,044]

Yeah, early on, they saved money by shooting a lot of Hogwarts interiors and exteriors at Lacock Abbey, Alnwick Castle, Durham Cathedral, Gloucester Cathedral, Oxford, etc. As the series went on, they were able to afford more sets, and the location shoots dwindled. But either way, the castle is very different in the films than in the books.

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

Definitely in the minority here, but I liked the Yates films quite a bit. In fact I like the look of all these films across the board, and IMO they really nailed, for the most part, the aesthetic and casting in all eight entries.

 

I think there's definitely an argument to be made that Giliam or especially Del Toro would both make an interesting Potter film. But had Gilliam done the first one, I'm frankly not sure it would have been anywhere near as commercially successful. Columbus, in doing a fairly straight forward, almost "generic" adaptation, really set a foundation that others could build on. There's value in that. Gilliam would have made a quirky, weird movie  that I'm not sure the series needed at that point. There's no way Gilliam would make a film so faithful to the book, and that's what you needed for the first entry, to establish credibility with Rowling's legions of fans. In any event, WB was certainly aiming for something with much broader appeal than what Gilliam would have delivered.

 

On the other hand, Del Toro sensibilities would have made him an excellent choice for Chamber of Secrets, and had he done so I believe it would be regarded alongside Prisoner of Azkaban as an artistic standout in the series. Not only as part of the series, but like Cuarón's film, an excellent movie in and of itself. 

 

 

 

[Alex 2,835]

I think Del Toro would have been a good choice for GOF as well.

 

They should have broken the bank to bring back Cuáron back for HBP.

 

[Richard Penna 3,694]

I yearn for a director/set designer who instead of looking at a cathedral or an empty warehouse set, opens a book of Potter or even LotR concept art and says 'is it possible to do this?'. A bit like how PJ used Bigatures to realize an ancient location and freeing himself from just what a regular set designer can build. I get turned off how much of the Hobbit is just CG with a camera swooping, but the set design and imagination behind it? Wow!

 

My slight issue with Cuaron's vision is that he focused a little too much on the characters inhabiting the castle, like the knight breaking through the window, while leaving the bulk of the sets just looking like a large church. I wanted to see sets and 'things' where I look at the screen thinking 'wow! how the hell did you make that?' and not, 'oh, that's a nice cloister... must find out where it is'. Although he did refresh the series after Columbus' very family friendly, safe approach.

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

21 hours ago, Alex said:

I think Del Toro would have been a good choice for GOF as well.

 

Yes, I agree. I'm just not a big fan of that film anyway, I think it's the weakest after COS. Which is a pity because GOF one of the strongest books.

 

But if Del Toro only did one, I think COS would be best suited to his sensibilities.

[Alex 2,835]

1 hour ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

But if Del Toro only did one, I think COS would be best suited to his sensibilities.

Would love to see the set of the chamber itself in a Del Toro directed CoS.

[Jay 37,369]

Francesca Gardiner is now one of three writers currently being considered to be showrunner of the series

 

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4351441

[Edmilson 7,466]

Sigh. This is really happening and is coming out in 2026.

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/harry-potter-tv-series-2026-debut-hbo-max-1235833774/

[Pieter Boelen 740]

On 02/02/2024 at 7:36 PM, Jay said:

Francesca Gardiner is now one of three writers currently being considered to be showrunner of the series

 

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4351441

His Dark Materials wasn't bad.

I hope they'll dare to be a bit more FUN with Potter though.

There needs to be MAGIC in there.

 

18 minutes ago, Edmilson said:

Sigh. This is really happening and is coming out in 2026.

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/harry-potter-tv-series-2026-debut-hbo-max-1235833774/

Holy crap, that's soon!

[Richard Penna 3,694]

Quote

the plan is to develop seasons based on all of the books, spreading out over 10 years

 

If they go all the way it's going to be a huge project and the possibility opens of them looking for a composer who can commit to multiple seasons over many years.

[Tom Guernsey 2,286]

1 hour ago, Richard Penna said:

 

If they go all the way it's going to be a huge project and the possibility opens of them looking for a composer who can commit to multiple seasons over many years.

Have they called Bear McCreary yet?

[Edmilson 7,466]

This part was interesting:

 

Quote

Zaslav also said that he met just a few weeks ago with Harry Potter creator J.K. Rowling in London.

 

“I was in London a few weeks ago with Casey [HBO and Max chief Casey Bloys] and Channing [WBD TV chief Channing Dungey] and we spent some real time with J.K. and her team,” he said. “Both sides are thrilled to be reigniting this franchise. Our conversations were great, and we couldn’t be more excited about what’s ahead. We can’t wait to share a decade of new stories with fans around the world on Max.”

Firstly, it seems that JKR will have some involvement with it despite her social media controversies.

 

Also, "a decade of new stories"? What do you mean by new? These are the same stories that have already been told on the books and movies. This is the laziest route they could've taken with Potter.

[Richard Penna 3,694]

I noticed that 'new stories' thing too. But that whole article is full of PR bullshit that doesn't tell you anything other than they're actively doing it so I wouldn't interpret it too literally.