Harry Potter TV Series in the works

[Director of Poltergeist 8,091]

At least they inspired good theme park attractions

[bored 564]

Weirdly, I felt a lot of the child/teenager performances were at their best in 2-4. There's an earnestness somehow in those that feels absent in the first one and later ones. Something about the way Harry, Ron, and Hermione interact feels the most real there (minus a lot of the melodrama in 4 which feels pretty forced).

 

Hell, I think 4 might be Radcliffe's best performance. He feels the most loose, joking and sarcastic (like Harry is supposed to be) while still pulling off some impressive moments. His delivery is genuinely heartbreaking when he's franticly explaining Voldemort's return and how Cedric wanted his body returned "I couldn't leave him, not there!" 

[Director of Poltergeist 8,091]

I think they're all terrible actors. The Ron kid at least had some comedic chops, but it got increasingly less funny and more Jar Jar-like, if Jar Jar wasn't funny. And Hermione at some point just started acting with her eyebrows. Fleeting appearances by esteemed veteran actors playing the adults didn't help their cause. Why are we watching these kids?

[Edmilson 10,471]

13 minutes ago, Mr. Lovejoy said:

if Jar Jar wasn't funny

But he really isn't fun.

[Director of Poltergeist 8,091]

You're so negative

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

Hermeyebrows

[Pieter Boelen 1,019]

19 hours ago, Mr. Lovejoy said:

Why are we watching these kids?

Yeah, why indeed?

*raises eyebrow*

[DarthDementous 1,424]

On 18/04/2025 at 12:24 PM, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

Well, not really, no.

 

The reason they trickle out information, like casting announcements, is to get people talking about it. Well, we're talking about it. And when we're talking about a well known "product" (to use your term) like Harry Potter, with familiar characters, that we're meant to "consume" (ibid), discussing the casting, or anything else, through a critical lens is not only appropriate (especially in a place like this), but it's what the studio wants.

 

When a project like this is announced, and we know no specifics, it's blank slate. As more information comes out...casting, directors, set design, composer, etc...people are going to start to form opinions, good or bad, little by little, based on that information. It's silly and unrealistic to expect anything else. Especially, again, in a place like this.

 

I said 'chill out' in response to someone declaring the unreleased (and at this stage unfilmed) show is garbage, not to someone merely forming opinions about information trickling out

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

Most modern shows are garbage unless they're made by Taylor Sheridan.

[bollemanneke 4,007]

At this point I'm actually more excited about Audible's upcoming dramatisation of the series. Especially after my idea to do with AI failed miserably.

[DarthDementous 1,424]

On 20/04/2025 at 7:33 PM, bollemanneke said:

At this point I'm actually more excited about Audible's upcoming dramatisation of the series. Especially after my idea to do with AI failed miserably.

just looked up that announcement, that is exciting! I've been wanting to revisit the books especially in anticipation for this new adaptation so that would be perfect

[bollemanneke 4,007]

Yeah, same! I'm also still waiting for ElevenLabs to finally sort out their bugs so I can generate my own versions of the audiobooks. (Gave Ollivander a cowboy accent yesterday, surreal.)

[DarthDementous 1,424]

15 hours ago, bollemanneke said:

Yeah, same! I'm also still waiting for ElevenLabs to finally sort out their bugs so I can generate my own versions of the audiobooks. (Gave Ollivander a cowboy accent yesterday, surreal.)

I'd be curious to hear some of the results you've had, especially if they're scuffed

[bollemanneke 4,007]

I'll let you know how I come along. Used up all my credits to convert a book in preparation for an EU exam though, plus they honestly need to do some updates before I continue with this.

[Chen G. 5,140]

On 15/04/2025 at 2:40 AM, Meredith McKay said:

Is Janet McTeer the first Marvel something actor in HP? I feel like that wouldn't be the case, but you never inow

 

I feel like overlap between Marvel and other film series is not much of a novelty, because Marvel is so exorbitantly large that half the actors on the planet are somewhere in there...

[Nick1Ø66 6,754]

 

Quote

 

New Harry Potter show reportedly casts Harry, Ron and Hermione

But we don't know the identities of the actors yet.

 

 

"Reportedly" only, no official announcement yet.

 

They better not screw this up, the success of the show lives or dies on casting these three. It's something of a minor miracle they got so lucky with the casting for the films.

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

This is like when they announce we have a new Pope but we don't know who it is for about three hours.

[Quintus 5,699]

Thank god all that pope crap in the news is finally over with again. Well, at least until the next nonce scandal.

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

Pope Harry I

[Pieter Boelen 1,019]

Just now, Lady Dimitrescu said:

Pope Harry I

Harry P.

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

12 minutes ago, Pieter Boelen said:

Harry P.

 

That's 80 Harries.

[Pieter Boelen 1,019]

7 minutes ago, Lady Dimitrescu said:

 

That's 80 Harries.

Say what now??

(I'm sorry, I don't get that reference.)

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

The "pi" letter in Greek has a value of 80. But it really looks like a "π".

[Director of Poltergeist 8,091]

Harry should have broccoli hair to make it more accessible to modern audiences

[Once 903]

8 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

"Reportedly" only, no official announcement yet.

 

They better not screw this up, the success of the show lives or dies on casting these three. It's something of a minor miracle they got so lucky with the casting for the films.

 

But let's also remember they are (obviously) going to be actual kids and really shouldn't be the focus of any serious criticism.

[Nick1Ø66 6,754]

Well of course, that goes without saying. No one should be attacking an actor, especially child actors, simply for being who they are or for playing a part. Anyone who does that is beneath contempt.

 

That’s wholly separate from the fact that…yeah, MAX has gotta get this right.

 

 

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

It'll be more interesting if they get it wrong.

[JazzyNips 79]

9 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

 

"Reportedly" only, no official announcement yet.

 

They better not screw this up, the success of the show lives or dies on casting these three. It's something of a minor miracle they got so lucky with the casting for the films.

Lucky? Did you watch the films?

[Chen G. 5,140]

6 hours ago, Once said:

But let's also remember they are (obviously) going to be actual kids and really shouldn't be the focus of any serious criticism.

 

There's a subtle but important difference between criticism and ragging on someone. You can definitely criticise the acting if you find it wanting, you just need to be articulate about it. As compared to "for all the chrisma this upstart lacks, he could have come from the nearest Ikea"...

 

Jake Lloyd is obviously the post-boy for this sort of thing, although it remains unclear whether any issues he struggled with later in life had anything to do with criticism of his acting. But it led to an overreaction in popular film criticism where you can't critique a performance (grunts in the direction of Morfydd Clark) without being deemed rude.

 

This line of thought falls apart on any number of factors - curious, isn't it, that people tend to defer criticism to "it's the direction" when an actor does poorly, but when an actor does well the same people have no qualms about praising the actor - but mostly, if it becomes ubiquitous, it would spell the death of film criticism.

[Nick1Ø66 6,754]

4 hours ago, Chen G. said:

There's a subtle but important difference between criticism and ragging on someone. You can definitely criticise the acting if you find it wanting, you just need to be articulate about it. As compared to "for all the chrisma this upstart lacks, he could have come from the nearest Ikea"..

 

Right. But in this case I'm specifically talking about criticism of an actor b/c of some non-mutable characteristic. It's one thing to have an issue with race-swapping a favourite character, and discussing the issue civilly. It's quite another thing to have a go at an actor, and in particular a child actor, who's been cast in such a role. They're just doing a job. This has already happened with this show, and there's a decent chance it will happen with one of the child leads.

 

In terms of critique of performance, of course child actors are subject to criticism just like adults. Though speaking for myself, I think there should be some restraint in time, place and manner we criticize a small child's performance in particular, and such criticism should be in reviews and discussions in places like this, and not directed at the child on social media. 

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

Yeah but you know social media is full of yahoos who just like shitposting "oi u were fukkin shit in that show u ruined harry potter".

[Nick1Ø66 6,754]

10 hours ago, JazzyNips said:

Lucky? Did you watch the films?

 

Yes, and thought they were mostly well cast.

[JazzyNips 79]

1 hour ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

Yes, and thought they were mostly well cast.

Well that's not a common thought. Even critics who liked the movies thought Daniel Radcliff was mediocre. 

[Nick1Ø66 6,754]

Ah, I see. Running contrary to "common thought". Well I'll have to reconsider my opinion then.

[Yavar Moradi 3,584]

28 minutes ago, JazzyNips said:

Well that's not a common thought. Even critics who liked the movies thought Danielle Radcliff was mediocre. 

 

This is news to me. All three young actors started out just okay, but by Prisoner of Azkaban they had come into their own IMO.

 

Yavar

[JazzyNips 79]

4 minutes ago, Yavar Moradi said:

 

This is news to me. All three young actors started out just okay, but by Prisoner of Azkaban they had come into their own IMO.

 

Yavar

Not Emma Watson. She went from pretty good to terrible. Probably has a lot to do with the directors though.

[Nick1Ø66 6,754]

1 minute ago, JazzyNips said:

Not Emma Watson. She went from pretty good to terrible. Probably has a lot to do with the directors though.

 

Is that your opinion, or common thought?

[Pieter Boelen 1,019]

17 hours ago, Lady Dimitrescu said:

The "pi" letter in Greek has a value of 80. But it really looks like a "π".

Confusing. 

Pi is pi and the Greek letter fully gets used for the 3,14 number. 

Where does the 80 come from?

 

12 hours ago, JazzyNips said:

Lucky? Did you watch the films?

I did! 

The trio was GREAT!

 

46 minutes ago, JazzyNips said:

Well that's not a common thought. Even critics who liked the movies thought Danielle Radcliff was mediocre. 

First I hear of that. 

I always found him VERY Harry.

 

13 minutes ago, JazzyNips said:

Not Emma Watson. She went from pretty good to terrible. Probably has a lot to do with the directors though.

She did? 

I like her. 

Or is that just because she's hella pretty...?

[Edmilson 10,471]

50 minutes ago, JazzyNips said:

Even critics who liked the movies thought Danielle Radcliff was mediocre. 

Well, they shouldn't have cast a girl to play Harry then...

 

[JazzyNips 79]

16 minutes ago, Pieter Boelen said:

 

She did? 

I like her. 

Or is that just because she's hella pretty...?

Idk, but you look way too old to be sexualizing an 11 year old girl. 

[Pieter Boelen 1,019]

3 minutes ago, JazzyNips said:

Idk, but you look way too old to be sexualizing an 11 year old girl. 

She's only 4 years younger than me.

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

But she's 35.

[JazzyNips 79]

2 minutes ago, Lady Dimitrescu said:

But she's 35.

In which Harry Potter movie?

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

I don't watch those anymore. I just follow her on Instagram.

[Pieter Boelen 1,019]

20 minutes ago, JazzyNips said:

In which Harry Potter movie?

Remember, when she was younger for those movies, we as watchers were younger too.

[JazzyNips 79]

4 minutes ago, Pieter Boelen said:

Remember, when she was younger for those movies, we as watchers were younger too.

Well you're not anymore, so I'd be careful talking about how hot the 11 year old is. 

[Pieter Boelen 1,019]

1 minute ago, JazzyNips said:

Well you're not anymore, so I'd be careful talking about how hot the 11 year old is. 

I said "pretty".

Which especially the GoF ball reveal deliberately made a point of pointing out.

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

[mstrox 7,211]

Really loving the energy that user Jazzy Nips is bringing to this thread.  Coming in flaming hot!!!

[bored 564]

Daniel Radcliffe is all over the place in those films. Harry's character is supposed to be a sarcastic, back-talking, frustrated, driven character, and Radcliffe often portrays him fairly blandly and passive. I think he has highlights, such as in part 4, but overall he doesn't live up to the original intended character for me at all.

 

Rupert Grint is pretty consistently fine, I think he's pretty funny in 2 and 3, but his angsty moments often feel pretty silly and forced until the 7th movie where he actually turns in a pretty good performance overall I think. And of course his character is not supposed to be anywhere near as one note and stupid as he's portrayed in the films, but that change was probably inevitable since movie trios usually have a comic relief.

 

Emma Watson...I kind of agree with @JazzyNips (not the rest of the conversation, just on her performance).  I think she was better at portraying Hermione as a child actress, but the second part 4 hits, she feels so over the top. Some moments it's warranted (again, I think she had a good performance in 7), but there's a weird focus on her yelling and screaming and crying all the time, when she was far more realistic in the books and moments like that were saved for more important scenes. She almost feels manic in the films which lessens her reactions when they're supposed to sell the scene.

 

It almost seems like she suffers from the same thing that Natalie Portman and Leo DiCaprio do (no I'm not saying they're always terrible). They're good enough at being angry or sad, and they scream and cry a lot which gives the illusion that they're great, intense actors, but when it comes to every scene in between, their delivery is often clumsy, off-kilter, or monotone.