Harry Potter TV Series in the works

[Brónach 1,302]

I spent about a month seeing insane takes by "dramatic allies/enemies" (often it's the same) about how much they much pay for a game and how everyone must know and see it and how much they can't pay for a game and how much everyone much know and see it until i lost it.

 

i don't think people understand much what someone like me tends to want, cares about, what i would like to see, what i find it funny or annoying, or about our involvement in art or any industry. which, most often it's computers and some academic things, i swear it and i don't know why. but next up is music, movies, writing, perfomance, games and so on. (and like half of them are autistic, i can't quite give you stats right now). They have no money and the community dynamics are not unlike a message board such as this.

 

and harrer potty is just harrer potty. if you want to troll a billionaire on the internet, support scotland.

[Sweeping Strings 2,365]

17 minutes ago, Brónach said:

 

this is funny to me (as someone with a stake on this, unlike almost everyone on the thread) because i just happen to not give her money at all for anything because there's nothing to give her money about.

 

i find "dramatic allies" very annoying, and sometimes they're the ones who backstab you.

 

they're also the ones who fell for things such as wearing harry potter tattoos for some reason. most of them don't read contemporary fantasy anyways (for adults instead of for kids).

Furthest I go with 'public' expressions of fandom is something like an item of clothing or a 'manbag'. Tattoos ... just aren't me.    

[Brónach 1,302]

i shouldnt point out "ha you have a tattoo" since i have twelve thousand dumb messages in this message board and i think if i were normal, they would be about half the messages.

[HunterTech 994]

I refuse tattoos on the basis that I don't expect that shit to look good when I'm older. That, and I don't think I'd need it as a constant reminder of what I enjoy (that's what the CDs and box sets are for!).

[Brónach 1,302]

i just don't have money for it and i have never come up with good enough ideas

[HunterTech 994]

All this has done is remind me that I should commission more artists, since they definitely need the money more than I do.

[oierem 152]

Everything about this seems like a bad idea. 

I'm just trying to imagine how a 8-episde adaptation of PS would look like...

 

Episode 1 would just be a very extended prologue plus Harry's daily life until he starts to get the mysterious letters. Who is writting to him? Can't wait till next episode!

 

Episode 2 would be Hagrid's revelation about Harry's past, and the trip to Diagon Alley. A really fun and exciting episode, can't wait to get to Hogwarts!

 

Episode 3 would be the journey on the train, introducing Ron and Hermione, and the banquet. Still no trace of the plot, but it's a fun episode!

 

Episode 4 would include Harry's first lessons, his confrontation with Malfoy and the encounter with the three headed dog. What could that dog be guarding? Mid-season climax without a doubt!

 

Episode 5 would include Hallowe'en, the encounter with the troll and the Quidditch match. Finally some action! But still, what's that fricking dog guarding? And is Snape a bad guy? 

 

Episode 6 would be about Christmas and the Mirror of Erisded and finally, FINALLY, they find out that the dog is guarding the Philosopher's Stone! Wish I'd noticed the subtitle of the season earlier!

 

Episode 7 would see the action ramping up before the climax: Hagrid hatches an illegal dragon and the boys get detention and encounter a hooded figure in the forest. It's Voldemort!!! What a reveal!

 

Episode 8 would be climax, with all the challenges and the final confrontation.

 

Do we really need 8 hours to tell that story?

[Brónach 1,302]

three episodes

[oierem 152]

Just now, Brónach said:

three episodes

So, three episodes of around 50 minutes each is exactly the lenght of the movie. Where are all the extra details?

[Brónach 1,302]

no maybe with ten minutes each you're fine

 

don't tell me the film is 150 minutes, i didn't remember it that long

[Mr. Who 919]

The first 2 books are pretty short and the films sets rather faithful to the books.

[Jay 37,378]

Surely the first season or 2 will be shorter than the remaining seasons

the books get longer as they go and so will the runtime of each season

[Sweeping Strings 2,365]

Presumably the idea will be to include the stuff from the books that wasn't in the movies? Could be an 8 - 10 episode season for each book. 

[Nick1Ø66 4,724]

Just now, Sweeping Strings said:

Presumably the idea will be to include the stuff from the books that wasn't in the movies? Could be an 8 - 10 episode season for each book. 

 

That might hold true to the later books, but the films for the early ones (especially the first two) were remarkably faithful to the books, almost to a fault. It's hard to imagine doubling their running time in a TV show.  

 

I do think Rowling, like many artists, is going to be unable to resist expanding on, or changing, aspects of her original creation, and I wouldn't be surprised if in the early seasons in particular the story and characters are fleshed out a bit more. Perhaps including spending more time establishing characters like Neville who will become more important as the series goes on.

[bollemanneke 3,352]

1 hour ago, oierem said:

Everything about this seems like a bad idea. 

I'm just trying to imagine how a 8-episde adaptation of PS would look like...

 

Episode 1 would just be a very extended prologue plus Harry's daily life until he starts to get the mysterious letters. Who is writting to him? Can't wait till next episode!

 

Episode 2 would be Hagrid's revelation about Harry's past, and the trip to Diagon Alley. A really fun and exciting episode, can't wait to get to Hogwarts!

 

Episode 3 would be the journey on the train, introducing Ron and Hermione, and the banquet. Still no trace of the plot, but it's a fun episode!

 

Episode 4 would include Harry's first lessons, his confrontation with Malfoy and the encounter with the three headed dog. What could that dog be guarding? Mid-season climax without a doubt!

 

Episode 5 would include Hallowe'en, the encounter with the troll and the Quidditch match. Finally some action! But still, what's that fricking dog guarding? And is Snape a bad guy? 

 

Episode 6 would be about Christmas and the Mirror of Erisded and finally, FINALLY, they find out that the dog is guarding the Philosopher's Stone! Wish I'd noticed the subtitle of the season earlier!

 

Episode 7 would see the action ramping up before the climax: Hagrid hatches an illegal dragon and the boys get detention and encounter a hooded figure in the forest. It's Voldemort!!! What a reveal!

 

Episode 8 would be climax, with all the challenges and the final confrontation.

 

Do we really need 8 hours to tell that story?

Well, why not though? At this point I'm just interested in how much exclusive book content they can film that never made it into the films. Nobody's going to be excited about the plot, they must know that.

[Brónach 1,302]

"exclusive book content" oh please

[Nick1Ø66 4,724]

Each season will undoubtedly be accompanied by a reissue of the corresponding book, complete with tie-in cover. Perhaps Rowling will publish these as "Expanded and updated" editions, incorporating whatever new material she writes for the series.

 

The possibilities for expanding Jo's world are endless! Twitter rejoice!

[bollemanneke 3,352]

Expanded archival collection!

[HunterTech 994]

I actually wonder if this will be an opportunity for all the Pottermore anecdotes to be incorporated in some fashion, given the few select eBook releases gathered from those don't cover the bulk of what was written for it. Definitely would prefer a supplement book over adding to the originals (unless it's like extra chapters at the end).

[Nick1Ø66 4,724]

7 minutes ago, HunterTech said:

I actually wonder if this will be an opportunity for all the Pottermore anecdotes to be incorporated in some fashion

 

This is what I'm thinking.

[Holko 9,532]

Poop vanishing flashbacks!

[Brónach 1,302]

the bathroom plotlines are going to be a riot this time

[Bilbo 3,709]

2 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

Each season will undoubtedly be accompanied by a reissue of the corresponding book, complete with tie-in cover.

There were never tie-in covers for the films. Apparently Rowling doesn’t like them and never wanted copies of the books with the actors on the covers. 
 

the U.K. got the celebratory editions which were just the original covers with foil stars and logos.

 

the US got mass market paperbacks for the first two films but stopped after that. A pity because they’re a nice little sized book.

[Nick1Ø66 4,724]

24 minutes ago, Bilbo said:

There were never tie-in covers for the films. Apparently Rowling doesn’t like them and never wanted copies of the books with the actors on the covers. 

 

Yeah I know. And it was the right call, tie-in covers are hideous. I hate the tie-in covers for Lord of the Rings (the Rings of Power ones are especially objectionable). But who knows? Times change. At a minimum, I think each book will have a new edition to correspond with the current season, even if it's not a tie-in.

 

I do admire how protective she is of her literary creation, and how she keeps the books a separate thing from the films.

[Yavar Moradi 2,604]

On 13/04/2023 at 8:06 AM, oierem said:

Everything about this seems like a bad idea. 

I'm just trying to imagine how a 8-episde adaptation of PS would look like...

 

Episode 1 would just be a very extended prologue plus Harry's daily life until he starts to get the mysterious letters. Who is writting to him? Can't wait till next episode!

 

Episode 2 would be Hagrid's revelation about Harry's past, and the trip to Diagon Alley. A really fun and exciting episode, can't wait to get to Hogwarts!

 

Episode 3 would be the journey on the train, introducing Ron and Hermione, and the banquet. Still no trace of the plot, but it's a fun episode!

 

Episode 4 would include Harry's first lessons, his confrontation with Malfoy and the encounter with the three headed dog. What could that dog be guarding? Mid-season climax without a doubt!

 

Episode 5 would include Hallowe'en, the encounter with the troll and the Quidditch match. Finally some action! But still, what's that fricking dog guarding? And is Snape a bad guy? 

 

Episode 6 would be about Christmas and the Mirror of Erisded and finally, FINALLY, they find out that the dog is guarding the Philosopher's Stone! Wish I'd noticed the subtitle of the season earlier!

 

Episode 7 would see the action ramping up before the climax: Hagrid hatches an illegal dragon and the boys get detention and encounter a hooded figure in the forest. It's Voldemort!!! What a reveal!

 

Episode 8 would be climax, with all the challenges and the final confrontation.

 

Do we really need 8 hours to tell that story?

 

I don't actually think this is a bad idea! And it wouldn't have to be eight hours at all. Episodes could be as short as half an hour long, a la The Mandalorian's superior first season. Then as the seasons go on, both the episode lengths and number of episodes would increase.

 

Yavar

[Brónach 1,302]

it's only a bad idea in the sense that the book isn't really good. not that it can't be told in short episodes, or very few of them. you kind of have to.

[Richard Penna 3,696]

On 13/04/2023 at 3:06 PM, oierem said:

Everything about this seems like a bad idea. 

I'm just trying to imagine how a 8-episde adaptation of PS would look like...

 

That sounds like just the right structure for a series to me. If you do what the RoP writers didn't do, and pull some interesting side plots and good dialogue from the book, plus get good actors, you could make something exciting and mysterious.

 

Had GoT been made into a film to start with, wouldn't you be saying the same thing about padding things out for a series?

 

Of course they could fuck it up completely. I'm just saying it's possible for this to be a worthwhile project.

[Mr. Who 919]

2 minutes ago, Richard Penna said:

 

That sounds like just the right structure for a series to me. If you do what the RoP writers didn't do, and pull some interesting side plots and good dialogue from the book, plus get good actors, you could make something exciting and mysterious.

 

Had GoT been made into a film to start with, wouldn't you be saying the same thing about padding things out for a series?

 

Of course they could fuck it up completely. I'm just saying it's possible for this to be a worthwhile project.

I still think that it’s too soon for a remake but there is definitively enough material for a series. I love the films but they naturally are adaptations of long books (specifically the later books). If they do a good job and manage to do their own thing then this series will surely be a success. At this point I’m mildly optimistic at this point as a huge fan of both the books and the film adaptations which are iconic. I also feel bad for the composer who ends up scoring it as the new music will immediately be compared with the popular film scores. For example, scoring scenes like Buckbeak’s flight or Dumbledore’s Farewell etc will be a huge task for a new composer to do given how great the cues for those scenes in the films are.

 

I don’t think the comparison with GOT works as those books are way longer, have more locations and more POV characters and multiple storylines that all work independently but are also connected to the larger story. Making films based on those books was never possible and GRRM said that he was pitched many ideas of making films about just Jon or just about Daenerys which he declined.

[Richard Penna 3,696]

I'm not sure if the time before a remake strictly matters that much if it does the adaptation well.

 

There are lots of properties with different film versions and series, and they do their own takes and styles. I don't see why a property like Potter should be 'above' that sort of reintepretation.

 

Musically, any composer is going to have a hard time matching Williams' score, so I'd say just ignore it and let the series be its own thing.

[Bilbo 3,709]

21 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

Yeah I know. And it was the right call, tie-in covers are hideous. I hate the tie-in covers for Lord of the Rings (the Rings of Power ones are especially objectionable). But who knows? Times change. At a minimum, I think each book will have a new edition to correspond with the current season, even if it's not a tie-in.

 

I do admire how protective she is of her literary creation, and how she keeps the books a separate thing from the films.

I really dislike that those RoP tie ins are the ones that show up in my audible 😡 

[Matt C 455]

On 13/04/2023 at 12:08 AM, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

Oh good grief. Heaven forbid, the creator of Harry Potter wants final say over Harry Potter. And yes, the "small stuff" matters, as much as the big stuff. If not more.

 

 

I've been going to Universal Orlando almost yearly. It wasn't until last year they started selling pressed pennies featuring HP and Wizarding World. A park employee told me JKR was adamant about not doing it until recently. And there was another thing--  employees couldn't let customers spike their own Butterbeer. Talk about OCD.

[Tom 4,673]

8 minutes ago, Matt C said:

employees couldn't let customers spike their own Butterbeer. Talk about OCD.

That's why they should work for Disney.  Everybody gets to slip their own Mickey into anything they want.  

[Jay 37,378]

[Mr. Who 919]

15 minutes ago, Jay said:

"I can't even believe you're saying Mickey"

 

I have to watch this episode now lol

[bollemanneke 3,352]

I don't understand how someone can be so controlling on the one hand and allow Yates to butcher half of the plot on the other.

[Richard Penna 3,696]

1 hour ago, Matt C said:

And there was another thing--  employees couldn't let customers spike their own Butterbeer. Talk about OCD.

 

How do you stop a customer spiking their own drink after they've purchased it? Or do you mean customers couldn't ask for something else to be added to it?

[TolkienSS 407]

4 hours ago, bollemanneke said:

I don't understand how someone can be so controlling on the one hand and allow Yates to butcher half of the plot on the other.

 

Because it's not totally out of the question that someone might be intelligent enough to realize that adapting the essence of your work to a different medium requires some reworking; and therefore being protective about your intellectual property and allowing a director and writer to adapt your work to a limiting medium go hand in hand.

 

I know that's a spectacular thought with all the recent trash TV and movie output, that use the necessary adaption work as a cover to completely reframe intellectual properties.

[bollemanneke 3,352]

But there's a difference between reworking something and totally destroying a plot point. For example: I have nothing against omitting Ludo Bagman or a Deathday Party, neither affect the story. I do, however, have something against completely ignoring the significance of Horcruxes. You can't, you just can't spend two movies hunting down objects and not tell us why Voldemort chose them.

[TSMefford 1,509]

I feel I must remind people here. Yates did not write the screenplay. Steve Kloves did, except for Order of the Phoenix.

[HunterTech 994]

And yet the complaints aren't nearly as high for those earlier films (though I suppose the considerably shorter lengths barring 4 probably gave those an easier time adaptation wise).

[bollemanneke 3,352]

25 minutes ago, TSMefford said:

I feel I must remind people here. Yates did not write the screenplay. Steve Kloves did, except for Order of the Phoenix.

Oh, I know, but I read drafts of scripts 6-8. Both 7 and 8 had all the info we needed, but it required two minutes of intelligent dialogue, which I guess Yates didn't want.

[TSMefford 1,509]

46 minutes ago, HunterTech said:

And yet the complaints aren't nearly as high for those earlier films (though I suppose the considerably shorter lengths barring 4 probably gave those an easier time adaptation wise).

 

I did not say that director's have no influence on the film or the screenplay, but screenplays and elements of them linger around regardless of how many directors or writers they go through.

I would also agree as you say that the shorter and less complicated books have an easier time of being adapted. 

 

Regardless, any script issues can not be entirely attributed to Yates.

 

42 minutes ago, bollemanneke said:

Oh, I know, but I read drafts of scripts 6-8. Both 7 and 8 had all the info we needed, but it required two minutes of intelligent dialogue, which I guess Yates didn't want.

 

I'd be curious to read those drafts. I've never seen any script drafts from the Potter films.

[Nick1Ø66 4,724]

I much prefer the latter Yates films to the early ones, no matter the things lost or changed from the books (some of which were better for film, IMO). I just think, strictly as films, they're better adaptations.

1. Order of the Phoenix
2. Deathly Hallows    
3. Half-Blood Prince
4. Prisoner of Azkaban
5. Goblet of Fire
6. Sorcerer's Stone
7. Chamber of Secrets

Yeah, I put Deathly Hallows as one film, b/c that's how I think of it. The first part taken alone would admittedly be further down this list. Columbus deserves a huge amount of credit for the casting, and Sorcerer's Stone does a great job of world-building, and shows a lot of fealty to the book. But I can't rate it higher because it's just so plodding.
 
POA clearly has the most style, and objectively might be the best film of the lot. I just like it when they're older and the stakes are higher.

[Bespin 8,484]

The problem with the HP MOVIES, is the the more they went british in the realisation, the more the movies went endless and boring.

 

I don't even know how John Williams got involved in this franchise from the start. It was like appeasing fishes with a grenade.

 

Making a TV series is perhaps their intent to be stiff and boring from the beginning?

 

To the grand damn of JK Rowling, Dumbledore will probably be portrayed by a black actor, and the Wesleys will probably be Indians. 

 

Refreshing!

[Nick1Ø66 4,724]

2 hours ago, Bespin said:

To the grand damn of JK Rowling, Dumbledore will probably be portrayed by a black actor, and the Wesleys will probably be Indians. 

 

I don't know if Dumbledore will be black, but he'll definitely be gay. And they'll play it up much more so than the books (where it wasn't played up at all because he wasn't written that way).

 

I do think Hermione will be black, that pretty much goes without saying. I also think many more of the supporting characters will be "diverse", and they may even throw a trans character in there. Though the latter will look like pandering, which of course is what it will be.

 

Other predictions: Cho Chang will be played with a lot more cultural sensitivity, the Patil sisters will be much more fleshed out, and in fact we'll get a lot more background on the supporting characters. And I'll go out on a limb for what I think them most radical change will be: Harry and Hermione will end up together. Rowling regrets pairing her with Ron, and I think this would be a way to shake up the story with TV that she'd be comfortable with.

 

Rowling would never mess with the books. But it's clear from her comments in recent years there are a number of things she'd do different given the chance, and I think the TV show will be give her that chance w/o undermining her literary legacy. And frankly I think they're going to throw some surprises in there just to keep an audience who is already familiar with the books interested.

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

1 hour ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

I don't know if Dumbledore will be black, but he'll definitely be gay. And they'll play it up much more so than the books (where it wasn't played up at all because he wasn't written that way).

 

Um.... How the hell would the sexual preference of an elderly man be "played up" in a children's series? And how would you expect he'd have been portrayed in the books if he "had" been written as gay? I've never understood this ludicrous argument. I find it often comes from people with questionable preconceptions of what gay people can look or act like, due to their own prejudices. 

[Nick1Ø66 4,724]

19 minutes ago, Docteur Qui said:

 

Um.... How the hell would the sexual preference of an elderly man be "played up" in a children's series? And how would you expect he'd have been portrayed in the books if he "had" been written as gay? I've never understood this ludicrous argument. I find it often comes from people with questionable preconceptions of what gay people can look or act like, due to their own prejudices. 

Good grief get over yourself.

[DarthDementous 1,059]

I don't know if I somehow caught something JK Rowling said in an interview, but growing up reading the books before the movies got to that point, I was always under the impression that Dumbledore had a gay relationship with Grindelwald. It's the one piece of 'revisionism' that never seemed out of place to me

[HunterTech 994]

2 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

Good grief get over yourself.

 

He hasn't even been pressing you for anything, and yet you treat his legitimate question as if an incredibly exhausting conversation had just happened. If you feel like he's accusing you of something, then I figure a straightforward answer would've dissuaded any of those notions.

 

I find the claim that Dumbledore wasn't written that way to be questionable, given the fact of JK having to dissuade the filmmakers from giving him a female love interest, so the idea doesn't seem particularly retroactive (though you could argue that with it being the later films, she would've barely had it floating in her head at the time).

[bollemanneke 3,352]

2 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

I don't know if I somehow caught something JK Rowling said in an interview, but growing up reading the books before the movies got to that point, I was always under the impression that Dumbledore had a gay relationship with Grindelwald. It's the one piece of 'revisionism' that never seemed out of place to me

So then just write the word loved. Loved. Not that hard to do. I re-read DH, I don't see any sign of romance between them in that book.

 

6 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

I much prefer the latter Yates films to the early ones, no matter the things lost or changed from the books (some of which were better for film, IMO). I just think, strictly as films, they're better adaptations.

1. Order of the Phoenix
2. Deathly Hallows    
3. Half-Blood Prince
4. Prisoner of Azkaban
5. Goblet of Fire
6. Sorcerer's Stone
7. Chamber of Secrets

Yeah, I put Deathly Hallows as one film, b/c that's how I think of it. The first part taken alone would admittedly be further down this list. Columbus deserves a huge amount of credit for the casting, and Sorcerer's Stone does a great job of world-building, and shows a lot of fealty to the book. But I can't rate it higher because it's just so plodding.
 
POA clearly has the most style, and objectively might be the best film of the lot. I just like it when they're older and the stakes are higher.

I'm interested, could you give examples of Columbus 'films being plodding? I ask because I keep hearing this complaint, especially with COS, but I never figured out a way to do it better than him.