We independently assess all our recommendations. Purchases through our links may earn us a commission.
In April, Max and Warner Brothers announced, somewhat unceremoniously, that it was rebooting the Harry Potter series. The streaming giant claimed the series would air for ten years and dedicate one season to each installment of J.K. Rowling’s seven-book fantasy saga.
As anyone who’s spent any considerable amount of time on the internet could guess, social media was set ablaze by the announcement, and fan reactions ran the gamut. Some book purists championed the decision, claiming television’s lengthier format would allow more time for plotlines discarded by the original adaptation. Other fans expressed concerns about the proposed reboot arriving too soon after the original film series, which concluded only 12 years ago.
But these logistical quibbles amount to little more than a sidebar when compared to the most hotly contested subject in the fan community: the author herself. Since 2020, Rowling has been in a perpetual state of hot water for her repeated transphobic comments on social media. The author’s unrepentant attitude toward her stances and the anti-trans activists she’s aligned herself with have put many fans in a difficult position. Some feel they can no longer engage with works created by someone like Rowling.
This growing anti-Rowling sentiment in the fanbase has resulted in numerous social media boycotts of Wizarding World projects. After the gradual box office decline and assumed shelving of the Fantastic Beasts series, it seemed the boycotts may have done the trick. But the massive success of Hogwarts Legacy proved there is still a substantial market for Wizarding World properties despite the ongoing Rowling controversy.
Instead of taking a risk on a brand new Wizarding World story, Max and its parent company Warner Brothers have decided to fill that market with a back-to-the-basics approach: rebooting the flagship saga. But do we actually need another adaptation of the Harry Potter books? Are fans ready to meet a new Harry, Ron, and Hermione? Let’s do a deep dive into the canon and the fan community to outline the pros and cons of the reboot.
Pro: A more faithful adaptation
The original Harry Potter film series is widely beloved, but it contains certain changes and omissions that have irked fans for years. Perhaps most notably, the backstories of essential characters such as the Marauders, Dumbledore, and Voldemort were, for the most part, left on the cutting room floor.
Once the production team began work on adapting the jumbo-sized doorstoppers in the latter half of the book series, they decided to snip any plotlines not seen from Harry’s direct point of view. Although this was an understandable choice given the dense source material, it undoubtedly left many fan-favorite characters with the short end of the stick.
With 10 or more hours to devote to each book, the reboot could delve into detailed explorations of characters not thoroughly fleshed out in the first series. We could spend more time in flashbacks with Harry’s parents and their friends at school. We could learn all over again what really makes Lord Voldemort tick and the whole Slytherin aesthetic.
Not to mention, we could sink our teeth into the star-crossed romance and eventual estrangement of the young Dumbledore and Grindelwald. The film series was adept in presenting the broad strokes in cinematic fashion, but there simply wasn’t enough time to color in all the particulars that makes the story so timeless.
Con: Some plotlines don’t warrant an adaptation
It’s true that the film series omitted plotlines from the books, but sometimes it did this for valid reasons. Fans who haven’t pored over the pages recently might hold the books in higher regard than they ought to. Rowling’s saga is a record-breaking fantasy classic, but it’s not without its blemishes.
The first three books in the series are narratively taut – keeping a steady pace that progressively ensnares the reader with layers of intrigue and magical discovery. Older readers might occasionally tire of their childish tone and subject matter, but regardless, there’s little fat to be trimmed in Rowling’s first three installments.
As the series progresses, however, the books become much longer and the narrative more sprawling. More often than not, this means we’re treated to engaging subplots and ingenious detailings of the Wizarding World. But sometimes, it leaves us stuck trudging through entire chapters that probably should’ve been summed up in a handful of pages. The fifth book, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, suffers most from Rowling’s penchant for ponderous plotting.
Apart from the Dementor attack and the Ministry hearing, the front end of the book meanders at a glacial pace. Once we’re back at Hogwarts and meet everyone’s least favorite Defense Against the Dark Arts professor, Dolores Umbridge, Rowling gets a little more pep in her pen. Still, it’s telling that the production team for the film series was able to turn the longest book in the franchise into the shortest movie without leaving out anything too essential.
Pro: Introducing a new generation to the magic
I have my critiques of Harry Potter (and even more of its author), but honestly, my childhood would’ve been considerably less enjoyable without the story in my life. To say I was obsessed with the series would be putting it mildly. I lived and breathed Harry Potter. I read the books when I was waiting for the movies and watched the movies while I was waiting for the books.
Harry’s world enthralled me for its wonder, its detail, and perhaps most importantly, its characters. Diving deeper into the Wizarding World with each installment was a thrill unlike any other when I was a kid. If Max’s reboot can do that for kids of this generation, that’s a win in my book.
Just as I and millions of other millennials did, the kids of this generation can grow up alongside the new Harry, Ron, and Hermione. They can identify with their struggles, savor their victories, and revel in the magic of their world.
Con: Is this just a cash grab?
Now that we’ve got the obligatory millennial gushing out of the way, let’s get back down to business. It doesn’t take an elite cultural critic to see that Max’s reboot announcement came at a curiously convenient time. Now that the Fantastic Beasts series is almost certainly toast and Rowling’s public image is more tarnished than ever, the cinematic Wizarding World is in dire straits.
Naturally, the studio responded by doing what studios do best: the safest thing possible. They’re well aware that millions upon millions of people will tune in to see the Boy Who Lived and his friends back at Hogwarts, and no amount of author controversy or fan community backlash is going to stop that.
So, is this reboot a cash grab? Well, of course, it is. But that doesn’t mean it can’t be well-made and entertaining. The film industry requires billions of dollars in annual revenue to keep pumping out films and television shows for us all to enjoy and discuss. Every film and television show you’ve ever watched is a cash grab to one extent or another. That has never stopped masterful filmmakers from bringing magical stories to life on screen. We’ll just have to wait and see if the magic lives on in Max’s reboot.
