Harry Potter - the TV series

[Which Tyler]

TV as in television, not transvestite - I don't think JK would greenlight that!

So, we've got the usual discussion on whether or not to boycott; both JKR herself, and this show / intellectual property. Whether it's even possible to separate the art from the artist etc.

Personally, I'm on the train of typically trying to separate; and when I do boycott, trying to be as accurate as realistically possible. A book is all about the author, with not that many other people involved.
A TV show is about far more, with the author not even the most important person involved - that'd be the show-runner, and more about the actors, directors, screen writers than the author - hell, it's more about the lighting director than the author!

And now we've a couple of new controversies.
https://www.harrypotter.com/news/hogwar ... hbo-series

American Dumbledore - surprises me, but I can't say I particularly care

Old Dumbledore - seems a risk, especially after having had to replace Richard Harris, and how good ageing effects can be these days.
My guess is that they'll "shoot" many of his important future scenes a few different ways on green-screen, and make sure they've a lot of footage, audio and visual - and get his permission in advance to digitally recreate him if necessary (whilst hoping it won't be) - which will be a controversy in itself.

Black Snape - that one's going to be tricky to pull off when he's an adult abusing a child for no apparent reason (and for anyone claiming his redemption arc, I... have views). Specifically, you will get James and Sirius literally hanging a black man under a tree - years before the start of the "redemption arc"

Anyone else remember the grief that American Gods got for the lynching scene?
In a show that was NOT for children, and had the easy defence of "yeah, that's the whole ******* point Jeremy!"



ETA: is there an agreed upon male / gender-neutral name to use instead of "Karen"?

[Stom]

TV as in television, not transvestite - I don't think JK would greenlight that!

So, we've got the usual discussion on whether or not to boycott; both JKR herself, and this show / intellectual property. Whether it's even possible to separate the art from the artist etc.

Personally, I'm on the train of typically trying to separate; and when I do boycott, trying to be as accurate as realistically possible. A book is all about the author, with not that many other people involved.
A TV show is about far more, with the author not even the most important person involved - that'd be the show-runner, and more about the actors, directors, screen writers than the author - hell, it's more about the lighting director than the author!

And now we've a couple of new controversies.
https://www.harrypotter.com/news/hogwar ... hbo-series

American Dumbledore - surprises me, but I can't say I particularly care

Old Dumbledore - seems a risk, especially after having had to replace Richard Harris, and how good ageing effects can be these days.
My guess is that they'll "shoot" many of his important future scenes a few different ways on green-screen, and make sure they've a lot of footage, audio and visual - and get his permission in advance to digitally recreate him if necessary (whilst hoping it won't be) - which will be a controversy in itself.

Black Snape - that one's going to be tricky to pull off when he's an adult abusing a child for no apparent reason (and for anyone claiming his redemption arc, I... have views). Specifically, you will get James and Sirius literally hanging a black man under a tree - years before the start of the "redemption arc"

Anyone else remember the grief that American Gods got for the lynching scene?
In a show that was NOT for children, and had the easy defence of "yeah, that's the whole ******* point Jeremy!"



ETA: is there an agreed upon male / gender-neutral name to use instead of "Karen"?

I had not thought about that...

Problematic...

I generally do not have a problem with casting most characters with BAME actors. Most of the time, their ethnicity in the source material is not important.

But this just feels like trolling. Take a character that was loved for the performance of an old, white, male actor, and then cast a black guy to play him.

It's just...unnecessary.

Neville would seem the perfect choice.

I am, personally, not interested in it. For one reason and one reason only: I HATE reboots that serve no purpose other than to make money for the studio. It is lazy. It quashes creativity because 100s of scriptwriters never see their work made, simply because studio execs see Harry Potter, Star Wars, Snow White...and $$$ fill their eyes.

It does not add anything.

[Puja]

So, we've got the usual discussion on whether or not to boycott; both JKR herself, and this show / intellectual property. Whether it's even possible to separate the art from the artist etc.

Personally, I'm on the train of typically trying to separate; and when I do boycott, trying to be as accurate as realistically possible. A book is all about the author, with not that many other people involved.
A TV show is about far more, with the author not even the most important person involved - that'd be the show-runner, and more about the actors, directors, screen writers than the author - hell, it's more about the lighting director than the author!

I am not going to be going into this thread very much, because I find the topic inextricably linked with LGBTQIA+ rights and cannot talk of one without the other. I will take a moment to remind everyone that Hammy has explicitly barred threads about trans rights on the board because they turn into a debate and people's existence should not be a debate.

However, I couldn't pass by without noting that "separate the art from the artist" should be for situations where the artist is dead or otherwise divorced from the work, and where consuming it does not cause further harm. Given that Joanne is very active in politics, both in spreading hate herself and in funding like-minded politicans/groups, and that she openly and repeatedly conflates Harry Potter's popularity with the popularity of her views (and said politicians/groups often reciprocate when citing her), I do not see how supporting her staying current and relevant can be justified.

This is not to mention that the main reason she has supported a reboot is because she despises the three stars of the films, due to them repudiating her views, but they're still what the majority of people picture when they think of Harry, Ron, and Hermione. She wants a new version of the characters that can be the public faces of her product and whom she can put on merchandise without giving money and cachet to people that she hates.

A TV show boycott might affect more people than the author, but it won't be the lighting director that gets the fame from it. TV shows fail all the time and put actors/directors/screen-writers out of a job; at least this one failing would be in a better cause than, "Didn't achieve worldwide success in the first 5 minutes so Netflix cancelled it."

Puja