In case anyone didn't know, JK has said before that she sees the ongoing success of Harry Potter as direct approval of her stance towards transgender people.
this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2025
105 points (89.5% liked)
Shows and TV
1254 readers
175 users here now
Open discussion of Media / Shows / Television
- Be nice
- Don't go off topic
- Don't rage farm
Other communities
We are still open to mod application, please comment on this post: https://lemm.ee/post/40675177
founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
This just in, J.K. Rowling is a literal bag of pond scum. More old news at 11.
And Harry will be played by French Stewart.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt could be Malfoy?
Why are we still giving JK Rowling money?
I mean, I'm not
Before the S hit the F, we bought the entire movie set and the entire book set for our kids. We'd regularly read them to them before bed, and now it makes me throw up in my mouth. As I always say, she can fuck off into the sun. There is absolutely no financial benefit for her to be a tankie, but I guess once you're rich you can just go full mask off.
Before San hit the Francisco?
I'm only acquainted with her being a TERF. Is she a tankie, as well? That seems like an unlikely ideology for a billionaire to espouse.
Not gonna lie, I don't know the difference between terfs and tankies. I'm old. I just know both are bad. Protect trans people.
TERF is trans exclusionary radical feminist.
Tankies are "leftists" who align themselves with "communist states" like Russia and China.
I fully intend on not watching this show on a monetized service that would give her money
Oh Harry, Harry, Harry... Did you, lovable little magical crotch goblin, place your silly little name in my shiny flambee chamber pot?
Harry Potter and the Trinity Killer.
Will Harry still be played by the ghost of Kevin Peter Hall in a giant Sasquatch suit? Oh wait, Im thinking of the wrong Harry..
I blew past this comment not even getting the reference at first, even though I watch Harry and the Hendersons with my daughter all the time. I actually got about five or six posts down my feed before it dawned on me and I had to come back to let you know.
Thanks for pointing it out. I would have blown past it too. Harry and the Hendersons was a show I watched on repeat as a kid. How's it hold up today? I might give it a shot with my kid now.
It’s the sneaky ones that get ya’!
IMO it still holds up, kinda the same way that “Honey, I Shrunk the Kids” and “Honey, I Blew Up The Kid” do — but that may be more due to the feelings of nostalgia that they all still up for me.
Holds up incredibly well. It's as timeless as the Vacation movies.
I see what you did there!
Wait... Why the series if the movies exist and already do the same job perfectly well...
Because JK Rowling likes money, I presume
She loves money about as much as she hates trans!
It's mainly HBO/Warner's new parent company and their president who wanted this to happen
Do you know how many huge companies make money on keeping this franchise alive to sell merchandise rights and theme park tickets?!
And those 2 are worth more than any artistic integrity ever.
Right, I'm just surprised they would remake the same stories instead of just expanding on the same universe
Same but expanding has been a bad sale lately because it pisses off old nerds or only appeases them because they focus on stories we already know the beginning and end to.
And apparently we can't trust to tell a completely new story in the same world as that would kill the merchandise already made of characters you wish to keep around forever in their collectors packaging.
Basically people are scared to step in any direction in case it is wrong and impacts the profit.
So remake, that isn't too different but younger.
So instead of writing competent, coherent stories and letting the creativity that caused the huge fanbase flourish, their reaction to fan rejection of by-the-numbers low effort cash grabs is to... make more remakes?
These decision makers need to leave the industry.
Tbf in the Potter fandom the idea of adapting the original books into a show instead of into movies has been popular for 25 years.
Line go up.
Great casting for a project that shouldn't fucking exist.
When I see him with a beard, I suppose it's not the worst choice. Still, this series seems as though it will be a little unusual and not something anyone had asked for.
He's a good actor, perhaps he will surprise everyone like hal becoming Walter White
He played a very believable serial killer in Dexter, and before Third Rock From the Sun he was largely known for his dramatic roles.
A good actor?
I'm sorry, but John Lithgow may very well be one of the best actors alive. Definitely among the GOATs. The dude is a master at what he does.
I do not disagree with you. Toss Gary Oldman in that group
I like that your best comparison for Dumbledore is Walter White
Hal?
Cranston's character on Malcom in the middle
Ohhhhhhhhh
He's not playing Dumbledore, he's playing Michael Gambon's version of Dumbledore. .
Love Lithgow wonder if it'll be similar to his Churchill
I'd be surprised if he used anything like his natural accent - American voices seem to be against the rules for fantasy shows (though there's probably exceptions I'm not thinking of).
Dumbledore is gonna be hilarious.
Seems like it wont be strictly UK actors this time around
Harry Potter and the American Actors trying to pretend to have British accents, Part 1.
Keanu Reeves for Severus Snape! Or Sirius Black. He's serious and wears black in John Wick, so he's perfect for the role!
“You’re a woman, Harry.”