{"id":569978,"date":"2023-04-13T02:09:04","date_gmt":"2023-04-12T23:09:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/en.buradabiliyorum.com\/harry-potter-tv-series-is-already-controversial-j-k-rowlings-involvement-slammed\/"},"modified":"2023-04-13T02:09:04","modified_gmt":"2023-04-12T23:09:04","slug":"harry-potter-tv-series-is-already-controversial-j-k-rowlings-involvement-slammed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/buradabiliyorum.com\/en\/harry-potter-tv-series-is-already-controversial-j-k-rowlings-involvement-slammed\/","title":{"rendered":"#Harry Potter TV Series Is Already Controversial: J.K. Rowling\u2019s Involvement Slammed"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

\n It\u2019s only been announced for a few hours, and it\u2019s already controversial. <\/p>\n

\n A Harry Potter TV series<\/a> was greenlit by Max (formerly HBO Max) that will remake J.K. Rowling\u2019s beloved bestselling fantasy novels into a \u201cfaithful\u201d long-form series to roll out over a period of 10 years. The ambitious project will cast new leads and include far more detail from the seven novels, which were often rather truncated in their previous adaptations into Warner Bros. feature films, which launched with 2011\u2019s Harry Potter and the Sorcerer\u2019s Stone<\/em>. <\/p>\n

\n Except, you know, there\u2019s the whole divisive matter of Rowling herself. <\/p>\n

\n Max could not make a series without a deal with the author, who still holds considerable control over the filmic rights to her stories. Rowling will be involved with the new series as an executive producer, though she is not expected to have day-to-day control or contribute to the writing. Many consider the author\u2019s repeated opinions about the trans community to be offensive. <\/p>\n

\n \u201cJ.K. is an executive producer, and her insights will be helpful,\u201d explained Casey Bloys, chairman and CEO, HBO & Max Content. \u201cWe are in the Harry Potter business. The TV show is new and exciting, but we\u2019ve been in the Harry Potter business for 20 years; this isn\u2019t a new decision. We\u2019re comfortable being in the Potter business. J.K. is a very online conversation \u2026 It\u2019s very nuanced and complicated and not something we\u2019re going to get into. Our priority is what\u2019s onscreen. The Harry Potter story is incredibly affirmative and positive about love and acceptance, and that\u2019s our priority, what\u2019s on the screen.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n When everybody read Bloys\u2019 statement, they decided to forget their concerns and take a wait-and-see app<\/a>roach. <\/p>\n

\n Oh wait, that\u2019s the total opposite of what happened. Here are a few reactions from media<\/a> professionals:<\/p>\n

\n Vulture<\/em> critic Kathryn VanArendonk wrote<\/a>, \u201cThis faithful adaptation of harry potter, announced with absolutely bullshit craven disdain for rowling\u2019s political impact, is bad.\u201d <\/p>\n

\n Reporter Sean T. Collins wrote<\/a>, \u201cIf you interview an actor or filmmaker or executive involved with the Harry Potter tv show and don\u2019t lead with a question about JK Rowling leading a hate group you\u2019re done, over, out of the art club.\u201d <\/p>\n

\n Out<\/em> magazine tweeted<\/a>: \u201cWe don\u2019t want any new Harry Potter content if noted transphobe J.K. Rowling is involved..\u201d <\/p>\n

\n Entertainment podcaster Dave Gonzales tweeted<\/a>: \u201cTen years of a Harry Potter series with Rowling as EP is just ten years of press events dragging her anti-trans agenda back into the news<\/a> cycle.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n Decider<\/em> editor Alex Zalben sarcastically tweeted<\/a>: \u201cThe witch hunt against JK Rowling continues with a 10 year commitment to faithfully adapt her novels, for the second time, now in TV form, with the unlimited resources of one of the largest entertainment companies in the world! Witch hunt!\u201d <\/p>\n

\n And here are some fans: \u201cAdapting every single<\/a> \u2018Harry Potter\u2019 book into at least one season of TV each is basically committing to a decade-long relationship with TERF J.K. Rowling. You don\u2019t do that if you\u2019re remotely open to accepting that trans men are men and trans women are women\u2026\u201d And<\/a>: \u201cJust be honest! Say Harry Potter is a lucrative franchise, you hope to make millions off of it and you don\u2019t particularly care about the harm that comes to trans community from Rowling.\u201d And<\/a>: \u201cSo HBO and Max chief Casey Bloys is a transphobe too, got it! Claiming rhetorical neutrality is siding with the oppressor, and he put his money where his mouth is already by paying TERF J.K. Rowling to adapt her \u2018Harry Potter\u2019 series for TV. He chose money over human rights.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n Whether all this will have any impact on the show itself is unclear, yet it seems unlikely. The most recent test case would be the February release of the game<\/a> Hogwarts Legacy<\/em>, which was similarly slammed for Rowling\u2019s involvement and faced calls for a boycott<\/a>, yet broke sales records, moving 12 million copies<\/a> in its first two weeks alone. A more distant test would be the Fantastic Beasts<\/em> film franchise; a five-movie plan was cut down to a trilogy amid collapsing box office. The ticket-sales plummet coincided with the rising controversy surrounding Rowling\u2019s views, but, on the other hand, the films were kinda<\/a> dreadful<\/a>, with the second and third entry scoring under 50 percent on Rotten Tomatoes, so it\u2019s tough to pin that on the Rowling controversy. <\/p>\n

\n As one fan<\/a> put it: \u201cPpl who claim to hate JK Rowling are so funny bc they still read her books, still watch her movies, still play her video games, still go to the Harry Potter theme parks, and still buy the merch. She can\u2019t be cancelled and she\u2019ll never go broke. They need to realize this.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n As for Rowling herself, she released this statement: \u201cMax\u2019s commitment to preserving the integrity of my books is important to me, and I\u2019m looking forward to being part of this new adaptation which will allow for a degree of depth and detail only afforded by a long-form television series.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n