‘Harry Potter’ Reboot Discourse Is About To Break The Internet

Harry Potter might soon be rebooted into a TV series; reportedly, HBO is close to a deal that will see each of J.K. Rowling’s books adapted into a single season of television, amounting to seven seasons in total.

If the deal goes through, the resulting discourse is going to be some of the worst the internet has ever produced; if Elon Musk doesn’t break Twitter, the incoming culture war might just shatter the platform to pieces.

Once viewed as a charming children’s story that spawned a mighty media empire, Harry Potter has now been irreparably tainted by the controversy generated by J.K. Rowling, who has joined the “League of Disappointing Authors.”

If the deal does go through, Rowling is expected to be involved to ensure the show “remains loyal to her original material” but “will not run the show day to day or serve as its primary creator.”

Rowling’s involvement is guaranteed to provoke backlash; the video game Hogwarts Legacy sparked weeks of heated discourse and debate, despite the developers of the game repeatedly emphasizing that Rowling was not involved.

At this point, Rowling’s transphobic commentary is well-documented; a quick scroll through her Twitter page shows that the Harry Potter author stopped tweeting about the Wizarding World long ago; the vast majority of Rowling’s likes, retweets and posts are about trans people, often framing trans women as a threat to cisgender women.

During a recent interview on a new podcast, The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling, the author compared the villains of Harry Potter, the fascist group known as “Death Eaters,” to the modern trans rights movement, stating:

“[The Death Eaters] demonized and dehumanized those who were not like them. I am fighting what I see as a powerful, insidious, misogynistic movement, that has gained huge purchase in very influential areas of society. I do not see this particular movement as either benign or powerless.”

Harry Potter stars Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson have all spoken out against Rowling’s rhetoric, while others, such as Ralph Fiennes and Helena Bonham Carter, have come to her defense.

Radcliffe has proved a particularly outspoken ally to the LGTBQ community, having appeared in the first episode of educational series Sharing Spaces, moderating an insightful discussion with six transgender and nonbinary young people.

The clear divide between the main cast of Harry Potter and Rowling inspired some joking commentary, speculating on the “real” motivation behind the reboot.

Harry Potter occupies an unusual cultural space, where many of the most dedicated, knowledgeable fans are socially progressive, outspoken about LGBTQ rights, and have largely turned their back on the Wizarding World ever since Rowling scorched her reputation, but still maintain an interest in the franchise.

Now, “anti-woke” types have begun to enter the fandom, taking delight in Rowling’s words and sending threats and abusive messages to trans creators using the whimsical language of the books.

Of course, the vast majority of Harry Potter fans (nostalgic millennials and children) simply want to enjoy a story about a boy going to wizard school, and will likely be baffled at the inevitable deluge of 3-hour YouTube essays ranting about their new favorite show.

The Harry Potter films aren’t perfect, but they are perfectly cast, and a huge amount of content from the books had to be cut out, for the sake of a smooth story. Writers and showrunners for a TV series will be given the unenviable task of adapting seven tonally inconsistent books (of varying lengths) into consistent seasons, and choosing what to include, or elaborate on.

Tumblr has already spent years dissecting Rowling’s Wizarding World, highlighting every single problematic aspect; some details haven’t aged well, or were somewhat baffling to begin with. Are the house elves still going to be happy to be enslaved, and will Hermione continue to be mocked for her attempts to liberate them? Are the goblins going to be depicted as a cabal of miserly bankers?

Casting of any Harry Potter reboot is bound to be more diverse, but will the show retain names like Cho Chang and Kingsley Shacklebolt, which have been criticized as clumsy racial stereotypes?

After witnessing racist backlash to Star Wars and The Little Mermaid, fans are nervously anticipating social media harassment of young actors stepping into these iconic roles.

Rowling was previously criticized for downplaying Dumbledore’s sexuality in the Fantastic Beasts films; will a TV series embrace the famously horny, queer-friendly Harry Potter fandom, and face the wraith of right-wing culture warriors terrified at the sight of a same-sex kiss?

“LeftTube” and “anti-woke” YouTube will surely be feasting on the drama for years; the show itself might even fall flat in comparison.

Harry Potter is a powerful brand, but the modern media landscape is already oversaturated with reboots, sequels and spin-offs; the last 24 hours saw another Game of Thrones prequel teased, a live-action remake of Disney’s Moana announced, and Shrek 5 appearing on the horizon.

At worst, a Harry Potter show might follow in the footsteps of the Rings of Power, a series based on a beloved IP that most viewers didn’t even bother to finish, overshadowed by a melodramatic culture war. Or perhaps the showrunners will be able to uncover the magic of Harry Potter for a whole new generation.

Either way, the online discourse is going to rival The Battle of Hogwarts.