Greed comes in many forms. For some, it’s about fame and for others, money. But for JK Rowling, it is about the need for everyone to think that she is right and real. One does not need to look far for proof; the recent trailer for the Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone series is evidence enough.
The new series by HBO and Rowling is nothing more than a cash grab. As someone who grew up on the books, films, and Rowling, I will not be watching it. No disrespect to the kiddos in it—it is a great opportunity for them—but the massive production value and giant paychecks behind the series are insulting to all those who suffered because Rowling dismissed their identities.
Despite Rowling’s many awful comments about the LGBTQ+ community, the British author is dead-set on remaining relevant. Her most recent endeavour is to revive the love that fans held for fun during the heyday of the first Harry Potter movie adaptations. The OGs from Warner Bros’ early 2000s film franchise—Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, among others—have since distanced themselves from Rowling, and for good reason. While they may owe their careers to her, the actors simply decided they did not need to put up with her contention. Gratitude does not equate respect, nor should it.
Can you separate Rowling from Harry Potter?
Pottermania was a thing growing up. From queues for books to waiting for the mailman to bring us a much-overdue letter from Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry (my letter was definitely lost in transit, and I blame India Post), it was all a rite of passage.
One of my fondest childhood memories is my father taking time off work to take my sister and I to the first day, first show of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004). In fact, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II (2011) was a family affair.
While there were some who were convinced it promoted Satanism, others saw the beauty of a children’s book series that promoted friendship, bravery, and love. Which is why it saddens so many of us to see the author spew such hatred and yet continue to profit from it decades later.
Also read: Hannah Montana deserves a reunion of its characters, not actors
Why the show gives us the ick
Apart from Rowling, the series itself does not inspire confidence. Although just a glance has been offered into the HBO production, it looks more like a thriller than a children’s story.
The Netflix lighting, too, is off-putting. You cannot make a show about the 90s without making it look like it belonged to that time period. Can you imagine Back to the Future (1985) with perfect, glossy lighting? Plus, audiences today are more than tired of the muted colours modern creators prefer.
The series, which chronicles the first book of the Harry Potter series, has been scheduled for a Christmas 2026 release. And while it does seem to offer insight into Harry’s experience at a Muggle school, it does not ignite a flame of nostalgia in the older generation that witnessed those denim-on-denim fashions and a pre-social media climate.
While the acting and character choices seem interesting, the series itself simply does not feel magical enough; there is no whimsy. Hashtag not my Harry Potter.
One YouTube comment perfectly sums up how it feels to watch the trailer: “It feels like seeing new people living in your old home.”
Views are personal.
(Edited by Prasanna Bachchhav)