Any news regarding the adaptation of J.K. Rowling's novels stirs up feelings among fans of the young wizard, akin to a sore spot being poked. The initial rumors about a series set in the Harry Potter universe emerged three years ago, and even then, many casual fans, as well as those among them working as film critics in various publications, vocally condemned the idea. They argued that the films should remain as benchmarks and that the topic should be left untouched, fearing it would be ruined.
Such arguments are not without merit. Looking at series adapted from feature films (like "Star Wars," "The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power," "Ripley," "Mr. & Mrs. Smith," etc.), it becomes clear that the main issue with these projects is that the films themselves are more vibrant, spectacular, and star-studded.
However, the television industry is driven by fearless individuals, and so a year later, the rumors about a multi-series version of "Harry Potter" were confirmed, followed by more details. Filming is set to begin next summer, with the premiere of the first season expected in 2027. There will be a total of seven seasons over ten years, with J.K. Rowling serving as one of the executive producers and the intention to include the entire plot of the novels, transforming the project into the most comprehensive adaptation of the books.
J.K. Rowling's figure, along with the producers' aim to conduct casting in accordance with all the tenets of new ethics—ensuring maximum inclusivity in selecting actors—has sparked a new storm of controversy. Often, those dissatisfied seemed to compete in absurdity. Some expressed outrage over the potential racial diversity of the cast, while others called for Rowling to be removed from all projects due to her allegedly transphobic statements. "Forewarned is forearmed; I've stocked up on plenty of champagne," Rowling responded on social media to the calls for a boycott, once again showcasing the strength of British humor in the face of ridiculous pretentiousness.
As the situation evolved, details about the casting for key roles began to surface. The American publication Deadline, citing its sources at HBO, reports that for the role of Hogwarts headmaster Albus Dumbledore, producers are considering British actor Mark Strong (from the "Kingsman" trilogy) or his fellow countryman Mark Rylance ("Bridge of Spies"). Maggie Smith (who passed away in September of this year), who played Professor McGonagall, will likely be replaced by Sharon Horgan ("The Garvey Sisters") or Rachel Weisz ("The Mummy").
1 The role of gamekeeper Rubeus Hagrid, played by British actor Robbie Coltrane, who created one of the most vivid characters in the Harry Potter films, was left vacant after his death in the fall of 2022. Brett Goldstein from "Ted Lasso" is actively being suggested for the role of Harry's friend. Alan Rickman, who portrayed Severus Snape, is also no longer alive, and it seems they want to invite Paapa Essiedu ("Gangs of London") for the role of the professor. Finally, Ralph Fiennes, who terrified audiences as Voldemort, noted in a recent interview that, in his opinion, the famous villain would best be portrayed by "Peaky Blinders" star Cillian Murphy.
2 3
Transitioning from rumors to more official information, no actor has yet received an offer to audition for the aforementioned roles. Although the so-called official information, as is often the case with large projects, is very limited due to non-disclosure agreements, which apply to the entire cast and crew.
Confirmed by the series' producers, the details regarding the casting of child roles show that thirty-two thousand children aged nine to eleven have participated in auditions so far. While for adult actors mentioned in discussions about potential candidates for significant roles, participation in the series will merely be an addition to their already established careers, for children, the stakes are incredibly high.
4 5
Looking at Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint, the main stars of the Harry Potter films, it is evident that in a civilized film system, even one project can provide actors with a future and the enviable privilege of only working where they want. The finances of the famous film franchise are indeed impressive. Warner Bros. has earned over seven billion dollars at the box office and has generously shared profits with the actors.
A recent tax scandal involving Rupert Grint sheds some light on the income levels of the Harry Potter stars. The actor, who is remembered for playing Ron Weasley, must return nearly two million pounds (approximately two hundred sixty million rubles at current exchange rates) to the British treasury for having paid only ten percent of his taxes instead of the required fifty-two percent, taking advantage of a loophole in the law.
However, what is even more impressive in this situation is the taxable income. In just one year (from 2011 to 2012), the royalties from DVD sales and television rights (meaning the actor had not appeared in any new projects and was simply receiving royalties) brought Mr. Grint four and a half million pounds. This is an impressive reason for the boy who will land the role of Weasley in the series to first seek out an accountant and a lawyer.