You don't think Rowling was commenting on race and class when she created the "mud blood" concept for the series? What was the motivation for this "hazing"? Was it Snape's House, his social status or his background?
It's not about what was going on books or the wider context, no matter what the context is a group of white kids hanging a black kid from a tree is going have a racist subtext to it just do to it's connection to lynching. No matter if it's the creators intent or not there is just so much history behind that, that it will become a racial issue, and add a whole layer that will be a huge distraction.
I think the trailer has gotten some interesting, unfortunate reactions in that before while a lot of people liked the movie trio and casting generally there were also a not huge but pretty significant amount that claimed that the movies RUINED Ron, Hermione, Ginny, some saying that also for other characters particularly Dumbledore and Harry, with and after the trailer there's been a lot more claiming of the movie cast just can't be topped, having other/new versions is pretty necessarily wrong/worse.
Again I do think having new actors wear pretty much the same uniforms/costumes is really setting them up for comparison and disappointment.
Again I do think having new actors wear pretty much the same uniforms/costumes is really setting them up for comparison and disappointment.
I personally feel the kids are just fine. The problem is that most of what we've seen so far feels so uninspired and lacking the magic that the original movies had. The magic came through in the movies via the actors who appeared to be having fun with their roles and knew they were involved in creating something special while also becoming real friends. This remake lacks purpose and will be continuously compared to the movies.
Based on the little that I have seen, it's going to come across a lesser version. This happens. Not all remakes exceed their original material.
But for me, it's really the later books, where a lot is cut out that I'm most interested.
Yeah, and I get that. But as I've stated before, I have real doubts that they're going to be able to pull it off as the books only get denser and longer as they go along, and it's only to get more and more expensive. I doubt that WB will have enough patience to see it through especially when the costs start to balloon. If that's the only feature that makes it stand out from the movies, then that makes me very concerned.
Last edited:
There will still be set reuse.
If the audience numbers are near GoT numbers, then maybe they'll spend. The biggest reason not to spend would be the cost of debt for the merger. They're going to have to cut costs, so few productions should happen in the future.
Yeah, that's the part that has me concerned. With more content, it will likely mean a longer series and more spending to accommodate all that, and then the longer the series goes on, the more the cast will likely be asked to be paid, and I just can't see them having the patience to see it all through. I feel like there might be more weight than it could bear given the ambitious nature of the series. It puts them in a bit of a conundrum, because it might mean they might have to start to cut stuff out anyway, which puts them right back to the original question of why this is being done in the first place.
I already feel sorry for the children in this show. Because after the show comes out, they will never have privacy again. I hope the girl who will play Hermione does not experience any of the sexualization and harassment that Emma Watson has gone through since her adolescence.
Being a British book set in an exclusive private school the idea of mudbloods and the hazing are far more likely to be inspired by the very discriminatory class system that exists there and British public school culture which is famous for a lot of things like hazing and "fagging". So yes social status and background would make far more sense for a British author of her generation.
This is no different than people my age who can't accept anyone but Christopher Reeve playing Superman.
The generation that grew up watching those films aren't going to like a remake no matter who is cast. As someone who read the books, I highly disagree with those that say the movies can't be topped. So much was cut out of those later films that I can't wait to see how they get tackled here. I'm certainly not going to cast any judgement on the series until I can actually watch it, and that isn't coming until later this year.
Last edited:
I've lived through several Supermen (starting with reruns of George Reeves), Batmen and Bonds. I can live with change. Poor execution is a different matter.This is no different than people my age who can't accept anyone but Christopher Reeve playing Superman.
The generation that grew up watching those films aren't going to like a remake no matter who is cast. As someone who read the books, I highly disagree with those that say the movies can't be topped. So much was cut out of those later films that I can't wait to see how they get tackled here.
Correct. Skin color didn't have diddly squat to do with mudbloods/purebloods and to suggest so is typical American projectionism. It was all about one class thinking they were superior to another due to old British class snobbery. It is like the DS9 episode "Ascension" when the "new" emissary forced reimposing the strict D'jarra caste system and Bajorians started seeing people they knew all their lives as "less than" because of their D'jarra status.
Last edited:
I don't know how detailed they are, but my best guess would be that they go for more generic representations of the characters, or not change them at all.