I was merely five years old when I saw Daniel Radcliffe in and as Harry Potter for the first time, and unbeknownst to me, I became a Potterhead without realising such a term existed. Almost twenty years later, much like a Horcrux, a part of me still resides in Hogwarts, consuming the Grand Feast while marvelling at Sir Nicholas’ nearly headless head.
The wizarding universe charmed the muggle world right from the first movie. Harry Potter films, albeit insufficient adaptations of the books, have a prominent place in pop culture. And while now, as an adult, my opinions regarding the author and texts have changed, the films nonetheless form a significant part of my growing years.
And that is why I’m ‘allowed’ to feel what I do about the reboot series. The news makes me unhappy. Here’s what the child in me would like to say:
1. There can only be one classic, and it ALREADY exists
We’ve seen enough examples by now to know remakes and spin-offs of the classics hardly ever live up to the legacy of the originals. And Harry Potter is just too touchy a topic.
2. Really don’t want another Fantastic Beasts, sorry
There’s no ‘obliviate‘ that’d be able to eradicate a ruined Harry Potter for me.
3. Daniel Radcliffe is Harry Potter. Period
And Emma Watson is Hermione Granger, Rupert Grint is Ron Weasley, Alan Rickman is Professor Snape, Robbie Coltrane is Rubeus Hagrid… NO ONE can substitute the GOLD original cast. They live in our hearts rent-free.
4. Because running out of ideas doesn’t mean you taint our childhood now
Harry Potter’s a time capsule. It shouldn’t be rehashed every 20 years.
5. Time-turner doesn’t exist in real life; legacies can’t be recreated
It won’t be the same. It can’t be.
And now let’s move on to the part when we grew up…
6. Ron Weasley was the WORST
Ron never treated Hermione nicely. In fact, he was jealous, insecure, and entitled right from the start. He literally abandoned her and Harry when they were facing life and death. Their relationship made no sense.
7. You’re talking about a ‘faithful’ remake of the books. Does it mean literally everybody telling Hermione that house elves ‘deserve’ to be enslaved?
An adult re-reading of Harry Potter books exposes horrifying bits of the texts. Like, the portrayal of House Elves as magical beings who ‘enjoy’ being slaves. And the fact that how Hermione, who seems to be the only person to really care about their rights, is ridiculed.
8. Or the lack of representation?
How convenient is it that almost 99% of students in Hogwarts are heterosexual and white? Everybody’s straight. And remember how the Parvati twins had no partner for the Yule Ball and how Harry and Ron HAD to pair up with them because of a lack of better options. Besides, they dressed them abysmally.
9. Or all the harmful tropes will be conveniently ignored AGAIN?
There are several harmful exclusionary tropes in the Harry Potter universe. Like cultural stereotypes, the rationalisation of slavery, women chronicling men’s lives, classism, and racism.
Think about it, Seamus Finnigus is the only Irish character. And he just BLOWS things up. A few years ago, Rowling claimed werewolves are a metaphor for HIV/AIDS. Lavender Brown lives up to the ‘dumb blond girl’ stereotype. Hermione is a ‘mud blood’, ‘impure’ because she’s a muggle-born.
10. Just the fact that it’s associated with J.K. Rowling
Reportedly. J.K. Rowling will be the executive producer of the new series. And why shouldn’t she when she created the universe? Well, the problem is that she’s a TERF. Even the actors in the film, including Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Evanna Lynch, among others, have also called out her transphobic and exclusionary remarks.
So, yes, don’t want a remake, reboot…anything.
