The Boy Who Lived is about to live again, whether we like it or not, as Warner Bros. Discovery is plowing ahead with its plans to reboot the Harry Potter franchise with all the speed (and noxious fumes) of the Hogwarts Express. In many ways, going back to basics and retelling the story of the legendary seven books in a TV series format is a smart way to fix the franchise after the incorrectly titled Fantastic Beasts movies. Still, daring to replace anything as beloved as the HP films was always going to be as incendiary as tickling a sleeping dragon.
Ask the Wizarding World fandom what the biggest drawback facing the show is and they’ll no doubt come up with a long list: the fact that the film series only ended 13 years ago, the glut of fantasy streaming shows around, and the perennially plummeting popularity of creator J.K. Rowling all spring to mind. However, some recent comments from Warner Bros. bring to light the real greatest challenge the TV series must overcome if it can hope to match the originals.
The Harry Potter TV series must choose the right Chosen Ones to cast the perfect spell on audiences
The Harry Potter TV series received a key update at Warner Bros. Discovery’s 2024 Q1 earnings call, as CEO David Zaslav confirmed the project is looking to release on streaming in 2026. This comes hot on the heels of Channing Dungey, chairperson of Warner Bros. Television, revealing to Variety that the studio’s fully aware of the difficulties in finding the right young actors to play the parts of Harry, Ron Weasley, Hermione Granger, and their Hogwarts classmates.
“The first step for us is figuring out who this showrunner is going to be and once we get that locked down, then we can start having those [casting] conversations,” Dungey explained. “The tricky part is the first two books, where the kids are on the younger end, around 11 or 12.”
In saying this, Dungey has correctly identified arguably the number one issue facing the Harry Potter franchise, as it’s one that has already proven to make or break the hype around other contemporary fantasy TV adaptations. For whatever reason, the young casts of both Disney Plus’ Percy Jackson and the Olympians and Netflix’s Avatar: The Last Airbender have come under extreme scrutiny from fans, far more than Daniel Radcliffe and company did back in the 2000s.
Perhaps it’s because of the rise of internet fandom since the beginning of the HP movies, but whoever inherits these beloved roles will have to be prepared to face a lot of intense attention, criticism, and possibly backlash once they are cast. That’s a heck of a lot to place on the shoulders of, as Dungey points out, an 11 or 12-year-old. And that’s without even mentioning the pressure of leading a major TV production based on one of the biggest franchises in the world.
With no disrespect intended to those talented young actors, reactions to the leads of both Percy Jackson and Avatar (not based on a books series, but an animation from the same era as PJ and HP) have been mixed, with many fans feeling they don’t quite align with the original characters. Warner Bros. absolutely struck gold the first time around as not only were Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson perfect for their roles they also turned out to be incredibly mature and well-adjusted people who were able to weather the storm of growing up in the spotlight. In many ways, the odds are against WB being able to capture that same — forgive me — magic a second time.
What WB must really be hoping for is to replicate what Netflix has achieved with Stranger Things, whose stars have grown up before audiences’ eyes and have become beloved superstars in their own rights. But there’s a reason Netflix is full of Stranger Things knockoffs that only lasted one season — lightning rarely hits the same spot twice. Even when your main character has a lightning scar on his forehead.