I can’t recall too many people complaining that what our content-choked, multi-platform, so-called Golden Age of television was lacking was a 10-year Harry Potter spin-off project. But clearly some people were because now we have one – or will when HBO Max, now rebranded simply as Max, brings its big budget live action adaptation to the small screen.

Unsurprisingly the project will be overseen by Potter author JK Rowling, a woman whose name is now prefixed by the word ‘controversial’ even in the pages of august industry journals such as The Hollywood Reporter.

“I’m looking forward to being part of this new adaptation which will allow for a degree of depth and detail only afforded by a long-form television series,” the author said in a statement accompanying the announcement. She also spoke of the personal importance of “preserving the integrity of my books.”

Ms Rowling will act as executive producer alongside several others including Neil Blair, the lawyer turned agent whose muscular Blair Partnership Rowling joined in 2011. Expect firm hands on the rudder, then, as HMS Potter sets sail for uncharted waters. More than that, expect a dive into the Potterverse even deeper than the one already afforded by the near 20 hour running time of the eight big screen outings.

But will Ms Rowling’s involvement be a boon or an impediment? Will the series be any good in its own right? Is it even worth doing under the circumstances or is Max flogging a dead centaur? Just three among many as-yet-unanswered questions.

The announcement was made on Wednesday by HBO boss Casey Bloys. Praising Harry Potter as “a cultural phenomenon” (no arguments there) he said the new series would give audiences “the opportunity to discover Hogwarts in a whole new way” and spoke of “an enduring love and thirst for the Wizarding World.”

Fleshing out a few more details, Max said the series would feature an entirely new cast, that its intention is “to lead a new generation of fandom”, and that each season “will be authentic to the original books” and will bring Harry Potter “to new audiences around the world.”

The accompanying budget is big (think Game Of Thrones) and so is the decade-spanning ambition (think Game Of Thrones). Hopefully some of the production spend will come to Scotland, where parts of the original films were shot.

As for the all-important showrunner, the person who will determine the creative shape of the project, there’s no word yet. On the face of it, the smart money should be on Jack Thorne, who wrote the stage play Harry Potter And The Cursed Child and whose abiding strength as a writer is his empathy for and treatment of young people in extremis. Among his other writing credits are Skins, Shameless, Shane Meadows’s This Is England trilogy, both Enola Holmes films for Netflix and the BBC’s well-liked adaptation of His Dark Materials. It’s quite the CV.

Then again, Ms Rowling might remember the letter Mr Thorne wrote after the first concerted backlash against her. That was in June 2020, when she was accused of transphobia after appearing to mock the use of the phrase “people who menstruate” in place of the word women.

“I wrote to Jo the day after it all hit,” Mr Thorne revealed in an interview last year. “I wrote because I have someone that’s close to me who is trans, and I worry about the kid who has loved those books and is hearing that they don’t fit.”

Maybe not Jack Thorne for showrunner, then. As for the casting, it’s up in the air (and hopefully chasing a snitch). But you could do worse than to stick a fiver on Cillian Murphy for Lord Voldermort. Or why not go for a treble with Zach Galafianakis as Hagrid and Jared Harris as Dumbledore? You read it here first.

The Herald:

In the online iteration of the Potterverse, where opinion is already sharply divided over Ms Rowling and what she may or may not believe regarding trans issues, reception to news of the TV series was mixed and became predictably heated. Some couldn’t wait (they’ll have to, though: 2025 is an optimistic air date, though 2026 is more likely). Others expressed concern, or set their faces against it.

One very prominent thumbs down came from fan-run Twitter account Harry Potter Universe, which has been posting since 2014 and has 419,000 followers. Just 48 hours days after the announcement it announced it was going offline permanently as a result of being “bullied, harassed, and insulted by hundreds of people because I gave my opinion on the new Harry Potter TV series … A safe, secure place for nine years quickly turned into a toxic environment in two days.”

If the corollary is that most people are in favour of the reboot, that’s good news for Max – less so if the takeaway is how divisive the franchise has become and how poisonous the debate around it and its creator remains.

In the question-and-answer session following the announcement of the new series, Mr Bloys was asked the inevitable question by reporters about the controversy surrounding Ms Rowling and the accusations of transphobia. That swooshing sound you’re about to hear is him ducking the issue.

READ MORE: JK ROWLING - GENDER IDENTITY MOVEMENT IS DANGEROUS

“I don’t think this is the forum,” he said. “That’s a very online conversation, very nuanced and complicated and not something we’re going to get into.” However he did add: “Obviously, the Harry Potter story is incredibly affirmative and positive and about love and self-acceptance.”

In light of that comment, here’s another question: will there be room made in the plot of the TV show for a transgender character? This is kind of a remake, after all, and one thing we know about remakes is they often require (and indeed benefit from) the sort of updates which consider issues of diversity, say. In which case, might there be room made in the cast for a transgender actor?

From a commercial perspective, Max would be stupid not to go down that route. Imagine the publicity, if nothing else. But the huge success of Netflix show Heartstopper, adapted from a webcomic by British writer Alice Oseman, has set a benchmark of sorts. A gay love story set in a bog average English comprehensive school, it also features a positive representation of a transgender character, Elle Argent. She’s played by transgender actress Yasmin Finney who later this year will be seen in Doctor Who playing a transgender character. Where the Tardis goes, will Hogwarts follow?

Harry Potter has traditionally had a strong LGBTQ+ audience, one of the reasons Ms Rowling has become a hate figure for some. In the real world, there are few schools which don’t have some pupils who self-identify as transgender or non-binary. Were the makers of the new Harry Potter TV series starting completely from scratch – were they wanting to reflect this reality – they would surely tackle all that, even if the setting was a school for wizards.

So Ms Rowling has quite an opportunity here. She can, potentially, hit reset on her reputation, find an accomodation with transgender issues but also address some of the issues which exercise her. Obviously she would have to be careful. The vehicle for all this is a fantasy story aimed at children. But that doesn’t mean it cannot be done.