Harry Potter at 25: Revisiting the First Cinematic Spell

In just under two months, arguably the year’s most anticipated — and likely most expensive — streaming show arrives, in the form of the first season of HBO’s “Harry Potter.” It’s an impressively ambitious undertaking that is expected to run to seven eight-episode series over the next seven years, and will, presumably, fill the various gaps left by the earlier film adaptations. Showrunner Francesca Gardiner and director Mark Mylod — both veterans of “Succession” — are helped by the knowledge that they are working with some of the best-known and best-loved material in modern children’s literature. They are, however, stymied by the fact that the “Harry Potter” creator J.K. Rowling has gone from being a universally beloved, even near-sanctified, figure to a divisive and controversial one, thanks to her uncompromising, and frequently expressed, views on gender issues. We shall have to wait until nearer the Christmas premiere of the show to see what, if anything, HBO does with Ms. Rowling in terms of promotion. While someone as media-savvy as the author is unlikely to do anything to rock the boat, the chance of public protests is pretty high. But the new cast must walk a fine line between distancing themselves from her opinions on gender — “I do not agree with Jo’s views,” and so on—and celebrating the storyteller whose characters they have played, all the while, presumably, benefiting from the high salaries they are being paid. Nobody has quite gone as far as Keira Knightley, who plays the dastardly Dolores Umbridge in the audio adaptations. When asked about her views about Ms. Rowling’s statements, Ms. Knightley smirked and said, “You know, I think we’re all living in a period of time right now where we’re all going to have to figure out how to live together, aren’t we? And we’ve all got very different opinions.” The internet duly blew up, with Ms. Knightley denounced as a TERF, and the basic good sense of what she was saying went largely unnoticed. But the repercussions of being involved in the show rumble on; Nicholas Hoult, initially cast as the flamboyant Gilderoy Lockhart in the second series, pulled out, citing that age-old canard “scheduling conflicts” cited, and “Loki” director Kate Herron wrote publicly that “They’ve asked me twice and I’ve had to explain my answer is never gonna change from a no.”A quarter of a century ago, things were very different indeed. When the first Harry Potter picture was announced — titled, like the book it was based on, “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone” in America, ostensibly because it was assumed too many Americans wouldn’t understand what a philosopher was — there was a shortlist of A-list directors all eagerly vying to take on the role.Emma Watson (L) and J.K. Rowling pose with the Outstanding British Contribution award for the Harry Potter Films during the Orange British Academy Film Awards on February 13, 2011 in London, England. Via Chris Jackson/Getty ImagesThe frontrunner, naturally, was Steven Spielberg, who revealed earlier this year that he had accepted the job, and then backed out to direct “A.I: Artificial Intelligence” in homage to his friend, the late Stanley Kubrick, with whom he had been developing the film for many years. Ms. Rowling’s own choice was Terry Gilliam, who would have been brilliantly suited to the film’s visual stylings — as well as having worked successfully with young actors in the past, although “Adventures of Baron Munchausen” star Sarah Polley has said otherwise – but she was not influential enough to dictate the hiring of the filmmaker. Ultimately, Chris Columbus, best known at that point for “Home Alone,” was deemed the safest pair of hands.Mr. Columbus has largely been dismissed as a steady-as-he-goes hack for his visually indifferent work on the two pictures that he directed, and there are criticisms that can be made of his films that continue to stand. The central child performances are terrible, especially Daniel Radcliffe as Harry: He looks perfect, and presumably was cast on that basis, but you can almost hear Mr. Columbus directing him off-camera, so wooden and flat are his facial expressions and line readings. The adult actors fare better, although several of them seem to be wearily marking time between other, more challenging roles. Alan Rickman, cast as the (apparently) nefarious Professor Snape, wrote candidly in his diaries about the frustrations that he felt while playing the part, and if he had had his way, he would have quit the series and seen the role recast — perhaps with Tim Roth, who turned down the part to play a villainous monkey in Tim Burton’s “Planet of the Apes” — but he was prevailed upon to remain in situ when his character’s arc was explained to him by Ms. Rowling. The greatest issue with “Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone,” as it should be known, is that it never feels dark or frightening enough. The first book, after all, begins with the murder of Harry’s parents by the dastardly Lord Voldemort, and then proceeds apace through the miserable life he leads in the reluctant care of his aunt and uncle, only to be rescued when he can finally head to the country’s most exclusive private school, Hogwarts. There is about an hour’s worth of exposition, some of it more entertaining than other parts — step forward John Hurt, single-handedly stealing scenes as the wandmaker Ollivander — but by the time the limp central mystery has to be resolved, complete with some truly dire visual effects, Mr. Columbus and his screenwriter Steve Kloves (the man responsible for the gorgeous “Wonder Boys”the previous year) seem content to steer the ship in the most unadventurous direction imaginable and hope that Hogwarts fans turn up in droves.That they did is not exactly a spoiler, with the film benefiting from a post-9/11 gravitation towards fantasy blockbusters. Audiences would return the following year for the (slightly superior) “Chamber of Secrets.”To be sure, there are elements of the first picture that work well, such as John Seale’s cinematography — albeit rather less lavish than his work on “The English Patient” and “The Talented Mr. Ripley” — and, most particularly, John Williams’s score, perhaps his last truly iconic work. The central motif, “Hedwig’s Theme,” has all the magic, mystery and drama that is largely missing from the prosaic goings-on depicted on screen. But it says a lot for the goodwill towards “Harry Potter,” and by extension its creator, that the film was not regarded as an artistic debacle along the lines of the Philip Pullman flop “The Golden Compass” half a decade later. Instead it was seen as a necessary, even promising, first installment in a franchise that would result in Warner Bros. making billions out of the books. It grossed $974 million on its first release, was optimistically nominated for a BAFTA for Best British Film, and led to a further seven films, all of which were hugely profitable and, for the most part, critically acclaimed. I have hopes that the new HBO series will be better than the first film, although the teaser trailer, which hinted at a darker, more realistic treatment of the books, was soon superseded by a blander and more predictable full preview that seemed to have taken all of its visual cues from the original pictures. Still, all will be revealed in a couple of months. If the show manages to restore the sense of wonder and awe to audiences that the films only achieved sporadically, perhaps, for once, its creator’s political views will not be the prevalent topic of conversation.

Harry Potter at 25: Revisiting the First Cinematic Spell

Harry Potter at 25: Revisiting the First Cinematic Spell

More from the New York Sun

Five Days Left. The Economy Is Booming. Get Out There and Sell It, Republicans

Homelessness Emerges Again at New York City

Award-Winning Poet Resigns From the Daughters of the American Revolution Over Its Refusal To Block Biological Males

Exclusive: New York Democratic Socialists Privately Rail Against Mamdani, Fantasize About Seizing Power To Imprison Conservatives

The Democrats’ Message of Failure

Hegseth Fires His Top Military Planner Whom He Blames for Leaking News on Another Round of Strikes Against Iran

Left Party’s Berlin Mayoral Candidate Admits Being Afraid of Extremists in Her Own Party

Justice Department Sets Date To Close D.C. Golf Course as Legal Battles Heat Up Over Access to Federally Owned Land

More from the New York Sun

Five Days Left. The Economy Is Booming. Get Out There and Sell It, Republicans

Homelessness Emerges Again at New York City

Award-Winning Poet Resigns From the Daughters of the American Revolution Over Its Refusal To Block Biological Males

Exclusive: New York Democratic Socialists Privately Rail Against Mamdani, Fantasize About Seizing Power To Imprison Conservatives

The Democrats’ Message of Failure

Hegseth Fires His Top Military Planner Whom He Blames for Leaking News on Another Round of Strikes Against Iran

Left Party’s Berlin Mayoral Candidate Admits Being Afraid of Extremists in Her Own Party

Justice Department Sets Date To Close D.C. Golf Course as Legal Battles Heat Up Over Access to Federally Owned Land