Daniel Radcliffe Breaks Silence on Harry Potter TV Reboot, Confirms Whether He’ll Appear in Max Series
Harry Potter is weighing in on his small screen successor.
Several months after Max announced a 10-year commitment to a TV adaptation of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter novels, Daniel Radcliffe — who played the titular wizard in Warner Brothers’ film series from 2001 to 2011 — is giving his blessing to whichever young actor is lucky enough to take up his mantle.
Radcliffe also says, rather definitively, whether we should expect to see him make a cameo in the series
“My understanding is that they’re trying to very much start fresh, and I’m sure whoever is making them will want to make their own mark on it and probably not want to have to figure out how to get old Harry to cameo in this somewhere,” Radcliffe tells ComicBook.com. “So I’m definitely not seeking it out in any way. But I do wish them, obviously, all the luck in the world, and I’m very excited to have that torch passed. But I don’t think it needs me to physically pass it.”
The Harry Potter reboot has already received public backlash for naming Rowling an executive producer; in recent years, Rowling’s statements on sex and gender have widely been deemed transphobic.
In response to the backlash, Rowling tweeted: “Dreadful news, which I feel duty bound to share. Activists in my mentions are trying to organise yet another boycott of my work, this time of the Harry Potter TV show. As forewarned is forearmed, I’ve taken the precaution of laying in a large stock of champagne.”
Will you be watching Max’s TV version of Harry Potter, or was once enough for you? Drop a comment with your thoughts below.
[COMMENT REMOVED BY MODERATOR]
Whatever you say TERF.
TERFs always get mad when you call them out for being TERFs. It shouldn’t be a difficult concept. If you don’t want to be called a TERF, then don’t be a TERF. Either that, or just own your hate.
TERF is an acronym; it’s not a slur. “Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist” is literally what she is. And it’s putting many real lives in danger. Maybe stop hating people who just want to be their true self?
I am with you it was not meant as a slur when the acronym came up, but bare with me, it has been used as a sort of weapon in recent times. Anyone daring to say anything that could be construed as transphobic is being called a TERF nowadays.
I personally have no problems with people living their true selfs, where I draw a line is in feeling uncomfortable myself. Why should only trans people get to feel comfortable in public spaces?
I know this is a fine line, and there isn’t a perfect solution but I expect respect from all parties to this situation.
As for getting to the topic of the article: they literally can’t use the material of the books without naming her an exec producer. (My best guess is she has that in her contract)
So you won’t ever get any new Harry Potter or have to deal with seeing her name on screen.( Heck you can skip credits if you want to)
I personally have no problems with people living their true selfs, where I draw a line is in feeling uncomfortable myself. Why should only trans people get to feel comfortable in public spaces?
*
Gee, I dunno, maybe because transgender people are the ones currently being discriminated against, having laws passed that are actively restricting what kinds of public spaces they’re allowed to be in, and are being assaulted and murdered simply for being who they are, perhaps? So as a result, their comfort and safety is and should be the most important concern and focus here? Just a thought.
*
The better question would be, why do you feel uncomfortable around them in the first place? They’re not a threat to you, they’re not going to hurt or have any kind of negative effect on you simply by virtue of being in the same space as you, so…what exactly are you so uncomfortable about? Any discomfort you feel sounds more like a personal problem for you and you alone to work out, that’s not anyone else’s responsibility.
I don’t think they’re just slapping her name on as EP. I understood she would actually be involved.
Even if she wasn’t, her radicalization and bigotry will overshadow the show for a lot of people. There’s no way they can/should make this show and allow Hogwarts to be as heteronormative as it appeared in the movies and was assumed to be in the books. Like, you can’t show this many teenagers and have us buy they’re all straight (like, dances and kids in the background–there has to be some level of same sex couples for it to make sense with reality in any way.) But if they do that, people will see it as a huge political statement either against her or as something for her to prop herself up with (“See, I don’t hate everyone, I let them put some gay kids in the background!” nevermind she chose the name of a famous originator of “reparative therapy” (torture of gay people) as her as her penname for one of her books, or her insane retconning back and forth using Dumbledore as her shield against justified LGBT exclusion criticisms.)
(I would also appreciate if they fixed things like the ridic racist name “Cho Chang”, but anyway…)
I wish I could just enjoy the show and “just skip the credits” but it’ll be adding to her pile of money and she just won’t shut up. If she just shut up and stopped being so vocally vile…let alone got educated and deradicalized (that would be the dream)… But I am glad that maybe some decent people will remain fans. I’d hate for this story to be left entirely to the bigots you can see in these comments, who feel their hate is more allowable because hers is tolerated for the sake of a story some kids grew up with.
You are right, though, we’ll never be free of her and have Harry Potter. She’s got the IP in a deathgrip, she’s never going to let it go public domain even after she’s dead 50 years. In some cases, like Lord of the Rings, I think that’s justified, but it’s a shame that so few things now will go public domain… So much of what we enjoy these days is reworkings and remixings of old stories, that’s the very nature of stories, but now every estate (no matter how far removed from the original author) has to cling to it and get a pile of money for any use. It’s going to lead to a lot of creative stagnation, if it hasn’t already.
Simply because she states facts as her didn’t the lefts say trust the science on Covid-19 but they were lying and here Rowling states undeniable facts and people are mad at her and people act as if she hates gays and trans people when hello one of the main cast rubius hagrid Robbie Coltrane was a gay man and oh so was Lucius Malfoy in Jason issacs
Not that it matters one way or the other but I don’t know why you’ve posted this multiple times. Jason Isaacs has been married to his wife for over 20 years (and together over 30) and they have two children. Robbie Coltrane had a wife and two children also although he was divorced at the time of his passing. It’s not the argument for JKR you think it is.
The OG cast has distanced themselves from the material so of course he has zero intention of being in it.
The whole reason they’re making the reboot is because they couldn’t get any of the cast to commit doing Cursed Child.
And thank goodness they wouldn’t do it. No one should have anything to do with THAT thing.
And people act as if she has open hatred to gays and lesbians when hello two of the main cast rubius hagrid Robbie Coltrane and Lucius malfoy werre both gay men and I think the actor who replaced dumbeldore Richard Griffith is also gay so those are 3 leads that are gay men
None of these actors you mentioned are gay. Jason Isaacs specifically has been married for 22 years. I agree she does seem to hate gays but you aren’t arguing her case from actual facts.
You know that both Robbie Coltrane & Jason Isaacs were/ are straight, right? But even if they were gay, doesn’t mean that it’s ok to discriminate against trans folks. Sadly, JK Rowling is a TERF. I legit loved the books & movies. I read the books to my kids & celebrated watching the movies together. But as much as I loved the world JK created, I hate the lies and hurtful things she’s said & the damage it’s done to so many.
If anything, since it’ll be a bit part, he should maybe play James Potter. He would be about the right age. Any other character or main character I think he, or any former main star would detract. Arthur Weasley has too big of a role for Rupert and we only really see Hermionie’s parents for a broad second at the end, and not worth Emma’s time.
He’s way to old to play James Potter. James and Lily Potter were 21 when they died.
Anyone who played a student in the movies is age appropriate to play Sirius or Remus (early thirties).
The movies definitely messed up concerning HP parents ages (their deaths hit much harder if you realize how young they were).
I want to see the all new Harry Potter tv series on max and I haven’t watched it yet
Lord, Casey, it’s not out yet. They haven’t even cast the show, let alone start filming it. Hold your hippogriffs.
I haven’t seen all new Harry Potter tv series and i didn’t seen it in max
I haven’t seen the all new Harry Potter series on the max on the tv
Looking forward to something closer to the books. I love the actors in the movies but they left so much out and changed way too much.
How how terrible Hollywood is nowadays I only see it being a disaster.
I haven’t paid attention to Rowling for years but it’s good to see she continues to be as toxic and tone-deaf as ever.
She is nails on a chalkboard, so smug like she has no idea how obviously awful she is, not only as a human being, but as a writer these days. The only reason they’re remaking the original books is b/c she’s produced nothing decent since the last HP novel. What a joke.
Rsallh you do know she’s the author of the cb strike series under a surname robert Galbraith and oh hbo/max had also done those
Do you mean pseudonym? A surname is a last name.
Daniel can play the father this time to Harry if they like to reboot everything into TV.
I will definitely watch it… and I agree with Ms. Rowling’s statements on sex and gender.
Plus these people act as if she has open hatred to gay and lesbians when oh wait Robbie Coltrane Jason issacs and Robert Griffiths all worked with her and guess what they were all gay
You repeating the same thing over and over does not turn it into reality. It just makes your factual errors stand out even more.
I do not see the need to bring back the Harry Potter series. The original story was so fresh and unique that to try and resurrect it would futile!
Will gladly watch if it seems good.
J. K. Rowling is 100% correct with her comments.
Men cannot menstruate. Men cannot get pregnant.
Such blatant statements of fact shouldn’t be controversial.
Not all cis women can get pregnant, not all cis women can menstruate, so what’s your point? You would exclude them from womanhood as well? Of course it is controversial when it’s so hateful and aimed to stop children from getting the care they need to live. They need it to live. Look at the effects of her and other bigots statements and you understand, it is hate and a misunderstanding of human cultural history re gender and a misunderstanding of biology (the sex binary is not real, biologically speaking.)
Yeah and let’s see 3 gay men were cast as the one that appeared in all 8 movies was Robbie Coltrane robert Griffiths and Jason issacs also gay men appeared in the movies
Factual errors from Colby, volyme 28…
This is exactly the problem with left wing politics these days. Over the years most of Rowling’s statements and views have been a left leaning. She is someone that the Trans community could have a dialog with. Her statements really aren’t controversial unless you take an extreme position. Instead of speaking with her and maybe trying to find some common ground, she gets labeled as a transphobe by extremists. As a result, she refuses to back down. They have created an enemy out of someone who didn’t need to be one.
Since WB owns this property, it would be incredible if they added new professors for lesser known classes…this is episodic afterall! It would be great to have an adult trans character or actor/actress as a professor.
As is so often the case on this comment section and many others, so called open minded progressives can’t accept other opinions. It must be difficult having to share the world with those that don’t think like you.
This show, if it’s done well, will be just fine. Just like the Hogwarts video game, which has sold over 12 million copies.
Apparently filmakers are out of original ideas. I think the films stand the test of time and don’t need “reinterpretation.”
I want Hollywood to cast actors that fit the role. We should be careful about casting someone that is any particular race, gender, or sexuality just because we are seeking diversity. It would be no different than giving someone a job in their company because they’re a man or because they are Hispanic.
Rowling fired the original HP because of his place of birth…. Think about it.
I will absolutely watch!! J.K.’s comments have been misconstrued.
Yes! I’ll watch Harry Potter any time, anywhere. I love the story and I love the world.
Unfortunately you can’t separate Rowling the world-creator from Rowling the hater. And one can love the art without loving the artist.
Art? Most of her books have been stolen from other writers. How is that Art?
What does her personal beliefs have to do with a story that drew you in and made you believe in magic. My daughter is a lesbian and my sons best friend is Trans gender, she is an amazing person. I think that what you all are saying is just as bigoted and narrow minded as her beliefs. In my eyes that makes you just as bad if not worse then her. I grew up with the books and then the movies and still love them at almost 40 and if they wanted to try the small screen then more power to them. I intend to at least give the show a try if it means I get to step away from all the anger, bigotry and self important finger pointing in reality for any amount time. Also if you want to stop racism and bigotry then stop making such a fuss, all you do is feed the negativity by adding to it. Your not destroying it.