If you ever needed proof positive that we live in a world where what matters most is the ability to create something out of nothing one only need look at HARRY POTTER. And no, I’m not referring to the skill sets they teach to him and his classmates at Hogwarts.
I’m referring to the fact that 15 years after the release of the (supposedly) final theatrical installment based on the original series of novels that captivated the hearts and minds of millennial and Gen X kids and nine months out from the release of its ambitious TV series spin-off we are practically drowning in conversation and debate about a mere two and a half minutes of original content. Witness the nuts-and-bolts news which among others DEADLINE’s Armando Tinoco was dutifully touting on behalf of the overeager HBO publicity staff yesterday:
HBO‘s adaptation of the Harry Potter book series is already breaking records for the premium cable network and the streamer HBO Max. The trailer for Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone got 277 million organic (non-paid) views across platforms in its first 48 hours, becoming the most-watched trailer in HBO and HBO Max history and exceeding the previous record by more than double.
The fact that we are now more frequently seeing stories about the success of short-form content versus actual series speaks volumes to how little has actually worked to expectations in recent years, and that’s especially true in the case of streaming services notoriously ambiguous about raw performances. We, of course, do not have any idea how many of those views are unique or even have actually been watched by humans, and we’ll likely never know how many of them will actually watch the actual series. As I was able to point out in a LinkedIn exchange yesterday with an equally dubious media savant, the data does exist in some form, but these days there’s no desire for any of them to share it publicly, and sadly far fewer people in the position to demand it to want to know.
More to the point in this particular case, what’s driving that record engagement may or may not have to do with the actual curiosity about the upcoming series, or even the pre-existing devotion to the franchise. Rather, it seems to have as much to do with how much hatred seems to be in vogue with both the fans and the ultimate source of the franchise, its creator JK Rowling. Per PEOPLE’s Derek Lawrence yesterday:
The trailer for season 1 arrived on Wednesday to great fanfare. And you can count the Wizarding World creator as one of its champions. “It’s going to be incredible,” the author tweeted in response to a Potter supporter. “I’m so happy with it.”
Not every response to the trailer has been as positive as Rowling’s, however, and her post presented a new venue for racist objections to Paapa Essiedu playing Hogwarts potions master Severus Snape in the series. Essiedu, who is English of Ghanian descent, recently opened up about the “abuse” he endured after being cast as Snape, who is written as white in Rowling’s novel and was played by Alan Rickman in the Harry Potter movies.
“I’ve been told, ‘Quit, or I’ll murder you,'” he said in an interview with The Times. “The reality is that if I look at Instagram I will see somebody saying, ‘I’m going to come to your house and kill you. While I hope I’ll be okay, nobody should have to encounter this for doing their job.”
How is it possible that the fan base of a fantasy world could be so cruel, shallow and ignorant? Maybe it’s because the woman that begat it has a track record of being even worse. As PEDESTRIAN’s Tom Salvo conveyed earlier this week:
Over the years, Rowling, a self-described TERF, has become a polarising figure after a series of transphobic manoeuvres including, but not limited to, deliberately misgendering trans public figures, donating to causes repressing trans rights, and slamming preferred pronouns. The stars of the original movies, including Emma Watson and Daniel Radcliffe, have weighed in on Rowling’s comments on multiple occasions(.)
And as FICTION HORIZON’s Valentina Kraljik reported yesterday, this has now provoked a full-throated culture war on the other side of the pond:
A bookshop in Leeds has sparked debate after launching a fundraiser that involves defacing copies of a Harry Potter novel. The store, called The Bookish Type, is owned by a trans team and is asking customers to pay 25p to write or draw inside pages of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. The idea is to later auction the altered book and donate the money to transgender healthcare. The fundraiser comes amid ongoing criticism of Rowling’s views on gender identity. Over the past several years, she has become one of the most visible gender-critical voices in the UK. In a 2020 statement on her website, she explained her concerns about policies related to gender identity, writing, “When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman… then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth.”
This is all unfolding in the very same week when this sadly amplified story from THE ASSOCIATED PRESS was dropping on multiple affiliated outlets:
Transgender women athletes are now excluded from the Olympics after the IOC agreed to a new eligibility policy on Thursday which aligns with U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive order on women’s sports ahead of the 2028 Los Angeles Games. “Eligibility for any female category event at the Olympic Games or any other IOC event, including individual and team sports, is now limited to biological females,” the International Olympic Committee said, “determined on the basis of a one‑time SRY gene screening.
There are literally millions that are doing their version of a Trump victory dance over this. A sizable proportion are likely so-called “Mama Bears” that were even more likely to have been avid readers of Rowling’s seminal works long before there any attention knowledge or attention being paid to her warped ideologies. It would be naive not to think that more than a few of those 277 million organic views aren’t being driven by some form of perverse solidarity or reverse indoctrination.
Nor should it be discounted that the business model of a streaming service heavily relies on echo effect viewership of pre-existing content that serves both a promotional reinforcement and a necessary revenue opportunity leading up to any significant launch. And as CNN’s Charlotte Reck reminded her readers earlier this week, her stablemate network has more than a few chips on the table in this case:
While HBO has not confirmed how much it is spending per episode, some reports suggest a cost of $100 million per episode. If true, this will far exceed the cost of the entire original film series, on which Warner Bros. spent an estimated $1.2 billion, and will make this the most expensive television production of all time.
So yep, in this case, the adage that there’s no such thing as bad publicity truly does apply. And considering that by the time the decision to greenlight more of this does roll around the wishful thinking of a few rogue state Attorney Generals notwithstanding in all likelihood the Ellisons will be front and center in that decision process it’s all the more possible something related to Rowling might get a few more mulligans than, oh for example, HEATED RIVALRY.
It’s a quantitative world first and foremost, no matter what anyone might contend to the contrary. Especially for companies about to create $79 billion in debt. Even a magician would be hard-pressed to make that disappear.
Until next time…