Harry Potter and the Decline of Hollywood Imagination

How the industry's return to the same set of IPs is a recipe for diminishing returns.

I don’t know about anyone else, but by this point I am getting a little sick of Hollywood’s relentless self-cannibalizing. In just the past week we’ve heard about the following: a live-action remake of Moana (the animated version of which was released as long ago as 2016); a potential TV series which would adapt all 7 of the Harry Potter novels (the last of the film adaptations, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, was released way back in 2011), and a Game of Thrones spin-off/prequel that is supposed to take place during Aegon’s Conquest. This is in addition to a potential reboot of The Lord of the Rings which is allegedly being considered, as well as the ever-growing slate of live-action Disney remakes (Peter Pan and Wendy is slated to release later this month). 

It sure does seem as if Hollywood is running out of ideas or, at the very least, that they’ve become so risk-averse that the very idea of investing in any new property is anathema. Instead, the mindset in the industry these days seems to be that it’s better to go with tried-and-true franchises, whether or not there has been any expressed interest in seeing said properties rejuvenated or updated. 

Let’s begin with Harry Potter. In addition to the obvious problems associated with the franchise and its creator’s notorious transphobia, there’s also the fact that, for those who remain loyal to the works themselves (if not their author), films still retain pride of place when it comes to adaptation. The second part of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was only released in 2011, and 12 years isn’t really that long in the cultural imagination, particularly given how easily accessible the films are, their continued presence in the zeitgeist thanks to the Fantastic Beasts films, and the persistent visibility of their young stars (Daniel Radcliffe, for example, recently hosted a roundtable for trans youth). Given all of this, it strains credulity that anyone, even Rowling’s defenders, would want to see the same story told in television form, particularly if, as seems likely, Rowling is going to be intimately involved in the production. 

Some of the longing for more Harry Potter seems to be at the whim of David Zaslav, the current CEO of HBO Max (soon to be simply MAX), but there’s no doubt that no major studio has made more of a bad habit out of devouring its own back catalog than Disney. In the past decade, they have mined their own extensive filmography for live-action remakes, taking the utopian joy of animation and rendering it into something far more banal and “realistic.” At first, this seemed cute and charming and there was, indeed, something fun about seeing such classics as Beauty and the Beast and The Jungle Book reimagined for new audiences. Each subsequent film, however, has leached a bit more from its source material, and it’s become painfully (painfully) clear that the House of Mouse is running out of the magic that was responsible for its global dominance. I’m not convinced that The Little Mermaid has what it takes to reverse this trend and, if the dismal failure that was Pinocchio is anything to go by, I’m even less convinced that the other projects slated to be released straight to Disney+ are going to do any better.

Of the recently announced projects, the Aegon the Conqueror spinoff for HBO seems to have the greatest promise and may be yet another jewel in the crown, particularly since House of the Dragon has already earned such critical praise and significant viewership. Yet even here I would argue that we’re seeing a reliance on an intellectual property that has already proven to be popular rather than trying to branch out into anything new or exciting or in any way challenging. Sure, there’s still a lot of George RR Martin’s world that hasn’t been fully explored on television, but this begs the question: does it need to be? After all, there are numerous other fantasy properties out there, some of them very popular, that are just waiting for their adaptation.

The truth is that what studios and streamers invest their money says a great deal about what they value. In this case, it’s becoming increasingly clear that they value a very limited set of properties. And, lest you think that I’m unaware of Hollywood’s long-standing history of cannibalizing itself, I’m well aware that the American entertainment industry has a well-established penchant for doing so. One notable period of such rampant remaking of existing properties was the 1950s, and some of the most notable cinematic triumphs of the period, including Ben-Hur and The Ten Commandments were both remakes of earlier films (in the latter case, both were directed by the same man, Cecil B. DeMille). However, in both cases a significant amount of time had elapsed and, more germanely, there wasn’t a home video market that kept the earlier films in the public consciousness in the way that is currently the case.

For all of my complaining, however, I don’t think that Hollywood is going to change in the near future, particularly if they have little incentive to do so. There will assuredly be some people who continue to shell out money and time to watch whatever the studios decide to provide but, given that truly bewildering number of channels and networks and streamers that are currently available, it’s not as if the big producers have the stranglehold on the public that they once did. Indeed, I predict that, sooner rather than later, viewers are going to get tired of seeing studios and streamers going back to the same well again and again. If the public backlash about the proposed Harry Potter television series is anything to go by, the series is going to face a very steep climb if it hopes to get anywhere close to the accomplishments of the original, let alone to endure through an entire seven seasons (for the life of me, I can’t imagine why anyone would want to sit through at least 70 hours of Harry Potter-related TV). 

I know that I, for one, cannot wait for the day that Hollywood regains its imagination.