When delighted Harry Potter fans learned the boy wizard will return to their screens, they also received another surprise: JK Rowling, who wrote the original books, is coming along too.
In an announcement this week, Warner Bros Discovery, the entertainment titan that first brought the series to cinemas, said it is developing a new, decade-long television show – with Rowling taking the key role of executive producer.
“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.
A few years ago, Rowling’s involvement in the project would hardly have come as a shock.
Amid a backlash against her views on women’s rights and transgenderism, even mentioning Rowling’s name next to her works has been taboo in recent years.
At one event to celebrate the 25th anniversary of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone last June, a journalist was infamously blocked from asking a question about her absence.
But on Wednesday, executives at Warner Bros Discovery gave Rowling their support as they positioned the Harry Potter TV show as a flagship offering of their enlarged “Max” streaming service.
Casey Bloys, the chairman and chief executive of HBO and HBO Max, dismissed suggestions that showrunners will struggle to find cast members because of her involvement, telling journalists: “That’s a very online conversation.
“We’ve been in the Harry Potter business for 20 years, this isn’t a new decision. We’re comfortable being in the Potter business.”
The decision to work with Rowling again generated instant outrage from trans activists, with some vowing to boycott the show before it has even begun filming.
Brands are facing a growing backlash for wading into trans issues, with the US beer maker Budweiser embroiled in a row over adverts featuring transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney and Disney locked in a feud with the US Republican Party for its opposition to “don’t say gay” laws in Florida.
One senior film industry source says the uncancelling of Rowling will ruffle feathers but is ultimately the right call.
“If you look at what JK Rowling has actually said and done, this is a woman who herself was a victim of domestic violence, who was a single mother, and has now devoted herself to women’s rights and helping other women who have suffered,” the source adds.
“Yet because she took a position, out of concern about those issues, she was just completely thrown under a bus.
“I think you are now going to see her redeemed, for a lot of reasons. Hollywood likes to forgive - and particularly when someone is a creative genius like her.”
Another industry source says: “I think you just need to lean into these things, there isn’t any point in shying away as it was always going to raise a few eyebrows.
“Their focus is on involving the best creatives possible to make something that fans will really want to watch. Rowling is undoubtedly one of them.”
JK Rowling - Gareth Davies/Getty Images Europe
Until just a few years ago, Rowling was an undisputed literary icon. Her books have sold more than 500 million copies worldwide, while movie adaptations and spin-offs such as Fantastic Beasts have collectively brought in tens of billions of dollars for the cinema box office.
A West-End musical – Harry Potter and the Cursed Child – has been running since 2016 and a string of video games have proved popular as well.
Her forthright views have put her at odds with Harry Potter film stars Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson – who argue “trans women are women” – and triggered a bitter backlash from people who were previously adoring fans.
By her own account, Rowling has faced a barrage of abuse while critics have gleefully boasted of burning her books and sent the author threats of violence.
In a 2020 essay, Rowling said she was motivated by concern about a new wave of misogyny, fueled by a “porn-saturated” culture and a backlash against feminism. She warned that arguments being made to support a faster legal process for people changing gender were diminishing the importance of female “biological realities” and were “deeply misogynistic and regressive”.
She also raised concerns that young people who are gay may be choosing to change gender because of homophobia.
JK Rowling - Dave J Hogan/Getty Images
In response, two Harry Potter fan websites announced they would boycott the author for causing “harm” to transgender people with her comments. Others accused her of “dog whistling” by raising concerns about transgender women entering women’s spaces.
Mermaids, the controversial transgender youth charity, even claims there have been “cases of self-harm and even attempted suicide” triggered by the author’s remarks.
However, since then Rowling has received support from other quarters.
“Warner Bros has enjoyed a creative, productive and fulfilling partnership with JK Rowling for the past 20 years,” it said.
“She is one of the world’s most accomplished storytellers, and we are proud to be the studio to bring her vision, characters and stories to life.”
Ralph Fiennes, who played the villain Lord Voldemort, also came to Rowling’s aid, telling The New York Times that the author had faced “disgusting” abuse.
“It’s not some obscene, uber right-wing fascist,” he told the New York Times. “It’s just a woman saying, ‘I’m a woman and I feel I’m a woman and I want to be able to say that I’m a woman.’”
Evanna Lynch, who played Luna Lovegood in the films, told The Telegraph in February: “Her [Rowling’s] character has always been to advocate for the most vulnerable members of society… I do wish people would just give her more grace and listen to her.”
During the pandemic, the enduring popularity of Rowling’s work returned to the fore as families turned to the wizarding world to escape the tedium of lockdown. It propelled publisher Bloomsbury to record sales, with boss Nigel Newton shrugging off the controversies.
“Harry Potter continues to do the most enormous amount of good in spreading the love of reading among children,” he said in October.
Evanna Lynch - David M. Benett/Getty Images Europe
Hogwarts Legacy, a video game that lets players enrol at the series’ legendary school for witchcraft and wizardry, has sold 12 million copies since its release in February – despite a boycott campaign by trans activists.
Next to those successes, Warner Bros’ decision to bring Rowling back may be motivated by profit just as much as principle.
The company certainly needs a little magic. It is currently battling the likes of Netflix, Disney, Amazon and Apple for streaming dominance, with the companies splashing huge sums collectively on films and TV shows in the quest for subscribers.
HBO’s combined “Max” service will wrap HBO Max and Discovery+ platforms into a single, bigger competitor, says Tom Harrington, a television analyst at Enders Analysis.
And David Zaslav, president and chief executive of Warner Bros Discovery, says major franchises such as Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings and DC superheroes such as Batman are at the heart of his strategy to woo audiences.
He is reported to have met Rowling at least twice in the months leading up to Wednesday’s announcement, when he spoke of his delight at reviving the series.
“My wife and I, we read [the books] to each of our three kids,” he said. “It’s really moving.”
Though a main showrunner has yet to be found, executives have promised no expense will be spared on the latest adaptation of Rowling’s work. That means a similar or even bigger budget than Game of Thrones spin-off House of the Dragon, which cost $125m (£100m) for just 10 episodes.
