JK Rowling & WB announce new movie in Potter Universe

Story here. “Rowling’s first-ever screenplay is expected to be the first of a series of new films about the wizarding world that fans know well from the Potter books and movies.”

Set in the same universe as Harry Potter, but 70 years before, and according to Rowling “not a prequel”. Main character is Newt Scamander, author of one of the textbooks in the Potter series. Rowling will write the script - no word if there will be a novel as well.

According to canon, it’s set too early for Voldemort to appear (movie set in 1918, V born 1926), but just perfect for a younger Dumbledore (born 1881) to show up. Given that Rowling recently said he’s the character she misses the most, I wouldn’t be surprised a bit if he finds his way into the movie.

So what do you think? Rowling can’t resist going back to where she started? Admitting her other novels will never go anywhere? Naked cash grab?

If it’s good, I won’t care why she was motivated to make it. I can’t help but feel, though, that they’ve seen just how undiscerning the fanbase can be.

That being said, I still haven’t seen the last three book films so perhaps I’m not who she’s targeting.

I think it’s all going to depend on who produces and directs it, as well as how much money they throw at it. I don’t expect Citizen Kane, but we know Rowling can write an interesting plot.

I’d rather have that in book form. But if early reviews are good, I’ll probably go see it.

It remains to be seen whether Rowling can translate her skill at writing books into a skill at writing screenplays. They’re two very different media.

Both The Casual Vacancy and The Cuckoo’s Calling have sold ridiculously well. And Cuckoo’s Calling got great reviews. So I don’t think it’s this one.

She is a billionaire. I have not heard anything about her blowing through all that money. I find it hard to believe its a money grab. Well, maybe for Warner Brothers.

It’s supposed to be based on ‘Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them’ which admits of great comedic and adventure potential.

I figure Rowling’s willing to take it on because she likes the Potterverse and its characters. I figure WB wants it because they’ve seen the excitement Disney’s generated with the ‘we’re NEVER going to stop making Star Wars movies there’ll be one per year’ routine and determined that there’s a LOT of money on the table for a long-term expansion of the Potter movies. And Scholastic (in the states) probably ain’t going to turn down novelizations.

Even if it was a cash grab, when did providing people with the products they demand become a bad thing?

I would certainly hope that any future books or movies are well done, but the creative industries are littered with people who produced crap for reasons other than profit.

I do hope we see books as well, though. Harry Potter got a whole generation of kids reading, and I’d love to continue that.

Twilight, The Hunger Games, and a huge pile of other tween lit franchises have continued that. Kids and teens read more than adults nowadays. The adult world needs another book to get them reading as much.

I thought that’s what “Fifty Shades of Gray” was. For women anyway.

Nothing wrong with a naked cash grab. Rowling is highly protective of her property, and given how much veto power she had for the HP movies, I can’t imagine she’ll have less here. So while the movie may not be good, it won’t be purely or primarily commercial. But it will still generate oodles of cash.

I really wish that she would write something based upon the founders era, that would be super interesting.

True. I didn’t want to make it sound like we’re all counting on Harry Potter to single-handedly keep up literacy. Still… more books just about always better, unless you’re in an earthquake. :slight_smile:

The Fifty Shades of Grey train has crashed and burned. Turns out, after the curiosity period dies down, most people have no interest in squicky bondage porn.

I’m not a huge HP fan, but I think there is definite potential in other stories set in that world, especially since they would be written by a more skilled and mature JKR from the get-go. But with so much cash at stake there is a big risk of Warner producers getting too many marketing department hack hands in the mix. I hope Rowling uses her clout to keep a strong degree of control - producer as well as writer, with veto power at least over a director.

The important question of course is who will they cast to play the youngish Dumbledore? He’s the only possible crossover character so you know they will insist he be in there.

I’m interested and excited to see how this movie turns out. I think the Potter movies suffered from being adapted from very long books–there just wasn’t time to explain everything. Since this is a screenplay from the get-go, it’s a different beast.

I’ve got $20 on Benedict Cumberbatch.

Purely this, makes me like the idea – I’m a sucker for anything about obsessive and eccentric naturalists and the strange creatures which they pursue. Newt Scamander is, is he not, the great zoologist of the wizarding world? I believe that – per a brief throwaway mention by Rowling – Luna (my favourite character in the books, partly because of her zoological enthusiasms) ends up marrying Newt Scamander’s – grandson? – can’t immediately find the reference.

So long as the film manages to include, in no matter how brief and glancing a way, something about the Crumple-Horned Snorkack – I’ll be happy !

That is an excellent choice.

She’ll absolutely have as much control as she wants. She had a ton of control over the HP movies, going all the way back to Sorcerer’s Stone, which was made well before she became the juggernaut she is now.

Nah, Cumberbatch would make a better Grindelwald.