Harry Potter and the Small Screen

[Thande]

Naw, it was the digital Harry Potter on the broom chasing the flying key.

Yeah, that wasn't great either. Heck, the effects might end up better in some ways on Brainbin's TV series: less budget, but if they're forced to use model shots and traditional effects...

 

[Orville_third]

Im Orerc, right? You're still working on that? I hope you release it someday, I remember you mentioning it back in the opening pages of TWR.

Yes, I am! I have done a bit of a trailer, which should cover some elements. (Though I misspelled the title...)
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showpost.php?p=4733461&postcount=185

 

[unclepatrick]

While I have nothing against the idea of a Harry Potter TV show, there are a few points that should be mention.

If it a TV show don't expect Big Name actors in many of the parts. There was a British show the Magician House with Ian Richardson as the main Star base on a novel series in the OTL. while it stay faithful to the books, many of the big scenes in the Book were ignored or happen off screen.


You could expect the same for Harry.

Several People have suggested BBC teaming up with HBO. In 1998, it not going to happen. HBO at the Time was criticizing Showtime for it failure to show movies. Showtime was the main cable channel that was showing TV shows. Most of those were thing like Magician House and Shoebox Zoo, that was produce elsewhere and then shown by Showtime. If Showtime had pick it up, then it going to be shown on the Showtime Children channel most likely after school, 3 or 4 O Clock.
Best bet for a US Channel co producing it would be the TBS, The ted Turner own network. But it not going to be a big Buget television show. Forget band of Brother, in 1998 no network going to risk it.

Best bet for time period. get Spielberg as Producer and do it as a Syndicated show. Still not going to be as big as many of you think but, more likely to make money in long run.

 

[vultan]

One other little random thought.

Remember how I said earlier that, without the Harry Potter movies, the DC comic characters would probably be Warner Bros. most important properties?

Well, aside from the boom in fantasy films, what was the other big trend in movies in the early-to-mid 2000's? That's right, the explosion of superhero movies. After X-Men came out in 2000, all kinds went into production immediately after, from Spider-Man to Daredevil to Hulk. However, these were all Marvel Comics movies. DC came in relatively late to the game, with Batman Begins and Superman Returns in 2005 and 2006, respectively.

However, since WB at this point is on shaky ground financially, and since they are in the almost uniquely bad situation of not having a major franchise on its hands at the moment, perhaps they see the trend started by X-Men and decide to put all of their metaphorical eggs in the basket of comic book adaptations? Could we see more DC movies in this time period, and coming out earlier than they did historically to more directly compete with the first wave of Marvel movies?

Maybe JJ Abrams' Superman: Flyby gets greenlit? The script seemed to have been an interesting combination of superhero story and space opera...

And perhaps Darren Aronofsky's Batman drama, Year One, gets off the ground? I hear it would have been far "darker-and-grittier" than the Nolan trilogy...

In fact, maybe the planned Batman vs. Superman movie happens as well!

Could someone even take a stab at Watchmen?

But most importantly of all - does this mean we get to see the Green Lantern comedy movie with Jack Black in the starring role?!?!

(I'm dead serious, they considered that last one. I know it sounds that bad, but in hindsight, it's hard to see how it could have been much worse than the Ryan Reynolds movie...)

 

[Kidblast]

The BBC adaptations of the Narnia series are excellent, I would urge you to watch them if you ever get the opportunity. The only real issue with them is they compressed Prince Caspian into just a couple of episodes. The special effects are done for £2.50 but, as with classic Doctor Who, have a charm all to themselves. Speaking of Doctor Who, Tom Baker steals the show in The Silver Chair as Puddleglum the Marsh-wiggle. Particularly interesting are some of the effects done by a Japanese animator in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, which mixes traditional animation with live action--whether this looks cool or absurd is in the eye of the beholder, I've found. The one thing the effects did do well is Aslan (unsurprising given that apparently they blew half their budget on him). There are plenty of issues I have with the modern Narnia film series, but really the main one is that Liam Neeson sounds weak and anaemic as Aslan compared to Ron Pickup.

Thande, of course, is spot on about his description of the Narnia TV series. They are very comprehensive, and are very charming, especially if you're watching them as a child.

 

[Thande]

One other little random thought.

That's a cool idea. Especially since this is the period when the DCAU is riding high. Might be a bit of a stretch, but I could see someone saying "you know how this property which people thought was just for kids turns out to have adult crossover appeal, well then how about we do live action DC films based on the ideas and stories from the DCAU animations?"

Thande, of course, is spot on about his description of the Narnia TV series. They are very comprehensive, and are very charming, especially if you're watching them as a child.

Yes, it does help to have seen them as a child. I still get a shiver when I see the opening sequence with the map and music (which I think may have influenced the opening sequence of "Game of Thrones").

 

[ColeMercury]

If it a TV show don't expect Big Name actors in many of the parts.

You could still get Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid, though. That's the most important thing.

 

[BillyShears]

I can imagine a BBC-HBO production akin to Rome with the production values/style of say Game of Thrones

 

[Brainbin]

IMHO, switching from 30 to 45 minutes After book 2 would Be Perfect and Suit the Shift in tone.

My story editor agrees with you there, so it looks like the "ayes" have it.

Concerning FX, I might like to have all sorts of techniques combined. It would Suit the quirkyness of rowlings World. Prosthetics/makeup, Size-Play a La "the borrowers", puppetry, stop-Motion (As offen realized in czech Series of the 80s), Cartoon-Interaktion as in Roger rabbit or Mary poppins (See "Pumuckl" for a Children-Series example).
With more Money, cheaper Realisation of Computer graphics and the more serious tone, more and more New creatures will Be realized As cgi.

I think it's probably too late for stop-motion to be a significant part of the series. Surely, CGI is more cost-effective by this point, even if it's still inferior in terms of results.

I am Not Sure how Prone the BBC is to Co-producing internationally? USA and Canada have been mentioned. How about European partners? French and German/Eastern European involvement might steer GoF Away from the Hyper-cliched depictions of beauxbatons and durmstrang which was Dralls terrible in the Movies.
Speaking from a German Point of View, Christmas '99 was the Breakthrough for the Books Here and the following Years, it was Not unusual for the Books to hold all Top Spots in the Sales Charts. So, several networks might Show interest to join the production. Probably One of the divisions of the Public ARD (Cologne-Based WDR as the biggest might Be Most probable, they also did a Lot of similar Co-Operations with Czechoslovakian tv in the 70s and 80s- i think that the barrandov Studios might Be a good partner once Potter Goes international anyways), ZDF, RTL or Kirch (SAT1) is possible, Too, but i deem it Less likely (Kirch Goes broke in 2002 anyways).

First of all, we have to know how quickly Harry Potter caught on internationally. It obviously did eventually, since those have to be the most widely-translated books after the Bible, but when did this happen? Was it during the "three-year summer", when everyone was waiting so long for book five to come out that the translators were finally able to catch all of the non-Anglophones up with the series? Translations did start coming out a lot faster after that (which may help to explain the increased delays in publication).

With casting the big question is Harry Ron and Hermione how likely (if at all possible) is it that we get the same trio as the films?

Virtually nil. First of all, they're each a year younger than when casting was done IOTL, and both Grint and Watson (who is already ruled out on account of her age) were total newcomers. Ironically, it's likelier that this production would want to go with bigger "names" for the kids (perhaps the offset the far less star-studded cast of adults?).

In general I suspect you are going to get some pretty ropey adaptations by doing it on TV due to the lack of budget and CGI still being pretty expensive. If there was a TV adaptation I wouldn't be surprised if there was still a film one once the TV series was done and the books were a huge hit, maybe it would take a little time but I expect it would be inevitable.

Perhaps movies would be inevitable, but at least now they will be measured against the television series, as opposed to the other way round.

Doing it in the Narnia style would be interesting, and I do remember the BBC doing a Christmas Harry Potter audio broadcast on the radio (that's where the Stephen Fry audiobooks come from, as he was responsible for it). That was before the films, so roughly the period we're talking about.

Now that's very interesting. If they do overlap, that radio broadcast might be butterflied away, but I wonder if we can find a role for Fry in the series as compensation. Again, his obvious affiliation with the series and friendship with Rowling IOTL make him a prime candidate. Perhaps Professor Quirrell? That seems within his range.

Probably not what Brainbin wants to go for though as I imagine he more wants the "people tuning in every week in the autumn with bated breath" style.

Isn't that always the best reason to do this sort of thing?

Well, effects aren't everything. I never thought the effects in the Potter films were that impressive anyway, there was some truly shoddy CGI in the first couple in particular (and I mean it seemed that way at the time, not just in retrospect).

Agreed - and since we're all sharing, the one that sticks out in my mind is the parting of the brick wall to reveal Diagon Alley

Yeah, that wasn't great either. Heck, the effects might end up better in some ways on Brainbin's TV series: less budget, but if they're forced to use model shots and traditional effects...

Even the youngest of us are old enough to remember the CGI boom of the late 1990s and early 2000s, how everything had to be done with computers, even when practical effects were still far more convincing - but they were still costly enough that you had to save up for them (as the modern Star Trek shows did, once they switched over to CGI). Nowadays, of course, any idiot with a computer can do it, and consequently, people aren't wowed anymore (and the older CGI is - surprise, surprise - aging very badly).

Maybe JJ Abrams' Superman: Flyby gets greenlit? The script seemed to have been an interesting combination of superhero story and space opera...

And perhaps Darren Aronofsky's Batman drama, Year One, gets off the ground? I hear it would have been far "darker-and-grittier" than the Nolan trilogy...

In fact, maybe the planned Batman vs. Superman movie happens as well!

Could someone even take a stab at Watchmen?

But most importantly of all - does this mean we get to see the Green Lantern comedy movie with Jack Black in the starring role?!?!

This is an excellent point, vultan - though, fortunately for all of you Batman fanatics (not to mention my own health and safety), it's late enough that the planned Schumacher film Batman Triumphant is off the table - but Warners desperately needed cash inflows at that point IOTL, which Harry Potter was good enough to provide. Without it, they literally can't afford to be so cavalier with their DC properties. The combined green-lighting of Superman: Flyby and Batman: Year One is obviously the ideal solution for everyone involved, but IIRC, Batman vs. Superman was the one that came closest to fruition IOTL (with Wolfgang Petersen, of all people, set to direct).

That's a cool idea. Especially since this is the period when the DCAU is riding high. Might be a bit of a stretch, but I could see someone saying "you know how this property which people thought was just for kids turns out to have adult crossover appeal, well then how about we do live action DC films based on the ideas and stories from the DCAU animations?"

There's one problem with that scenario, though - Warners already tried bringing the DCAU to the big screen, directly, and in 1993, no less! Batman: Mask of the Phantasm was released to theatres stateside, but didn't do very well, and every subsequent DCAU feature has been direct-to-video.

You could still get Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid, though. That's the most important thing.

Funny that you mention him - my story editor and I had already agreed that he was the one shoo-in of the OTL cast. So yes, consider his casting canon.

I can imagine a BBC-HBO production akin to Rome with the production values/style of say Game of Thrones

One step at a time, now

 

[NCW8]

This seems to be the consensus opinion, so thirteen half-hours (perhaps with scenes exclusive to the British cuts of the episodes, similar to what The Muppet Show did) will likely prevail at first. Moffat will have the clout to push for 45-minute shows as soon as he is able, no doubt.

Just one further thought about the 45-minute episodes. For Doctor Who, the BBC also created 15-minute "making of" episodes called Doctor Who Confidential that could be shown after each 45-minute Dr Who episode to fill up a full hour in the scedule. These were also fairly cheap to produce, so helped to offset the costs of the actual stories. Perhaps the same idea could be used for Harry Potter - call it the Hogwarts Files.

Cheers,
Nigel.

 

[Thande]

Now that's very interesting. If they do overlap, that radio broadcast might be butterflied away, but I wonder if we can find a role for Fry in the series as compensation. Again, his obvious affiliation with the series and friendship with Rowling IOTL make him a prime candidate. Perhaps Professor Quirrell? That seems within his range.

Sinister Stephen Fry! That might be particularly jarring/shocking precisely because nobody would expect him to be a villain. On the other hand it could lead to a "narrowed it down to the guy I recognise" effect because you wouldn't expect to see Stephen Fry in a role as minor as what the audience is supposed to think Quirrell is.

Agreed - and since we're all sharing, the one that sticks out in my mind is the parting of the brick wall to reveal Diagon Alley

Interestingly I remember a documentary about/with JK Rowling at the height of Pottermania in 2000/2001, and she actually mentioned that specific effect as being crap in the film (well, reading between the lines). She had this sketch of her own of what the wall opening is supposed to look like and said something about Chris Columbus ignoring that when she'd shown it to him. So quite perceptive on your part to note that...

Even the youngest of us are old enough to remember the CGI boom of the late 1990s and early 2000s, how everything had to be done with computers, even when practical effects were still far more convincing - but they were still costly enough that you had to save up for them (as the modern Star Trek shows did, once they switched over to CGI). Nowadays, of course, any idiot with a computer can do it, and consequently, people aren't wowed anymore (and the older CGI is - surprise, surprise - aging very badly).

Yeah, I may be being naive here because my experience of children's TV is from a few years earlier, when the questionable use of CGI was limited to things like Virtually Impossible, where it sort of actually made sense.

There's one problem with that scenario, though - Warners already tried bringing the DCAU to the big screen, directly, and in 1993, no less! Batman: Mask of the Phantasm was released to theatres stateside, but didn't do very well, and every subsequent DCAU feature has been direct-to-video.

Yes, but I could see them saying "Alright, the problem is because cartoons are for kids (animation age ghetto) but the general stories and characterisations of the DCAU are good, let's just transfer those into a live action film with mass appeal".

This may be wish fulfilment on my part because as I've mentioned in our PMs (discussing Sonic and Mario media) it annoys me when a more obscure form of the media comes up with interesting and effective plots that would work well transferred to the mainstream form (in that case games, in this case films) and these are invariably ignored in favour of something simplistic and rubbish with gaping plot holes that a hack slapped together in five minutes.

 

[NCW8]

Sinister Stephen Fry! That might be particularly jarring/shocking precisely because nobody would expect him to be a villain. On the other hand it could lead to a "narrowed it down to the guy I recognise" effect because you wouldn't expect to see Stephen Fry in a role as minor as what the audience is supposed to think Quirrell is.

It might depend upon the timing. Fry had a nervous breakdown in 1995 while appearing in a west end play. He walked out of the show (causing it to close early) and disappeared for a few days. It therefore wouldn't be surprising that he appeared in a minor role to try and re-establish his career.

Cheers,
Nigel.

 

[Thande]

It might depend upon the timing. Fry had a nervous breakdown in 1995 while appearing in a west end play. He walked out of the show (causing it to close early) and disappeared for a few days. It therefore wouldn't be surprising that he appeared in a minor role to try and re-establish his career.

Cheers,
Nigel.

Good point, I'd forgotten about that (but I remember it now you've said). Indeed I think his role in the Harry Potter audiobooks and pushing the Potter phenomenon WAS part of the way he reestablished himself. So this makes a lot of sense. Of course, it might be a bit wince-inducing for that reason for the viewers to see Fry playing someone who effectively has magical schizophrenia and has an insane breakdown at the end...

 

[Clandango]

Sinister Stephen Fry! That might be particularly jarring/shocking precisely because nobody would expect him to be a villain. On the other hand it could lead to a "narrowed it down to the guy I recognise" effect because you wouldn't expect to see Stephen Fry in a role as minor as what the audience is supposed to think Quirrell is.

I imagine there will be homosexual subtext in whichever role he takes or he will claim there is. I loved Blackadder and Jeeves and Wooster but I am not a fan how he has inserted homosexuality into the characters through interviews or how all the latest movies I see with him as a side role have them adding it to preexisting characters. It just seems shoehorned.

 

[Thande]

I imagine there will be homosexual subtext in whichever role he takes or he will claim there is. I loved Blackadder and Jeeves and Wooster but I am not a fan how he has inserted homosexuality into the characters through interviews or how all the latest movies I see with him as a side role have them adding it to preexisting characters. It just seems shoehorned.

I agree I dislike that attitude a lot in principle but I can't say I've seen it that much in Stephen Fry's portrayals of those characters.

 

[Clandango]

I agree I dislike that attitude a lot in principle but I can't say I've seen it that much in Stephen Fry's portrayals of those characters.

Not those ones, though he said there was something going on between Jeeves and Wooster in an interview, his character in Black Adder Goes forth was attracted to a cross dresser, then he loudly shouted the stuff in V for Vendetta, Sherlock Holmes, and I honestly haven't seen much else of his work other than the tour over the United States. I just hope that he manages to change his voice enough so that People don't keep thinking of him as Stephen Fry rather than the part he plays.

 

[Thande]

Not those ones, though he said there was something going on between Jeeves and Wooster in an interview, his character in Black Adder Goes forth was attracted to a cross dresser, then he loudly shouted the stuff in V for Vendetta, Sherlock Holmes, and I honestly haven't seen much else of his work other than the tour over the United States. I just hope that he manages to change his voice enough so that People don't keep thinking of him as Stephen Fry rather than the part he plays.

The Blackadder Goes Forth one wasn't a historical character though, and I think it was more just meant to imply how insane he was (he finds George completely convincing as a woman but thinks an actual woman is an unconvincing crossdresser) than meant to have any sexual connotations.

 

[Hörnla]

I imagine there will be homosexual subtext in whichever role he takes or he will claim there is.

Which, as to JK Rowling, would make him a candidate for playing Albus Dumbledore...

First of all, we have to know how quickly Harry Potter caught on internationally. It obviously did eventually, since those have to be the most widely-translated books after the Bible, but when did this happen? Was it during the "three-year summer", when everyone was waiting so long for book five to come out that the translators were finally able to catch all of the non-Anglophones up with the series? Translations did start coming out a lot faster after that (which may help to explain the increased delays in publication).

IMHO, the increasingly fast translations also had to do with the phenomenon that a huge load of Germans discovered that they were able to read an English novel in the original version. The later HP volumes manged to climb the charts in the English version over here and I guess, that for a lot of readers those were the first, maybe only books, they voluntarily read in English. This, of course, put quite a pressure on the German publishing house (and Wikipedia says that the situation in France was similar).

"Harry Potter und der Stein der Weisen" came out in Germany already in 1998 (8000 prints). In Early '99 I first got word of mouth of the books by one of my tutors here in Germany at university, but she refered to the English book. In summer '99 I saw HP on a Time-magazine cover and, as I said, it must have been late '99 that they became a big hit in Germany. I got the first two volumes for Christmas and by then everybody knew about the hype.

"Harry Potter und die Kammer des Schreckens" and "Harry Potter und der Gefangene von Askaban" came out in Germany in '99 both.

Also in 2000, only three months after the publishing date of the Anglophone world, "Harry Potter und der Feuerkelch" came out in Germany, by then with a first edition of 1,000,000 (half of that being sold during the first 48 hours).

In 2003, "Harry Potter und der Orden des Phoenix" was the first book ever in Germany to reach the #1 spot AS ENGLISH VERSION. The German translation had a delay of almost five months (due to the immense length of the volume) but came out with a first edition of 2.0 milllion.

"Harry Potter und der Halbblutprinz": two-and-a-half months delay, 2 million.

"Harry Potter und die Heiligtümer des Todes": three months delay, 3 million.

Altogether, more than 30 million HP-books in the German translation have been sold until now. Alone in Germany, the eight movies have generated a box office of combined 514 million $.

 

[Thande]

Which, as to JK Rowling, would make him a candidate for playing Albus Dumbledore...

Stephen Fry actually does have the voice and manner for Dumbledore (probably why he does the audiobooks) but he clearly doesn't have the physical appearance and it probably wouldn't be that convincing even with makeup.

IMHO, the increasingly fast translations also had to do with the phenomenon that a huge load of Germans discovered that they were able to read an English novel in the original version. The later HP volumes manged to climb the charts in the English version over here and I guess, that for a lot of readers those were the first, maybe only books, they voluntarily read in English. This, of course, put quite a pressure on the German publishing house (and Wikipedia says that the situation in France was similar).

"Harry Potter und der Stein der Weisen" came out in Germany already in 1998 (8000 prints). In Early '99 I first got word of mouth of the books by one of my tutors here in Germany at university, but she refered to the English book. In summer '99 I saw HP on a Time-magazine cover and, as I said, it must have been late '99 that they became a big hit in Germany. I got the first two volumes for Christmas and by then everybody knew about the hype.

"Harry Potter und die Kammer des Schreckens" and "Harry Potter und der Gefangene von Askaban" came out in Germany in '99 both.

Also in 2000, only three months after the publishing date of the Anglophone world, "Harry Potter und der Feuerkelch" came out in Germany, by then with a first edition of 1,000,000 (half of that being sold during the first 48 hours).

In 2003, "Harry Potter und der Orden des Phoenix" was the first book ever in Germany to reach the #1 spot AS ENGLISH VERSION. The German translation had a delay of almost five months (due to the immense length of the volume) but came out with a first edition of 2.0 milllion.

"Harry Potter und der Halbblutprinz": two-and-a-half months delay, 2 million.

"Harry Potter und die Heiligtümer des Todes": three months delay, 3 million.

Altogether, more than 30 million HP-books in the German translation have been sold until now. Alone in Germany, the eight movies have generated a box office of combined 514 million $.

That's an interesting story. I wonder if something similar happened in France, where I imagine people would tend more to run around with their hair on fire about people buying the English versions.

I find the translations fascinating because it's been done into so many languages, including novelty ones like Latin, Ancient Greek, Scots Gaelic and Welsh (OK, the last one is borderline 'novelty' because there are some people who speak it). I own the first Potter book in both French and Romanian. I'm always interested to see whether they attempt to translate the character names or not into equivalents (the Romanians don't, the French do, but rather inconsistently).

 

[vultan]

This is an excellent point, vultan - though, fortunately for all of you Batman fanatics (not to mention my own health and safety), it's late enough that the planned Schumacher film Batman Triumphant is off the table - but Warners desperately needed cash inflows at that point IOTL, which Harry Potter was good enough to provide. Without it, they literally can't afford to be so cavalier with their DC properties. The combined green-lighting of Superman: Flyby and Batman: Year One is obviously the ideal solution for everyone involved, but IIRC, Batman vs. Superman was the one that came closest to fruition IOTL (with Wolfgang Petersen, of all people, set to direct).

Of course, to make it fit, they could set it up so that the Superman and Batman movies are released before, and build up to, Batman vs. Superman. Aronofsky might have to make some concessions on his story so that the two universes fit together (Bruce Wayne can't be a homeless guy in a Batsuit running around beating up petty criminals, but it could still be dark and gritty crime drama, without any supernatural elements in the first movie), but it would make the crossover seem even more like an event, kind of like how Marvel Studios built up toward The Avengers...

...speaking of which, since WB owns the movie rights to all of the major DC properties I know of, maybe they decide Batman vs. Superman itself should build up to an even bigger crossover event, if successful: a Justice League movie. To support it, they could release some standalone movies about each of the characters, like direct sequels to Superman: Flyby and Batman: Year One, a movies for Wonder Woman, The Flash, Green Lantern (John Stewart version, definitely), and Martian Manhunter, all leading up to a Justice League movie in about 2008 or thereabouts (and since Batman vs Superman would be directed by Wolfgang Petersen, logic demands that their second big crossover movie in less than a decade be directed by an even bigger director - maybe Robert Zemeckis or Ridley Scott?).

And I agree with Thande when he says elements from the DCAU could be used in this movie franchise, particularly where it regards Green Lantern and the Martian Manhunter. Those two movies would probably be more space opera than superhero movie on their own, same with how Batman: Year One would be more crime drama than superhero movie.

This massive , multi-movie, multi-franchise project would obviously replace the Harry Potter series for them in this scenario. I note that in our timeline, this is exactly what they're doing: now that HP has run it's course, they're ratcheting up the number of DC movies in production and preproduction, and the rumors of a Justice League movie on the horizon are even stronger than ever. In this scenario, they'd be forced to rely on the superheroes even earlier.

And, of course, Marvel would be forced to respond in kind...

(Sorry I've gotten off course from the point of this project. I'm not really a Harry Potter fan, but the whole "fantasy-movies-more-inspired-by-LOTR-and-Star Wars/more-and-earlier-DC movies" angle that would logically have to happen in this timeline has made me very excited for this project.)