Harry Potter and the Small Screen

[Thande]

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.

So basically you're suggesting that DC do what Marvel did/is doing with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but ten years earlier.

Presumably, thanks to the Law of Allohistorical Irony, Marvel will instead pursue standalone films with no overarching "The Verse" continuity. Which isn't so farfetched given that their first entries into the superhero film boom of the 2000s were indeed like that (and they still make some such ones).

 

[vultan]

So basically you're suggesting that DC do what Marvel did/is doing with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but ten years earlier.

Presumably, thanks to the Law of Allohistorical Irony, Marvel will instead pursue standalone films with no overarching "The Verse" continuity. Which isn't so farfetched given that their first entries into the superhero film boom of the 2000s were indeed like that (and they still make some such ones).

Well, I did explicitly compare it to their building up for The Avengers, so yes.

Marvel superhero movies instead being produced as standalones is a interesting possibility, though I wonder how Marvel Studios gaining semi-autonomy will affect things.

 

[Orville_third]

Were there plans for more DC movies in the early 2000's besides Zatanna?

 

[Hörnla]

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.

I agree. Basically, he would have been too young (*1957, 17 years junior to Gambon, 27 to Harris). If he were older, his physique wouldn't have been to far away from Gambon's. In the end, it is beard and glasses.

Fry could have been either a good Horace Slughorn, IMHO...or perhaps Cornelius Fudge. With a bit of a stretch, also Uncle Vernon.


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). [/QUOTE]

While being an exchange student in Abertawe, Cymru, I had a flatmate who spoke Welsh as his first language and who had learnt English only from preschool on.
I always presumed that Harry himself hailed from somewhere in SouthEastern Wales, due to Hagrid stating at the very beginning, when transfering him to the Dursleys, that he "fell asleep over Bristol". Drawing and contiuing a line from Surrey over Bristol brings you pretty much into the region of Newport/Cardiff.

But, OTOH, Rowling grew up near Bristol, so the connection is closer, probably. Also, "Godric's Hollow" is too ancient-Anglo-Saxon for a name to be situated in Wales.

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).

The German translation changed very few of the personal names (exception is Hermione -> Hermine) or placenames, but quite a few of the magical creatures/expressions. In the latter years, that made discussions about HP between "original readers" and "translation readers" difficult at times.

 

[Thande]

I always presumed that Harry himself hailed from somewhere in SouthEastern Wales, due to Hagrid stating at the very beginning, when transfering him to the Dursleys, that he "fell asleep over Bristol". Drawing and contiuing a line from Surrey over Bristol brings you pretty much into the region of Newport/Cardiff.

But, OTOH, Rowling grew up near Bristol, so the connection is closer, probably. Also, "Godric's Hollow" is too ancient-Anglo-Saxon for a name to be situated in Wales.

Nah, Rowling would have said if he was Welsh.* Basically I don't think she cared about the geography, "Bristol" is just an inherently funnily mundane name to use in a fantastic context (like "Wolverhampton", which Paul Merton often uses on HIGNFY). I would say Godric's Hollow is probably somewhere in the Gloucestershire/Wiltshire region.

* Or implied it, at least. I mean it's never actually said that Snape is northern, but it's pretty much obvious when where he lives is described in the sixth book that it's in either Yorkshire or Lancashire.

The German translation changed very few of the personal names (exception is Hermione -> Hermine) or placenames, but quite a few of the magical creatures/expressions. In the latter years, that made discussions about HP between "original readers" and "translation readers" difficult at times.

I can imagine. There are fewer examples of that in the Anglophone book world but there are some.

 

[Brainbin]

My apologies for the silence these last few days - that other timeline of mine has been hoarding my concentration.

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.

I like that. By the time we bump up to 45 minutes (perhaps c. 2003? Close to the OTL return of Doctor Who), The Adventures of Harry Potter will be a veritable event.

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 can see them really emphasizing the comedic aspects of Quirrell's personality with Fry in the role, making him seem (to the minority of viewers who haven't read the first book) to be the obvious comic relief character - the Dogberry of Hogwarts, if you will. Which makes it even more jarring later on, of course.

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...

I remember seeing that, actually, back in the day. She was relatively diplomatic about it, but yes, it was pretty obvious that she thought the effect was terrible (which it was - the parting of the Red Sea in The Ten Commandments looked far more convincing!) Her interpretation of it was more like a magical portal actually appearing in the wall.

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.

I'm only a few years younger than you, but it really is quite remarkable what a difference that small age gap makes.

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.

I definitely see where you're coming from here, and I am willing to allow that it's a possibility in this timeline. Knowing what we know about studio executives, it's hard for me to imagine them being sophisticated enough to not throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to the DCAU, but hey. They tried practically everything to get both Batman and Superman off the ground IOTL, so perhaps, in their greater desperation ITTL, they might try something like this?

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.

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...

I was vaguely aware of his nervous breakdown when I suggested him for Quirrell, because the obvious reality subtext there would, I think, make him more chillingly effective in the role. Granted, it's rather meta-casting (within the context of TTL), but as OTL has shown, Fry has discussed his mental condition at great length, and I think he might see this part as an opportunity to come to terms with it. (Hugh Laurie would almost certainly make a better Quirrell, but it's harder to cast him in the role.)

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.

Everybody does that now, though. It's what's in "vogue". Probably because the concept of the "romantic friendship" is so alien to our modern-day society (at least among men).

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).

Thanks for sharing that, Hornla. It's really nice to get an inside perspective on one of the most economically significant world languages (EFIGS, to borrow from gaming terminology). Speaking of which, if any Romance readers would like to share their insights on the translations, you are all more than welcome to do so. Of course, English is the lingua franca throughout Europe, but I wonder how much Harry Potter might have helped that along. Obviously, there was an organic component to it, at least in Germany.

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.

No, we're not doing that. We're getting a genuinely elderly man to play Dumbledore. I'm more than happy to accept casting suggestions for the role - what's nice about it is that, from our vantage point, we know who will be alive a decade down the line from when he is first cast, so as to avoid a Richard Harris/Michael Gambon situation.

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.

When it comes to linguistic protectionism in la Francophonie, Quebec will always make France seem downright assimilationist in comparison

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).

You know, I probably should own the French version, since the Potter books are purportedly an excellent tool to increase your proficiency with foreign languages. Having said that, I just looked up their French titles: Harry Potter and the School of Wizards? That almost makes Sorcerer's Stone look good! (At least they kept all the later titles intact.)

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...

The interesting thing about OTL is that Warners and DC very much let their filmmakers run amok, for good (the Nolan trilogy) and for bad (Superman Returns), at least by popular consensus. If these earlier directors are reined in for a greater cause, I wonder how it would affect development of those films. The giant albatross that any Superman film has around its neck is Jon Peters, of course, which makes it even more difficult to see how a good movie could be made under those circumstances.

...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?).

A big-screen Wonder Woman film? The Holy Grail of superhero movies? That would be tough to pull off - especially considering the terrible track record for female superheroes to date IOTL. I think a Green Lantern film would work, though I don't know enough about John Stewart's character to say who might play him (you do know they're going to suggest Will Smith, don't you? ). I don't see a Flash movie turning out well; I can already picture the derisive comparisons to Sonic the Hedgehog. Martian Manhunter has a slightly bigger upside, but it needs a very delicate touch. Any Justice League movie could obviously turn out just as well as The Avengers did IOTL, so no worries there.

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.

All right, I'll agree with you there.

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.

It makes for the ideal substitute to the eight Potter films ITTL. Looks like my side project has a side project!

(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.)

My timelines seem to be like Hollywood movies - start off small and intimate, but get very bloated, very quickly

Presumably, thanks to the Law of Allohistorical Irony, Marvel will instead pursue standalone films with no overarching "The Verse" continuity. Which isn't so farfetched given that their first entries into the superhero film boom of the 2000s were indeed like that (and they still make some such ones).

I think that's a fairly safe bet. It appeals to my sense of irony

Marvel superhero movies instead being produced as standalones is a interesting possibility, though I wonder how Marvel Studios gaining semi-autonomy will affect things.

Okay - I'll ask the million-dollar question: what does this mean for One More Day?

Were there plans for more DC movies in the early 2000's besides Zatanna?

You know, that's an excellent question. I don't know; that's something that merits further research.

Fry could have been either a good Horace Slughorn, IMHO...or perhaps Cornelius Fudge. With a bit of a stretch, also Uncle Vernon.

I actually liked Fry for Ollivander, but there's no way I (or they) would waste him on a role that tiny. If he's cast in any role other than Quirrell, I agree it would be Fudge.

I always presumed that Harry himself hailed from somewhere in SouthEastern Wales, due to Hagrid stating at the very beginning, when transfering him to the Dursleys, that he "fell asleep over Bristol". Drawing and contiuing a line from Surrey over Bristol brings you pretty much into the region of Newport/Cardiff.

From what I understand, the reference to Bristol was the first of her many, many shout-outs to the West Country, which as you note was the region in which she was born and raised - and, it should be noted, Hagrid was played with a West Country accent on Rowling's specific instructions, so it's probably more about where he lives.

Yes, I know that Wales and the West Country aren't the same thing. I'm sorry if the previous paragraph didn't make that clear.

I would say Godric's Hollow is probably somewhere in the Gloucestershire/Wiltshire region.

Along with about half the locations in Harry Potter

Okay, let's drop the casting bomb. As it stands right now, this is my choice for The Boy Who Lived himself: Gabriel Thomson. From what I can gather, he was either the runner-up, or at least on the shortlist, IOTL. Note that the Harry Potter and the Secret Chamberpot of Azerbaijan parody for Comic Relief that I linked to earlier even alluded to Thomson again, as apparently there were rumblings about him replacing Radcliffe for the second film IOTL! He's definitely on the older end of the age range, born on October 27, 1986, and would be thirteen during filming of the first season. (Radcliffe was born on July 23, 1989, and was indeed eleven during production of the first film). Here is his Wikipedia page, and here is his IMDb page. His most famous role IOTL is that of Michael Harper on the American-style Britcom (now there's a contradiction!) My Family, which would be butterflied away (or at least his casting therein would be). I'm also looking at his father on that program, Robert Lindsay, as a candidate for Snape. Note that the only cast member to appear in any of the Harry Potter films IOTL was Zoe Wanamaker, who appeared as Madam Hooch in the first film.

I think that should be sufficient to get the ball rolling on casting discussions!

 

[ColeMercury]

It occurs to me that Timothy Spall is also still a really good choice for Peter Pettigrew.

 

[Thande]

You know, I probably should own the French version, since the Potter books are purportedly an excellent tool to increase your proficiency with foreign languages. Having said that, I just looked up their French titles: Harry Potter and the School of Wizards? That almost makes Sorcerer's Stone look good! (At least they kept all the later titles intact.)

Now when I first saw that, I indeed thought the French had dumbed down like the Americans. But apparently there is actually a really good reason for why they changed the title. Nicolas Flamel (who was a real person, donchaknow) was French, and in France he's apparently as well known as Isaac Newton is here or Ben Franklin is in the USA. Because the French know his association with the Philosopher's Stone so much, the big reveal (that Flamel being mentioned casually on Dumbledore's chocolate frog card being the link to the Philosopher's Stone) doesn't work for a French audience if they already know from the title that the Philosopher's Stone is involved. So they changed the title to the more generic one to conceal the relation of the Philosopher's Stone, so the reveal still works--the French audience thinks the mention of Flamel on the chocolate frog card is just a casual historical gag, like the witch-burning stuff mentioned in the third book, and then there's still the shock of it turning out to be important later on. I think the translators did rather well there.

From what I understand, the reference to Bristol was the first of her many, many shout-outs to the West Country, which as you note was the region in which she was born and raised - and, it should be noted, Hagrid was played with a West Country accent on Rowling's specific instructions, so it's probably more about where he lives.

I can't say I noticed that many shout-outs myself, but maybe you don't notice when you're British yourself.

Okay, let's drop the casting bomb. As it stands right now, this is my choice for The Boy Who Lived himself: Gabriel Thomson. From what I can gather, he was either the runner-up, or at least on the shortlist, IOTL. Note that the Harry Potter and the Secret Chamberpot of Azerbaijan parody for Comic Relief that I linked to earlier even alluded to Thomson again, as apparently there were rumblings about him replacing Radcliffe for the second film IOTL! He's definitely on the older end of the age range, born on October 27, 1986, and would be thirteen during filming of the first season. (Radcliffe was born on July 23, 1989, and was indeed eleven during production of the first film). Here is his Wikipedia page, and here is his IMDb page. His most famous role IOTL is that of Michael Harper on the American-style Britcom (now there's a contradiction!) My Family, which would be butterflied away (or at least his casting therein would be). I'm also looking at his father on that program, Robert Lindsay, as a candidate for Snape. Note that the only cast member to appear in any of the Harry Potter films IOTL was Zoe Wanamaker, who appeared as Madam Hooch in the first film.

I think that should be sufficient to get the ball rolling on casting discussions!

I have to say, that is a genius set of casting decisions. Thomson looks like Potter and the fact that he could do sardonic humour so well so young in "My Family" suggests he would do well at capturing Potter's personality. And Lindsay would work pretty well as Snape, too. And best of all, this would presumably butterfly My Family away, too

Pity there's no obvious role for Kris Marshall (Nick), easily the best thing on that show. He's got the personality for Fred and George but is way too old for that.

 

[Alberto Knox]

Okay, let's drop the casting bomb. As it stands right now, this is my choice for The Boy Who Lived himself: Gabriel Thomson. From what I can gather, he was either the runner-up, or at least on the shortlist, IOTL. Note that the Harry Potter and the Secret Chamberpot of Azerbaijan parody for Comic Relief that I linked to earlier even alluded to Thomson again, as apparently there were rumblings about him replacing Radcliffe for the second film IOTL! He's definitely on the older end of the age range, born on October 27, 1986, and would be thirteen during filming of the first season. (Radcliffe was born on July 23, 1989, and was indeed eleven during production of the first film). Here is his Wikipedia page, and here is his IMDb page. His most famous role IOTL is that of Michael Harper on the American-style Britcom (now there's a contradiction!) My Family, which would be butterflied away (or at least his casting therein would be). I'm also looking at his father on that program, Robert Lindsay, as a candidate for Snape. Note that the only cast member to appear in any of the Harry Potter films IOTL was Zoe Wanamaker, who appeared as Madam Hooch in the first film.

I think that should be sufficient to get the ball rolling on casting discussions!

Consider it rolled.


Robert Lindsay wouldn't be my first choice for Snape. But saying that, I could see him doing a very fine job of the part. The first actor that came to my mind was Rowan Atkinson. He has the right look for the part and could play the role of Snape perfectly by taking his Blackadder performance, subtracting half of the humor and replacing it with extra bitterness and resentment. As Alan Rickman demonstrated admirably, Snape is a character from which a great deal of deadpan humor can be extracted. Atkinson would be just the man to do it. Whether he can be brought onboard is another matter entirely.

I have been scratching my head over Dumbledore and running in to the same problem noted by Thande in regards to Stephen Fry. While there are several actors available who could convincingly pull off Dumbledore's speech and mannerisms, they don't really fit the physical description. The only viable candidate I could present would be Tom Baker, who is not particularly jowly at the point of the shows development and sufficiently silverhaired to play the rather eccentric headmaster of Hogwarts.

Assuming Peeves the Poltergeist isn't absent from the TV series, I would heartily recommend the OTL choice of Rik Mayall, whose scenes were sadly cut from the film adaption of the Philosopher's Stone.

 

[Thande]

Robert Lindsay wouldn't be my first choice for Snape. But saying that, I could see him doing a very fine job of the part. The first actor that came to my mind was Rowan Atkinson. He has the right look for the part and could play the role of Snape perfectly by taking his Blackadder performance, subtracting half of the humor and replacing it with extra bitterness and resentment. As Alan Rickman demonstrated admirably, Snape is a character from which a great deal of deadpan humor can be extracted. Atkinson would be just the man to do it. Whether he can be brought onboard is another matter entirely.

I just don't think people could take Rowan Atkinson seriously in a serious role. Everyone would always be waiting for the punchline.

I have been scratching my head over Dumbledore and running in to the same problem noted by Thande in regards to Stephen Fry. While there are several actors available who could convincingly pull off Dumbledore's speech and mannerisms, they don't really fit the physical description. The only viable candidate I could present would be Tom Baker, who is not particularly jowly at the point of the shows development and sufficiently silverhaired to play the rather eccentric headmaster of Hogwarts.

Tom Baker could certainly pull it off, but I'm not sure if he'd want the part.

Assuming Peeves the Poltergeist isn't absent from the TV series, I would heartily recommend the OTL choice of Rik Mayall, whose scenes were sadly cut from the film adaption of the Philosopher's Stone.

Agreed on both points

 

[Alberto Knox]

I just don't think people could take Rowan Atkinson seriously in a serious role. Everyone would always be waiting for the punchline.

Fair enough...personally I don't see Snape as an entirely serious role, hence the suggestion, but I suppose if the audience is to be initially persuaded of the characters apparently sinister intentions, a well known comic is perhaps not the best choice.

Tom Baker could certainly pull it off, but I'm not sure if he'd want the part.

Perhaps so but there are so few actors up to the role who I could see taking it.

The only other option I could see would be John Neville, an exile across the water, and I have my doubts as to whether he could be tempted back across it for the sake of a television program. Still...if it's an international co-production there might be a ray of hope.

 

[Hörnla]

Nah, Rowling would have said if he was Welsh.*

Yes, indeed.
But we can conclude from her background,that mentioning Bristol is a nod and not an accident.

Wolverhampton? Sounds right out invented to me. (I used to know someone from there and she could be very ironic about the place...)

Thanks for sharing that, Hornla. It's really nice to get an inside perspective on one of the most economically significant world languages (EFIGS, to borrow from gaming terminology).{...} Of course, English is the lingua franca throughout Europe, but I wonder how much Harry Potter might have helped that along. Obviously, there was an organic component to it, at least in Germany.

My pleasure.
In Germany, I think that HP didn't do much to promote the trend towards lifelong English schooling, which comes rather from economic necessities. Also, you do not have much of a possibility to evade English lessons at school.

What HP did, though, is to give a lot of people the possibility to see what they could do with what they had learnt at school. I think, that many people underestimate themselves concerning that, I did so myself until (at age 16) a friend came back from his year in the US and gave me his Tom-Clancy-collection.

Today, every bookshop here has a shelf with English language books. Before HP, that was rather an odditiy, as long as you weren't in a metropolis like Berlin or near a uni campus.

You know, I probably should own the French version, since the Potter books are purportedly an excellent tool to increase your proficiency with foreign languages. Having said that, I just looked up their French titles: Harry Potter and the School of Wizards? That almost makes Sorcerer's Stone look good! (At least they kept all the later titles intact.)

Either the French editors didn't have much faith into a multi-volume success, or the concept of the "Philosopher's Stone" is not much known in France? In German, "der Stein der Weisen" is at least known as a saying (as in "that was not exactly the philosopher's stone you found"), perhaps more so than in the US? Ahhh...errr....Thande just explained that.

I actually liked Fry for Ollivander, but there's no way I (or they) would waste him on a role that tiny. If he's cast in any role other than Quirrell, I agree it would be Fudge.

Ollivander would be an odd choice for me, but, on the other hand, Fry could play the Sorting Hat or Ron and it would still be good. Concerning Fudge, I checked, nobody of the principal cast of "Yes, Minister" would be available, I am afraid.

Along with about half the locations in Harry Potter

Wiltshire and Worcestershire? Please enlighten me. Only connection I see is filming in the Cathedral of Worcester.

I have not thought much about casting yet. All the people I checked if they were "low career" enough to be a possible choice for a TV series turn out to be quite busy already on closer inspection.

But I am ready to throw one name in freely, without much thinking and recherche: Ian Richardson as Dumbledore.

 

[Thande]

What HP did, though, is to give a lot of people the possibility to see what they could do with what they had learnt at school. I think, that many people underestimate themselves concerning that, I did so myself until (at age 16) a friend came back from his year in the US and gave me his Tom-Clancy-collection.

Today, every bookshop here has a shelf with English language books. Before HP, that was rather an odditiy, as long as you weren't in a metropolis like Berlin or near a uni campus.

That's an interesting point, thanks for sharing. I did notice rather more English-literature sections in German bookshops than I was expecting when I went to Berlin in 2009.

 

[Brainbin]

It occurs to me that Timothy Spall is also still a really good choice for Peter Pettigrew.

Maybe. It's a relatively small role, and it won't be cast until later on (basically a glorified cameo in the third season), so they can afford more of a "name" for it.

Now when I first saw that, I indeed thought the French had dumbed down like the Americans. But apparently there is actually a really good reason for why they changed the title. Nicolas Flamel (who was a real person, donchaknow) was French, and in France he's apparently as well known as Isaac Newton is here or Ben Franklin is in the USA. Because the French know his association with the Philosopher's Stone so much, the big reveal (that Flamel being mentioned casually on Dumbledore's chocolate frog card being the link to the Philosopher's Stone) doesn't work for a French audience if they already know from the title that the Philosopher's Stone is involved. So they changed the title to the more generic one to conceal the relation of the Philosopher's Stone, so the reveal still works--the French audience thinks the mention of Flamel on the chocolate frog card is just a casual historical gag, like the witch-burning stuff mentioned in the third book, and then there's still the shock of it turning out to be important later on. I think the translators did rather well there.

All right, that's fair enough. Thanks for sharing.

I have to say, that is a genius set of casting decisions. Thomson looks like Potter and the fact that he could do sardonic humour so well so young in "My Family" suggests he would do well at capturing Potter's personality. And Lindsay would work pretty well as Snape, too. And best of all, this would presumably butterfly My Family away, too

Thank you very much, Thande! And why not? I'll make myself a hero and butterfly My Family from TTL

Robert Lindsay wouldn't be my first choice for Snape. But saying that, I could see him doing a very fine job of the part. The first actor that came to my mind was Rowan Atkinson. He has the right look for the part and could play the role of Snape perfectly by taking his Blackadder performance, subtracting half of the humor and replacing it with extra bitterness and resentment. As Alan Rickman demonstrated admirably, Snape is a character from which a great deal of deadpan humor can be extracted. Atkinson would be just the man to do it. Whether he can be brought onboard is another matter entirely.

I don't know. I get that Atkinson can play cutting and refined because of Blackadder, but most North Americans aren't familiar with that show. What are they familiar with? Mr. Bean. He's going to come on the screen and people are going to burst out laughing. "Mr. Bean can talk!" And, meanwhile, I'll agree with Thande about British viewers and their reaction. Quirrell can be spun into a comic relief character, but Snape - especially in the first book - has to be serious and enigmatic, so that everyone will think he's the villain.

I have been scratching my head over Dumbledore and running in to the same problem noted by Thande in regards to Stephen Fry. While there are several actors available who could convincingly pull off Dumbledore's speech and mannerisms, they don't really fit the physical description. The only viable candidate I could present would be Tom Baker, who is not particularly jowly at the point of the shows development and sufficiently silverhaired to play the rather eccentric headmaster of Hogwarts.

He certainly has the Bohemian attitude down pat. His interpretation of Dumbledore would definitely be self-consciously quirky, which works for the earlier books, and of course he does have a famous (almost-)death scene on his resume. But on the other hand, casting him in that role is just begging for "Dumbledore is a Time Lord" jokes.

Assuming Peeves the Poltergeist isn't absent from the TV series, I would heartily recommend the OTL choice of Rik Mayall, whose scenes were sadly cut from the film adaption of the Philosopher's Stone.

Of course Mayall will be kept for that part, which will be featured in the program, though sparingly.

Tom Baker could certainly pull it off, but I'm not sure if he'd want the part.

He might if he were told that it could finally break his typecasting. Though, as I noted above, the BBC might not want him because he is so heavily typecast.

Fair enough...personally I don't see Snape as an entirely serious role, hence the suggestion, but I suppose if the audience is to be initially persuaded of the characters apparently sinister intentions, a well known comic is perhaps not the best choice.

Exactly. In book one, there's no room for even a darkly comedic portrayal (and note that Rickman played it arrow-straight in that film as well, though we were fortunately not spared quite a good bit of hamminess on his part). After that, as he becomes more ambiguous (and with scenes like the DADA lesson in book three), then there's room for comedy (even if it's your timeworn British "man in drag" chestnut). But even then, Snape gets really dark again in book six, so it can't last.

The only other option I could see would be John Neville, an exile across the water, and I have my doubts as to whether he could be tempted back across it for the sake of a television program. Still...if it's an international co-production there might be a ray of hope.

Fortunately for you, he lives in Canada, and therefore (assuming that the CBC gets involved early), there could be negotiations involving his trying out for the part. He's "known" to younger American audiences the way few British actors of his generation and calibre are (through his appearances on The X-Files), and that alone might be enough. Of course, he would only go over there in exchange for some hefty perks; including a wide berth to take other engagements and probably the highest salary of any cast member.

One problem with Neville: though he did live to 2011, he died of Alzheimer's Disease, signs of which would likely manifest years before that. According to IMDb, though, he continued acting through 2010, by which time the series would be over, so perhaps he can just come in under the wire.

In Germany, I think that HP didn't do much to promote the trend towards lifelong English schooling, which comes rather from economic necessities. Also, you do not have much of a possibility to evade English lessons at school.

What HP did, though, is to give a lot of people the possibility to see what they could do with what they had learnt at school. I think, that many people underestimate themselves concerning that, I did so myself until (at age 16) a friend came back from his year in the US and gave me his Tom-Clancy-collection.

Today, every bookshop here has a shelf with English language books. Before HP, that was rather an odditiy, as long as you weren't in a metropolis like Berlin or near a uni campus.

So in other words, Harry Potter allowed for the practical application of the required learning that you had done. That's still very valuable. And of course, it gives you (and people in many other European countries, assuming that their experiences were broadly similar to yours) an advantage that many native English-speakers lack, as even in areas where a second language is required learning (such as Canada, where French is mandatory), many of us do not bother to apply that learning.

Ollivander would be an odd choice for me, but, on the other hand, Fry could play the Sorting Hat or Ron and it would still be good. Concerning Fudge, I checked, nobody of the principal cast of "Yes, Minister" would be available, I am afraid.

For Fudge, we need a stuffy, obstructive bureaucrat, right? Why not Nicholas Smith (Mr. Rumbold) from Are You Being Served?

But I am ready to throw one name in freely, without much thinking and recherche: Ian Richardson as Dumbledore.

An interesting choice, but his death date (2007) is problematic. They might be able to work around it since his character died at the end of the sixth book (which would have aired c. 2006), but they would need photo and body doubles, a sound-alike, and perhaps even the dreaded CGI in order to have him "appear", even in his limited capacity as he appeared in the books, in the seventh and final season, which would be filmed in 2007-08, after his demise.

I'll draft a formal "casting call" post soon, but feel free to continue with the discussion in the meantime.

 

[Plumber]

Wait, Rowan Atkinson as Quirrell?

 

[NCW8]

I don't know. I get that Atkinson can play cutting and refined because of Blackadder, but most North Americans aren't familiar with that show. What are they familiar with? Mr. Bean. He's going to come on the screen and people are going to burst out laughing. "Mr. Bean can talk!" And, meanwhile, I'll agree with Thande about British viewers and their reaction. Quirrell can be spun into a comic relief character, but Snape - especially in the first book - has to be serious and enigmatic, so that everyone will think he's the villain.

In the UK he's known to have a bit more range thanks to his appearance on Not the Nine O'Clock News and some of his stand-up routines. For example, here is part of his act where he plays the part of a schoolmaster.

Cheers,
Nigel.

 

[Thande]

He might if he were told that it could finally break his typecasting. Though, as I noted above, the BBC might not want him because he is so heavily typecast.

But Dumbledore is pretty much the same kind of character as the Doctor, so it wouldn't be breaking typecasting. I don't think Baker would want such a big, central role; his acting in this period tended to be small cameo parts, such as Puddleglum the Marsh-wiggle in the BBC Narnia TV series and Mr Wyvern in the Reeves and Mortimer 1999 remake of Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased).

There's also the point that there would be a revolutionary mob of frenzied Doctor Who fans storming Broadcasting House when Dumbledore is killed in book 6

For Fudge, we need a stuffy, obstructive bureaucrat, right? Why not Nicholas Smith (Mr. Rumbold) from Are You Being Served?

I didn't know he was still alive! Particularly weird when Miss Brahms has passed away...

In the UK he's known to have a bit more range thanks to his appearance on Not the Nine O'Clock News and some of his stand-up routines. For example, here is part of his act where he plays the part of a schoolmaster.

Cheers,
Nigel.

But as I said above, all his roles are still comic and I don't think anyone could take him seriously in a dramatic role. Different kinds of comic, but still comic.

 

[ColeMercury]

Maybe. It's a relatively small role, and it won't be cast until later on (basically a glorified cameo in the third season), so they can afford more of a "name" for it.

But he looks right. I remember that before the third movie came out, Spall was the first person I thought of to play Peter.

But then again, it depends on what age they decide to make the "Marauder generation" (i.e. Snape, Sirius, Remus, Peter, James, Lily). In the books, they're all only about twenty years older than Harry, which makes them in their early-to-mid-thirties. In OTL's movies they appear to be about ten or fifteen years older than that. So actors like Timothy Spall and Rowan Atkinson may be too old if they follow the books more closely.

 

[NCW8]

But as I said above, all his roles are still comic and I don't think anyone could take him seriously in a dramatic role. Different kinds of comic, but still comic.

Other comedians have switched to doing more dramatic roles, but you're right that Atkinson hasn't shown any sign of doing that yet. How about casting him in a more comedic role - Nearly Headless Nick, for example ?

Cheers,
Nigel.

 

[Thande]

Other comedians have switched to doing more dramatic roles, but you're right that Atkinson hasn't shown any sign of doing that yet. How about casting him in a more comedic role - Nearly Headless Nick, for example ?

Cheers,
Nigel.

Yep, he could pull that off (no pun intended). And I doubt they would get John Cleese for such a minor TV role.