Wizarding World 2023 - Rumors & Discussion

[BrickBob Studpants]

@Whovastron: Every shameless soulless cashgrab remake of a beloved franchise has been utterly horrible so far, so why should this be any different? Or name one good remake, besides Dune. I’ll wait.

Also, can’t wait for that slavery subplot in GoF 

I hope TLG will give us all of the missing stuff from the movies before this travesty unfolds.

[Nylock]

2 minutes ago, Retro Brick Reviews said:

I think the theme is over after this, and probably the HP franchise as a whole.

100%, especially if lego switches to adapting the show.
 

I’d say in less than 10 years (or if they haven’t already), Warner Bros will push for a live action cursed child film with the original cast to try and salvage the franchise. And it’ll be terrible. 

[Retro Brick Reviews]

Just now, Nylock said:

I’d say in less than 10 years (or if they haven’t already), Warner Bros will push for a live action cursed child film with the original cast to try and salvage the franchise. And it’ll be terrible. 

Iirc they actually tried to get one greenlit about a month ago, but none of the Trio were willing to be in it because of Rowling. So this reboot is plan B.

[BrickBob Studpants]

Just now, Nylock said:

Warner Bros will push for a live action cursed child film with the original cast to try and salvage the franchise. And it’ll be terrible. 

Actually, as much as I hate the plot of CC, a movie adaptation of that would’ve been preferable. They could’ve made anything, a Hogwarts Legacy show, something set in Medieval times, a Marauder film/show, but they went for the single worst option possible.

What next? Remakes of the LoTR movies?

[Retro Brick Reviews]

3 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

 

Also, can’t wait for that slavery subplot in GoF 

That's going to be quite a shock for all the mothers whose only exposure to HP was watching the movies with their kids. (Same goes with how Voldy was conceived, lmao).

The more I think about it, a lot of the stuff WB cut from the original movies was probably for good reason...

[JeanGreyForever]

2 minutes ago, Retro Brick Reviews said:

Iirc they actually tried to get one greenlit about a month ago, but none of the Trio were willing to be in it because of Rowling. So this reboot is plan B.

Rowling also said no to a movie. She was worried it would hurt the play financially because why would anyone pay to see it if there's a movie. For the same reason most musicals don't get film adaptations until they've been around for a long time.

[Nylock]

14 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Actually, as much as I hate the plot of CC, a movie adaptation of that would’ve been preferable. They could’ve made anything, a Hogwarts Legacy show, something set in Medieval times, a Marauder film/show, but they went for the single worst option possible.

What next? Remakes of the LoTR movies?

I agree completely. For a universe where so much world building had already been done AND where they could do so much more world building, they decide to just rehash what we’ve seen. The look of the castle + John Williams score in the announcement makes it all the more infuriating. Why even bother with a new series if it’s gonna look and sound just like the films? 

 

if Warner bros were to ever reboot LotR, I think I’d commit to never watching a piece of studio media again. 

[Felkin]

Some people here have been saying that this theme will end soon because pretty much every character / location has been done.

If nothing else, a new show in a few years will bring new designs which will (hopefully) look awesome on screen and as Lego sets. Look at the various illustrated versions of HP and how different they are to the movie-verse, and I'm excited to see how they bring the books to life this time... hopefully with a lot less omissions.

[Retro Brick Reviews]

3 minutes ago, Felkin said:

If nothing else, a new show in a few years will bring new designs which will (hopefully) look awesome on screen and as Lego sets. Look at the various illustrated versions of HP and how different they are to the movie-verse, and I'm excited to see how they bring the books to life this time... hopefully with a lot less omissions.

Actually, judging by the announcement showing Hogwarts with the exact same appearance as in the movies, it seems like this series is going to use the exact same designs as the movies, just with different actors. 

12 minutes ago, Nylock said:

Why even bother with a new series if it’s gonna look and sound just like the films? 

Because this is nothing more than an attempted cashgrab. The movies are incredibly iconic (arguably moreso than the books), and this is the easiest/laziest way to capitalize on nostalgia for them.

[Slytherin Alumni]

I would have rather had a film about the founders of Hogwarts during the time they created the school, the creation of the CoS and split of Slytherin

OR

A film of the Marauders when they were in school, becoming animagus’, Snape’s almost demise, etc. 

I’ve always thought either of those would be great stand alone films. Not sure why they’ve never done them.

[Killian]

59 minutes ago, JeanGreyForever said:

Rowling also said no to a movie. She was worried it would hurt the play financially because why would anyone pay to see it if there's a movie. For the same reason most musicals don't get film adaptations until they've been around for a long time.

Yeah where the eff is my Wicked: The Movie? It's time already!!

[BrickBob Studpants]

2 minutes ago, Killian said:

Yeah where the eff is my Wicked: The Movie? It's time already!!

Are you being sarcastic or not? Because if you aren't, boy, do I have news for you

[Killian]

3 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Are you being sarcastic or not? Because if you aren't, boy, do I have news for you

I mean, there have been rumours for about a decade now. I've stopped paying attention LOL

[BrickBob Studpants]

1 minute ago, Killian said:

I mean, there have been rumours for about a decade now. I've stopped paying attention LOL

It's being adapted as a two-parter

Gah, I hope they reveal the new sets soon to wash the stench of the awful news out of my mouth

[Retro Brick Reviews]

Just now, BrickBob Studpants said:

Gah, I hope they reveal the new sets soon to wash the stench of the awful news out of my mouth

I mean, after the Temple of Doom there's a good chance we'll soon get a press release of "We worked closely with Warner Brothers to consolidate the launch of the new Harry Potter sets, and in order to have better synergy with the upcoming series have elected to cancel all of them."

[JeanGreyForever]

2 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

It's being adapted as a two-parter

Which is a total cash-grab especially since I doubt the first one will even do well enough to justify a sequel.

[EdWebhead]

1 hour ago, JeanGreyForever said:

Rowling also said no to a movie. She was worried it would hurt the play financially because why would anyone pay to see it if there's a movie. For the same reason most musicals don't get film adaptations until they've been around for a long time.

Even then I still think it would be too early to do the Cursed Child as a film, the original cast are still young and haven't quite aged up to play the older versions of their characters yet.

Also, upon further reading Zaslav has said that the series doesn't limit what they could do in the Wizarding World, which could mean they are open to continuing from the original continuity with spinoffs, sequels, etc. The series might very well exist on its own and be ignored entirely if you wanted to, like how Rings of Power and the LOTR films are completely separate. It's needlessly convoluted, but there's that at least, which would make sense considering how dependent on the films the parks and merchandise are.

[BrickBob Studpants]

Just now, Retro Brick Reviews said:

I mean, after the Temple of Doom there's a good chance we'll soon get a press release of "We worked closely with Warner Brothers to consolidate the launch of the new Harry Potter sets, and in order to have better synergy with the upcoming series have elected to cancel all of them."

Good one  I’m so glad we’re getting Gringotts this year, which is one of the bigger gaps to fill

[JeanGreyForever]

I think another issue which may have led to a HP reboot is the fact that the theme park rights are owned by Universal, not WB. With Disney, there's no danger of a SW reboot because so much of the Disney theme parks have attractions or lands invested in the series. I have no idea if WB gets anything from all the HP merchandise sold at Universal, but especially if they don't, they wouldn't feel beholden to the originals being present there.

Personally, I don't see this remake working at all. Harry Potter is very much a product of the 90s/2000s. Kids today don't have that same connection unless they grew up watching the movies through their parents. They'd have to heavily change the series to adapt it more for the Gen Z crowd and that's only going to further distance older fans from this reboot. Most older fans will already feel outraged that the originals are being phased out for a blatant cash grab.

And while people are justifying the existence of this new reboot by claiming it'll be closer to the books, there's no guarantee of that either. For as much as they link back to the books, there's probably going to be just as much if not more that they change. His Dark Materials fans thought the HBO series would be an improvement on the movie and more book accurate, but very little of the book fandom enjoys the show and it didn't catch on with general audiences at all.

4 minutes ago, EdWebhead said:

Even then I still think it would be too early to do the Cursed Child as a film, the original cast are still young and haven't quite aged up to play the older versions of their characters yet.

Also, upon further reading Zaslav has said that the series doesn't limit what they could do in the Wizarding World, which could mean they are open to continuing from the original continuity with spinoffs, sequels, etc. The series might very well exist on its own and be ignored entirely if you wanted to, like how Rings of Power and the LOTR films are completely separate. It's needlessly convoluted, but there's that at least, which would make sense considering how dependent on the films the parks and merchandise are.

Cursed Child starts off where the HP epilogue ends so it would be 19 years later. Deathly Hallows Part 2 came out in 2011 so 2030 would be the most accurate age-wise for Cursed Child to become a movie. However, Daniel Radcliffe has basically said he's not interested in returning anytime soon and he would only consider the idea after a 30-40 year gap like the original Star Wars cast took decades to reunite. And from what I've read online, Emma Watson wants nothing to do with JK Rowling anymore and would never return. I'm not sure Daniel would return with JKR's involvement either since he's been very vocal lately about supporting trans youth and other marginalized groups and how people need to listen to them.

Another issue with Cursed Child is that because of all the time travel, the play involves younger versions of the characters and Dan, Emma, Rupert, and all the other actors playing the Hogwarts students couldn't pass off as, say their Goblet of Fire selves, now let alone in years to come. And what will they do about characters whose actors have passed away like Alan Rickman as Snape? The only thing that would work is going the Star Wars route and using CGI to de-age the actors and reconstruct the deceased actors.

Rings of Power and LOTR are a separate situation because two different companies have the rights to those two properties. Apparently Amazon and Jeff Bezos were very angry when they heard the news that WB was making more LOTR movies, so the dueling franchises exist there because the rights are divided. With HP, WB owns it entirely so it would be very bizarre to make a reboot show while continuing to make movies based on the originals. That would confuse casual audiences and cannibalize the franchise, and it's a reason why Disney didn't continue the EU for Star Wars while starting their own movies.

[Tariq j]

What's interesting about that video is that they've used the same logo, model of Hogwarts and theme music. So are they just going to use the same sets/costumes/props as well? I would've preferred they'd expanded the universe to be honest.

[Seaber]

There won't ever be any sets from this show, but look forwards to the years of speculation that there will be 

[JeanGreyForever]

11 minutes ago, Tariq j said:

What's interesting about that video is that they've used the same logo, model of Hogwarts and theme music. So are they just going to use the same sets/costumes/props as well? I would've preferred they'd expanded the universe to be honest.

If the show only got officially confirmed today, I doubt they would have anything ready to showcase like concept art or designs for a new castle, let alone theme music.

[eldiano]

42 minutes ago, JeanGreyForever said:

I think another issue which may have led to a HP reboot is the fact that the theme park rights are owned by Universal, not WB. With Disney, there's no danger of a SW reboot because so much of the Disney theme parks have attractions or lands invested in the series. I have no idea if WB gets anything from all the HP merchandise sold at Universal, but especially if they don't, they wouldn't feel beholden to the originals being present there.

Personally, I don't see this remake working at all. Harry Potter is very much a product of the 90s/2000s. Kids today don't have that same connection unless they grew up watching the movies through their parents. They'd have to heavily change the series to adapt it more for the Gen Z crowd and that's only going to further distance older fans from this reboot. Most older fans will already feel outraged that the originals are being phased out for a blatant cash grab.

And while people are justifying the existence of this new reboot by claiming it'll be closer to the books, there's no guarantee of that either. For as much as they link back to the books, there's probably going to be just as much if not more that they change. His Dark Materials fans thought the HBO series would be an improvement on the movie and more book accurate, but very little of the book fandom enjoys the show and it didn't catch on with general audiences at all.

Cursed Child starts off where the HP epilogue ends so it would be 19 years later. Deathly Hallows Part 2 came out in 2011 so 2030 would be the most accurate age-wise for Cursed Child to become a movie. However, Daniel Radcliffe has basically said he's not interested in returning anytime soon and he would only consider the idea after a 30-40 year gap like the original Star Wars cast took decades to reunite. And from what I've read online, Emma Watson wants nothing to do with JK Rowling anymore and would never return. I'm not sure Daniel would return with JKR's involvement either since he's been very vocal lately about supporting trans youth and other marginalized groups and how people need to listen to them.

Another issue with Cursed Child is that because of all the time travel, the play involves younger versions of the characters and Dan, Emma, Rupert, and all the other actors playing the Hogwarts students couldn't pass off as, say their Goblet of Fire selves, now let alone in years to come. And what will they do about characters whose actors have passed away like Alan Rickman as Snape? The only thing that would work is going the Star Wars route and using CGI to de-age the actors and reconstruct the deceased actors.

Rings of Power and LOTR are a separate situation because two different companies have the rights to those two properties. Apparently Amazon and Jeff Bezos were very angry when they heard the news that WB was making more LOTR movies, so the dueling franchises exist there because the rights are divided. With HP, WB owns it entirely so it would be very bizarre to make a reboot show while continuing to make movies based on the originals. That would confuse casual audiences and cannibalize the franchise, and it's a reason why Disney didn't continue the EU for Star Wars while starting their own movies.

Universal gets their cut.  a Harry potter wand at a universal park will retail for 59.99, where as the harry potter store in NYC or the Warner Brothers store or hell, even the official harry potter shop sell it for 39.99 

[evanevanevan]

I'm going to cut through the hate with positive optimism and excitement! It's not like the OG movies are disappearing forever 

This is just more Harry Potter content, and with that a greater potential for more Harry Potter LEGO. Hopefully we get scenes from the books that originally got cut!

[BrickBob Studpants]

5 minutes ago, evanevanevan said:

This is just more Harry Potter content, and with that a greater potential for more Harry Potter LEGO.

More of the same you mean  I hope TLG is not as creatively bankrupt as those WB hacks and will finish the theme beforehand.

Seriously, first the whole DCEU debacle, then the Batgirl desaster, the cancellation of so many shows, and now this poo. I lost all respect I ever had for WB. Good thing TLG isn‘t affiliated with them any more for future LEGO movies.