Great Debate

Continuing the Harry Potter franchise or letting it die; two Spectator staff members weigh in

More stories from Sadie Sedlmayr

More stories from Parker Reed


Continuing Harry Potter franchise is a no-no

The “Harry Potter” series is one of the most magical series of all time. The seven books and eight films showed us a young 11-year-old boy’s journey from lonely muggle, all the way through becoming a dark lord-vanquishing young wizard. When “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2” rolled its final credits, Potter’s journey through Hogwarts with Hermione Granger and Ronald Weasley had come to an end. His arc was complete.

“The Lord of the Rings,” “The Terminator” franchise, “Saw” and the “Transformers” live action films are all prime examples of movie series that didn’t know when to say when. And now with “The Cursed Child” and “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find them” (which is planned to be a trilogy) both hitting the market this year, Warner Bros. is in danger of adding “Harry Potter” to that infamous list.

The Harry Potter source material has been exhausted. Harry Potter’s iconic character arc has been completed and it is still fresh in our minds since the last movie only came out a short five years ago. It is time to cast the avada kedavra curse and kill this “Harry Potter” reboot idea right now. If Warner Bros. decides to go forward with it anyways, a cash-grabbing dollar sign will be their patronus.

And no, I am not saying any spin offs/reboots will be inherently terrible. In fact, David Yates and Warner Bros. have an immaculate track record of quality films. There is just no need for more movies or books right now. Harry fought and he won. Now cast the nox spell and let him fade from the spotlight. Or like Draco Malfoy thinking he could ride Buckbeak, it won’t end well.

— Parker Reed, Sports Editor

Thumbs up for continuing Harry Potter franchise

“Harry Potter.” Simply saying it aloud brings me back to the glory days of my childhood where I would be hunched up in a blanket on the couch with a bowl of ice cream while reading about the latest adventures Harry and his friends got into at Hogwarts. Like every good thing, it came to an end and I was devastated.

Long were the nights where I’d close my eyes as I dreamt its inevitable return to hard copy as well as the big screen. It was so close I could taste it, yet so far away  I could cry.

Deep down, I always knew my dream would come true.

This is why the recent arrival of “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child” (which takes place 19 years after the original and is based off of Harry’s son Albus Severus Potter), and “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them” (which is going to be a trilogy), is no shock to me.

The upside of of Harry Potter’s return to hard copy is fans don’t have to remain in an unknown void — one in which readers would be forced to fill their own mind of what could be. Tell me, what’s the reason not to be stoked?

I don’t want to hear how the Harry Potter books are children’s books because I would have to correct you by quoting Ron Weasley: “Rubbish.” I read them to this day in my adult life and let me tell you, it feels just the same.

To those who say it’s too soon to bring it back since it only just ended five years ago, let me just ask you, when is long too long? If you ask me, four years was way too long for Harry Potter to be gone from my life.

There’s more story to tell with Harry and fans should revel in all its glory.

— Sadie Sedlmayr, Staff Writer