Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Podcast!! Film Foundations Franchise: An Intro to the Sorcerer's Stone and more!!

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
Hello everyone, and welcome back to Film Foundations, the collaborative
show between weirding Way Media and Someone's favorite productions. I'm
your co host Chris Tashue all the way from the
Internet's Worst movie podcast, The Culture Cast.

Speaker 2 (00:45):
You're so hard on yourself?

Speaker 1 (00:46):
Oh No, I'm just joking. I always say like. I
also like, what is the thing I say on my show?
Much to the chagrin of many, I'm still the host of.

Speaker 2 (00:53):
This show anyways. I'm the other co host, Ryan Verel
from The Disconnected. I hope people don't hate me, but
so many.

Speaker 1 (01:02):
Royan Farrell, much to the secrete of some maybe for
sure a couple. On this show, we ask and answer
for questions about a given topic in the world of
film that is either an actor, director, franchise, or micro genre.
Micro genre what is that? It's a genre within a genre,

(01:22):
So melt movies are a micro genre within the horror
franchise or horror subgenre, as it were. Our job is
to entice you and to broaden your horizons on film,
to encourage you to travel down film tangents like we're
about to and side roads that maybe you wouldn't have
traveled otherwise, especially when it comes to making some connections

(01:45):
to films and other kinds of films in this show.
As you can tell if you've clicked on this episode,
you know what our topic is. Our topic is the
Harry Potter film franchise. We will keep the discussion to
the Harry Potter book series to a minimum. You ask, well,
let me tell you because JK. Rowling is not the

(02:05):
kind of person who I would like to talk about.
We can talk about the things that they have made,
but not the person behind them, because the person behind them,
like so many other things, is a person just like
me and you, and they have human problems like not
liking everybody, which is on them, not on us. So
that's just to get out of the way jk Rowling.

(02:25):
We're not gonna bad mouth her, though she deserves it,
but we're not going to. On this episode. We're gonna
be talking about all the people who made the Harry
Potter films worth checking out why who where the directors?
Some of them still surprising to Ryan to this day
that they directed Harry Potter movies. To be fair, me too.
So Ryan, before I give a little bit of my

(02:46):
thoughts on Harry Potter, I have to know, because this
is I think going to be a a me talking
most of the episode fang given our slight, our slight
difference in age, I think is enough, like just enough
for it to I mean, that's the thing. I mean,
we'll get to when we get to it for my stuff.
But I gotta know, Harry Potter, right, why are you

(03:08):
sitting here listening to me talk about it? Is the question?
Because you said you're not gonna you said it's not
ninety nine percent me episode, So why is it ninety
nine percent me on this episode?

Speaker 2 (03:18):
I did just miss the boat. I think when the
first film came out, I was fourteen, just a little older.
It felt like it was geared towards people just a
couple of years younger than me. It's not like I
was against it or anything, it just wasn't my thing
at the time. I'm also not, I've talked about this before,
not huge into fantasy, and so when it comes out

(03:38):
and it's clearly about wizards and stuff, I'm not like
itching to go to the theater to see that, unfortunately,
But at that point, my only real interactions with the
idea of Harry Potters. I knew some people that had
read the books and were fanatical about them, and the
books at that time were still coming out. A lot
of people don't remember that when that first movie dropped,

(03:59):
it was not the series was not over. We were
still getting.

Speaker 1 (04:02):
Three books into the series.

Speaker 2 (04:04):
Yeah. Right, So my first personal interaction with this this
is gonna be a really funny story because man, was
it sad. I was in I think it was two
thousand and five one of the books dropped and I
was at that time working at Walmart in a tiny
town in the desert in California, and I got picked

(04:25):
to be on the midnight shift for a midnight Harry
Potter book launch. And as we opened the Walmart doors
at midnight because they were not open twenty four to seven,
a grand total of two people walked in the door
to buy a copy of Harry Potter. I was so

(04:46):
pissed off that I had to come work this super
late shift for two people to come in and buy
a book.

Speaker 1 (04:52):
So, if you're listening to this episode of our show
and you happened to be one of those people, Ryan
still holds it against you.

Speaker 2 (05:00):
Day. But yes, the film franchise, my history with them.
I think I've seen all of them at least twice.
The first four or five I've probably seen three or
four times, and I think only one of those rounds
of watching. All of these were all my choice. I
knew I wanted to watch them at least once. It's
it's such a big deal. It's kind of one of
those things where it's a part of the zeitgeist. I

(05:21):
probably should watch it. That way, I can have some
sort of an opinion. I would say I wasn't surprised
by the quality they They are well made films, clearly,
I think personally, it's it's nice to see the what's
the best way to say this, it's nice to see
the franchise itself age with the characters, because in that

(05:42):
in that first film, it's very kid qt type of storyline,
and then that those last couple of movies are like, yeah,
fuck you, we're gonna kill everybody. This is a dark movie,
and it's it's it's cool. It's nice to see that
sort of thing grow up with the with the watchers
and the viewers and the the readers that love these
things from the beginning. I like that part. The cast

(06:03):
and these are obviously incredible, like some of the biggest
names ever are in these movies. Yeah, they're still not
entirely my thing, but obviously it's a huge part of
pop culture. Continues to be much to the chagrin to
take your words of everybody that is anti the author

(06:23):
behind the story, and I'm gonna go step for further
than you did. I'm not even gonna say her name
in this episode. She doesn't deserve it for for anybody
that's listening to this. When when we're gonna be covering
some sort of topic in the future that includes somebody
that's been quote canceled, which I hate that fucking term,
But when we're covering somebody like this that is known

(06:43):
for being a piece of crap or as done something
incredibly offensive, we are going to do our best to
separate the art from the artist promote to everybody the
fact that I mean are these are eight movies that
clearly took a lot of work the writer behind the books.
They didn't have to do a whole lot to get
these movies made, obviously, So yeah, she wrote the story,

(07:05):
came up with the character names, but when it came
to actually making the movies, it was literally hundreds and
hundreds of people involved and they all deserve some time
to shine. So we're going to focus on those people.

Speaker 1 (07:17):
Well, and to your point, I think it's gonna be
even funnier. I'll just go in and bleep her name
out when I said it, which is even the funnier part.
So you can guess as to who we're talking about,
as if you don't already know. But I think, and
I think to your point, and again I want to
echo this as well, because I you know, in terms
of my experience in time with Harry Potter, this is
part of it. So I'll get to it when I

(07:39):
when I talk about it. So Harry Potter obviously, book
series came out nineteen ninety seven in June, Harry Potter
and the Philosopher's Stone Overseas on this side of the
on this side of the pond, Apparently philosophers means nothing
to anyone, so the term Sorcerer's Stone is used. Obviously,
I prefer Philosopher's Stone. I know Sorcerer's Stone has a

(08:01):
little bit of alliteration to it, which which lets it
glide off the tongue a little bit easier. But the
book series, like I mentioned, was released in nineteen ninety seven,
the first film gets released in two thousand and one.
Like Ryan already mentioned, the first film does come four
years after the first book. But and I think this
to your point is one of the smartest things that

(08:22):
they did period with these books was casting it and
shooting them in a way where, like you said, they
age up with the actors so and look, we and
we literally can point to things now that have not
done that and that have not succeeded at all looking
at you stranger things like wow, wow in a lot

(08:43):
of ways, like the amount of like mental gymnastics and
plot gymnastics they've had to do to get the characters
to like, oh, well, of course there's been five years
in between. It's like, oh, they're like adults, now, how
does this work. Harry Potter took that problem and kind
of ran with it. But also again, they cast the
first movie four years. It came out four years after

(09:06):
the book. So that's the other thing that they avoided
that I think again, if you're a fan of fantasy,
you're probably imminently aware of if you're a fan of
Game of Thrones, which is we're still waiting for the
final book to come out, final two books to come
out actually because of Sound of Winter. Whatever the hell
that book that's supposedly coming out James or George R.

(09:28):
Martin claims is still not out and that show's done.
So Harry Potter had the benefit of again coming out
at a time where you could do this where they
cast young actors, where they cast the young actors correctly,
where they committed to those actors being cast, and they
worked with them from film one until the last. Like

(09:50):
you mentioned the last film. Last film comes out four
years after the last book comes out too, so the
character's ages are pretty accurate I think to what the
expectation was in the book series. But now again to
talk personally, and I want to mention it because I

(10:11):
don't think i've I've gotten my opinion on this matter
out on this podcast, but on the Culture Cast we
talk about it frequently. I'm not a fan of cancelation
culture either. I think that it should be viewed more
as you're finding your audience whatever that means, and you're
making your intentions clear as to who you want your
audience to be. Look, if you're someone that is homophobic, transphobic,

(10:35):
anti semitic, you know, racist, there are other people like
you in the world, and they will gravitate towards the
things that you make. But guess what, I don't think
I want to be part of that group. If you do,
and that that that's the audience you want to attract, fine,
far be it from me to tell you not to,
because again we know that they It's not like someone's
a racist and everybody cancels them. That's not the case.

(10:58):
I wish it were. But there areny of people that
not only agree with this person, but probably like this
series more now because that's the case, which is a
problem obviously. But at the same time, like you mentioned,
this person has made their audience intentions clear and they've
made their own personal feelings clear. The thing is, this

(11:19):
is the other thing. To tie it back to me personally.
I am thirty three years old. Harry Potter came out
when I was seven the book and then the first
film came out when I was eleven. I am the
target audience for this film, clear period period. Here's the thing.
I didn't read the books until I was an adult.
I didn't read the books until long after I had

(11:40):
seen all the movies. I didn't like the movies growing up.
I have no problem admitting it. I even have no
problem admitting I didn't even like Lord of the Rings
when I was growing up. Lord of the Rings is
now the trilogy for me. It is something that I
put on frequently because it's a comfort film for me,
especially the first one and the second one, not so
much the third one. But Harry Potter has that same

(12:02):
feel for so many people my age, like it's something
you grew up with. It was as big or bigger
than Star Wars because these movies were coming out and
were good in a way that Star Wars when we
were growing up was not. And I mean, I understand
the bristling at having to watch these movies or have
anything associated with the author who penned them, but like

(12:25):
you've mentioned, we have to remember, and especially us, but
not just us, but I think the world at large
needs to understand that. Like you've said, I will parot
it one hundred percent, there are how many people like
this person didn't hold the boom, mic wasn't behind the camera.
They are not in front of the camera either, clearly.

(12:47):
So again I'm not saying like it's the adult thing
to do to be able to compartmentalize these things, but
to compartmentalize these things is not easy, but it is
it is something worth doing because, yes, I'll just say
it right here, these movies are worth watching. I would
even say some of the books are worth reading. Does
that take away from the fact that the person who

(13:08):
wrote them is a deplorable human being who cannot stop
themselves from putting their foot in their mouth as recently
as like a week ago. No, it doesn't change any
of that. But it also doesn't change the fact that
the source material the movies are not anti semitic. They
are not racist, they are not transphobic, they are not homophobic.

(13:29):
They are creations of the author that were then adapted.
They don't unless they're unless Harry Potter comes out and
says I hate gay people. There's no homophobic slant in
Harry Potter. There's none. And again, plenty of authors inject
their stories with their own feelings and ideas and we'll

(13:51):
get to it when we get to it. Because some
of these movies later on I think suffer from that,
the author's bullshit feelings getting in the way of making
a narrative that works in a satisfying way, especially with
some of the outcomes of some of the characters. But
I think for me and for like I said, a
lot of people, my age, Harry Potter is a seminal

(14:13):
set of films and books that are hard to ignore
because from say nineteen ninety seven to twenty eleven or
two thousand and seven, when the books came the final
book came out, they were literally the biggest fucking thing.
Like you said, people's lining up to get the books,
people lining up to watch the movies. I mean, I

(14:34):
remember I had friends, Like I mean, I I was
twenty one when the final movie came out, which is
crazy to think about, frankly, that the final movie came
out in twenty eleven, Like, I mean, it doesn't seem
like that was that long ago. But at the same time,
twenty eleven, in nineteen ninety seven and two thousand and one,
like two thousand and one and twenty eleven feel like

(14:56):
the fucking one side of the moon and the other
side of the gall from each other in terms of
like the world that the first movie comes out in
into a world that the last movie comes out in. Uh,
I mean, we literally had uh nine to eleven economic
crashes and all kinds of stuff in the in the
span of Harry Potter being a series, So it was

(15:17):
something that a lot of people my age gravitated towards.
It was easy to gravitate towards because the ideas in
the book are, you know, you're a kid, maybe you're
from a bad household, but you can be saved and
sent to Hogwarts and make your own way. And like
plenty of us, can one uh resonate with that, you know,
coming from a household that you know again you don't

(15:40):
you feel othered in and you go to a place
where you are no longer the other you are part
of a group of people that are in the same
boat as you, you know, becoming wizards and witches or
what have you. So it's I mean, ultimately a story
that's about acceptance and fine and and and creating a
found family in a lot of ways, right and ends

(16:01):
up yeah, having you know, having a lot of resonance
with people our age, because I think a lot of millennials,
I think you would agree with me. Found families are
as important, if not more important to people our age.
And I think that I'm not gonna say that's a
uniquely millennial thing, but I don't hear gen xers talking
about that as much as I hear millennials do, and

(16:21):
I don't hear boomers talking about it as much as
I hear millennials do talking about found families, and like,
my found family is almost as important, if not more important,
than my own family. And I mean, I think for me,
it's like fifty to fifty and sometimes they edge each
other out. But again, like I understand also where your
found family is your family, and you don't call them
your found family because they're your family. And I mean,

(16:45):
and again that's what Harry Potter really talks about, is
what does it mean to find a group of people
that are your family even though you're not related to them,
Because we have characters literally bringing Harry Potter into their
household and treating them like a member of the family
when he is literally just the wizarding world's most famous person,

(17:05):
which on top of everything else. And that's the thing
obviously when we're talking about Harry Potter that again I
don't feel like gets mentioned enough, and I'm going to
mention it here and you know, shout me down from
the mountaintops. But Harry Potter is a white savior story ultimately,
and is that a problem, No, because so is Star Wars,
so is Lord of the Rings, so that you can

(17:27):
talk about all of them. Now, look, when you adapt it,
you can cast it however the hell you want. I
wouldn't be surprised because we haven't mentioned it. There's a
Harry Potter. They're readapting the books now. So But I
and here's the thing, I have no problem with it because,
as far as I'm concerned, the correct platform and vehicle
for something like this is television period. I actually think

(17:49):
television in a lot of ways is the art form
for adaptation of books, and especially trilogies and series of books, because,
like you know, with the things that you like that
are adapted, I don't have you read Harry Potter at all.
You're just seeing you've seen the movies, right.

Speaker 2 (18:05):
I've read like literally a tiny bit, like less than
twenty pages.

Speaker 1 (18:10):
So you like Dakota Johnson, then you've seen four percent
of the Marvel movies, which is yes, of like five
minutes of one. I guess for me, the books are
or whatever. The movies are decent adaptations of the books,
but the movies leave a lot of the stuff in
the books out that I think is somewhat interesting and
actually is worth mining. So yeah, I think Game of

(18:34):
Thrones and a lot of other things really set a
precedent for if you have a series of books, or
a trilogy of books, or seven goddamn books in this
series case, why what you need to milk that, and
I mean really milk it for seven seasons of TV.
You're going to get more out of seven seasons of
TV than you're ever going to get out of eight movies,
even if you split the last movie into or last

(18:54):
book into two movies, which to lead into our first question,
I think that this is one of the few series
that actually works when it comes to splitting its last
book into two movies, because the other thing that I
can think of that did that, or the other two things,
one of which I don't think we'll ever do on
this show unless we want to do like an April
Fools episode on Twilight, which I would do because I've

(19:18):
seen all those movies. Twilight and Hunger Games did that
same thing where they split their last book into two
parts into two movies, and Hunger Games and Twilight, god,
i mean they're like literally treading water in that second
Twilight movie. Harry Potter, I think, is the one of
the few series that actually made that work, because in

(19:40):
a lot of ways, the movie adaptations of some of
the later books leave shit out like crazy and again
we you know someone's typing in the comments furiously, but
what about Tom Bomba Dylan, Lord of the Rings, what
about him at You know, like, sometimes some of these
things are not critical and crucial to the narrative the
way that they adapting it. I get that it might

(20:01):
be crucial and critical to the narrative as it's written
on the page, but you can't one, for one, unless
you're doing TV, and then you can't drag your feet
and really let it play out. I wouldn't be surprised
if the Harry Potter Show is like twelve episodes a
season or something like. There's enough there to really drag
your feet and give the audience and give the audience

(20:23):
who says never seen these things or who has a
new appreciation for it. But also I'm hoping that when
they readapt these things, they're gonna have something worth watching
that's not just this again, because again, this is so good.
You can't throw this out with everything else when something
new comes out, they're not readapting it because the movies
are bad. And when we get to our third question,

(20:45):
we'll talk about in my mind what the pop culture influences,
and that leads to I think why they're readapting it.
But all of that to say, I think Harry Potter,
Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, those are like big
name when we're talking about franchise filmmaking, and I think
Harry Potter, that's deserved. Now does it suck again that

(21:07):
the people who created it are terrible? Yes, But I
mean George Lucas doesn't go around telling us what he thinks,
probably for the best. I don't know anything about him
outside of what I've read, but he doesn't go around
offering his personal feelings on things like this, and he
made god knows who knows. Just because people don't like
the absence of information is not proof. The absence of

(21:31):
information is just the absence of information, and you're making
your own conclusions, is what I'm saying when an author
of something like this offers up their feelings, different story.
So all of that to say, Harry Potter is something
I think just worth checking out if you've never seen
it before. But what you should check out is the

(21:51):
first question of our podcast.

Speaker 2 (21:55):
What a great transition. Yeah, so I will take this
first one first because my answer is going to be
so simple, and I'll let you go on obviously, But
I personally I think watching these in order is the
absolute best way to do this, of course, because it's
a story that's expanding on each other, and it's not
like some other franchises where if you come in at

(22:15):
you know, the fourth movie, you can probably get a
vibe of what's going on, but there's just already so
much like character development and understanding of why characters are
the way they are that you got to watch the
first one first. And to be fair, I think I
don't know if this is sacrilegi to say, because I
don't know how everybody feels about these, but I think
the quality of these like greatly increases as the franchise

(22:38):
goes on. However, that first one is still pretty damn good.
Like it's it's still a very fantasy field world that
you can get lost in easily. I totally understand the
appeal behind these. They're well made, they've got great effects,
they've got incredible acting. Yeah, my answer is clearly the
first one.

Speaker 1 (23:00):
So my answer is Fantastic Beasts and where to find them?
I'm I'm just kidding. And that's when everybody left the show.
That's everyone's like, these guys are fucking clowns. Goodbye. Look,
and you know we will we are. We are including
the Fantastic Beast movies in this Will they show up
as an answer, I don't think so, but we are

(23:23):
including them here because there will be never another opportunity
for us to talk about them. Thank god. Frankly a
lot now that.

Speaker 2 (23:29):
You said that, some guest in the four months is
in contact and goes, have you done the Fantastic Beast franchise?

Speaker 1 (23:34):
That's three movies. It's ten movies now, I mean it's
ten movies with all of them.

Speaker 2 (23:39):
And I think it was, isn't it eleven eight Harry Potter,
three Fantastic Pieces?

Speaker 1 (23:43):
Oh yeah, no, I guess you're right. I always forget
that there's two movies, so yeah, eleven in the series
three three Grindel Goarf movies and then eight Harry.

Speaker 2 (23:51):
Potter movies Grindle Car.

Speaker 1 (23:55):
When I did the culture cast on the first Fantastic
Beast movie, whenever the hell that movie came out like
two thousand and fifteen. I'm pretty sure. Uh my co
host at the time could not, for the life of
him keep the names of the character straight, so he
called grindle Wald grindel Gorf and it has stuck with
me since. So I think for me, yes, the obvious

(24:17):
answer here is Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone Harry
Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. However, I will put a
caveat here for a couple reasons. A. I think the
only version of the movie worth watching is the extended
version of the movie, which is available.

Speaker 2 (24:32):
On HBO Max.

Speaker 1 (24:35):
I believe, Yeah, no, it is on Peacock TV, and
I do not think that they Yeah, I know, I
know it's on Peacock. Go look, that's where I'm watching
it right now. I don't. They used to be on
HBO Max because that's where I used to watch them.

Speaker 2 (24:50):
But and that isn't that where the show's coming.

Speaker 1 (24:52):
Is a U and the show is coming, which is
why it was weird to me that when I went
to look today where they're streaming, it's literally streaming being
on Peacock, which I, okay, makes very little sense to me.
I don't know how rights work with stuff like that,
but the extended version of the movie does add some
scenes from the book that are I think again not

(25:16):
necessarily needed, but I think just help add more flavor
to the world. And the first movie is fantastic, I
will say, and you know, I think you've kind of
we alluded to it when we were talking before recording.
My only issue with the first movie, genuinely is the
amount of ooing and eyeing there is, like, look at
the fucking brooms, look at the sorting hat, look at

(25:38):
the and like I get it, because at the time
it was like, look at these things that you've only
read about. Here's the Great Hall and the candles floating
and the night sky and you know, I own Professor
Quirrel and Snape and all this stuff, like these are
things that had only ever been put to paper. And
so sitting here now in twenty twenty four, going, well,

(26:00):
I like the one that's extended more because it gives
me more information, Like that was not the option at
the time, right that the only thing you watch is
the original one, and the oohing and eyeing in the
first movie gets to be a little much after a
while because they really linger on a lot of stuff.
They linger on the things in the world, which I
mean again, if you're talking the movie to do it,

(26:21):
it's the first one, and like through and through, if
you're gonna do it, it needs to be the first
one because you can't be wasting and maybe not even
saying wasting, but you can't spend time on ooing and
eyeing in every other movie, because then every other movie
will just feel like the first one. And to be fair,
like you've already kind of alluded to past the first movie, second,

(26:44):
well past the third second movie, I would say maybe,
and we'll get to it, and we get to it.
But past the first movie, first and second movies, it
becomes a very different tonal film series. It becomes very
different tonally. The first two movies I think allow the
ooh and the ah and the magic of the world
to really like kind of just present itself and allow

(27:07):
it to breathe in a way that the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh,
and eighth movies aren't necessarily interested in, because they're less
about creating the world but more about fleshing out the
characters and their backstories and their hates, wants, needs. All
of that is fleshed out more in the third fourth, fifth, sixty, seventh,
and eighth movies. But the first movie is amazing, like

(27:29):
and it is a seminal piece of filmmaking because for
in a lot of ways, like fantasy films for children
were not like this at the time, and in a
lot of ways, like now, fantasy films for kids follow
this mold to a t like this, Hunger Games, Divergent,

(27:49):
Maize Runner. I mean, we could go back and forth
for hours just naming all of these things that exist
now fourteens and young adults that were adapted because of
the success of Harry Potter, but they've done the same
way as the first Harry Potter movie. Now, if it's
me and I'm answering a little bit more kind of
candidly and less, I wouldn't say obviously, because I don't

(28:11):
want to take away from your answer. Like you said,
it's the obvious answer, and I think it's the right answer.
I would say, if you if you can stomach maybe
not knowing everything that's going on in a movie. The
second movie I think is the better movie in terms
of a place to start, because the second movie has

(28:31):
less of the ooing and eye and more more of
some stakes being injected to the plot, and the extended
version of the second movie is like three hours long,
and the second movie has my favorite character in the
entire series, so I'm a little biased. But at the
same time, I think for me, the first two movies
are of a piece for a number of reasons. Directed

(28:54):
by Chris Columbus, who, as far as I'm concerned, not
only the right director for this but the per director
for this series. I don't think he was needed past
the second movie for obvious reasons, because again, I don't
really associate Chris Columbus with It's not that I associate

(29:14):
him with mature things, but I associate I associate him
with a certain kind of tone that all of his
Harry Potter movies have, most of the movies he's directed
has because he directed step Mom, misist Out, Fire, Home Alone, One,
Home Alone Two, like a lot of movie. He directed Rent,
which still blows my mind. But for me, whenever I

(29:37):
think of Chris Columbus, I think of a director, and
in a lot of ways, because again not to not
to forget that he also wrote Gremlins and Goonies. He
works with young people and young adults better than a
lot of directors. Oh yeah, he gets He gets those
performances out of younger actors the way that all the

(29:57):
other directors wish they could, and the way that they
talk badly about young people, like you never work with
kids and you never work with animals. Like Chris Columbus
is the outlier that proves the rule there because he
gets better performances out of child actors than I think
anybody else. And the first Harry Potter movie has some
terrible acting in it, namely from the three child leads.

(30:21):
They're terrible. I'm a what, there's just so much. It's again,
it's not bad, it's just their kid actors being asked
to carry a movie. Child actors are not often given
the reign of the kingdom in the movies that they're in.
They're often I think of The Mummy Returns often as
a very good example of like you put a kid
in the movie and you kind of ruined it. This

(30:43):
is like, if there are no kids in this movie,
there is no movie. And I think it was really
smart to have Chris Columbus be the first and to
direct the first two movies, because the first two movies
are kid centric, and then beyond that, we kind of
start running into other things. But I agree with you.
The first movie obviously is the right answer here. It's
a fantastic movie. It has the better versions of some

(31:06):
of the characters too, the first two movies. Do you know,
take this opportunity to mention Dumbledore does get recast in
these movies, which is an unfortunate thing because for me,
Richard Harris is Dumbledore like I love Michael Gambond. He's amazing,
he really is. His energy that he brings is so
different because Michael Gambon and again having seen The Cook

(31:29):
the Thief, his wife and her lover, having seen that movie,
now it's like that guy played Dumbledore for fuck's sake,
and look, Richard Harris is a hell raiser of his own. Obviously.
He is in the same class as like an Oliver
Reed type mentioned in the same breath, because Richard Harris
was known for being a wild human being who got

(31:50):
into all kinds of stuff. Okay, him playing Dumbledore for
a certain group of people is shocking, similarly to Michael
Gambond playing Dumbledore is to a certain group of people
is shocking. But I love the fatherly mentorship and character
that Richard Harris is conveying with his Dumbledore, and it's

(32:11):
sorely missed in the other movies. I would actually say,
again unfairly here to answer the question, uh with a
level of finality, I think you watched the first two movies.
I think you watch the first two movies, and that's
and I think you watch the first two movies, and
if you want to continue beyond that, you're you're you're not,
you're not in for a different time. But the third movie,

(32:33):
when we're about to talk about it, because I'm assuming
it might be the answer for some of us for
the next question, is a literal one eighty in so
many ways, stylistically, tonally, plot wise, the first two movies
are kids movies. Second movie pushes the envelope a little
bit more than the first one does, but they are
movies for kids, made by a director who understands how

(32:57):
to direct children, especially in a fantasy world. Yeah. I'm
not saying the first movie is a perfect movie, but
the first movie is a very good example of how
you do fantasy right for people in their children, in
their seven to teen so young adults and teenagers. I
think the Harry Potter series in the first two movies

(33:19):
are really perfect examples of that.

Speaker 2 (33:23):
Well said you know, while while you were saying that,
one of the things that kind of hit me. I
was never really excited about another adaptation of Harry Potter stuff,
but the fact that they're doing TV one of the
things that really sticks out. Now with the two hour film,
you can't really develop these characters very much, and so
we know the main three essentially like really well, but

(33:46):
this world is full of tons of characters that have
very different experiences, very different perspectives of Harry Potter, and
I guarantee, you know, if we get something like twelve
episodes of what you're talking about, I can't imagine and
how much better you could flesh out even even some
of these ones that feel like main characters that really

(34:06):
kind of aren't because they get like very specific feuding
screen time with Harry Potter, but you don't ever really
feel yeah, but you don't really feel their motivations like
it's just oh, this kid's just a bully. Well, no,
there's other stuff that is causing him to be like that,
and so you'll get more so man that the way

(34:26):
you just said that, something turned in me, and yeah,
I feel like it's gonna be. It's important. I'm glad
we're doing it now.

Speaker 1 (34:33):
And and to your point about adapting the series, and
this is a thing that like genuinely always sticks out
to me. And me and some close friends that watch
these movies when we're gaming or just have them on
in the background, we always comment on two things. They
say the word muggle a lot, which is effectively this version,
this world's version of the N word, but it's directed

(34:56):
at people who don't know what it means, which is
always such a weird thing because they say mu buggle
a lot. Muggle is a derogatory term for non magic
people and like that is literally like the like it's
comparable to the N word and the F word in
our world. It but it. But the thing is they
never make point of it. And I know what you're
gonna say. Mud blood is the other term.

Speaker 2 (35:16):
That no, no, that's more of the N word, I
think muggle.

Speaker 1 (35:19):
But the thing is, mud blood only exists because mud
blood is an offensive term that the wizards know is
offensive to them. Muggle is offensive to a non magic
person should find muggle offensive, but they don't know what
that term means. It's weird, like if you think about it,
muggle is only offensive if you know what it means.
And the intention behind using the term is the people

(35:40):
that don't don't know. They don't know they're being referred
to as muggles. They talk about they walk into the
world and say muggle a lot, and the term mud
blood is tied into the word muggle. You can't have
it without it.

Speaker 2 (35:52):
This is a weird thing for two white guy storry.

Speaker 1 (35:55):
But that's but my point is, like it is. It
is strange to me because there there are subplots in
these movies that are based around the idea of like,
you don't use these you don't refer to someone as
a mud blood, dirty blood. Yeah, dain't any wizard that
doesn't have half blood or so whatever the hell Hagrid says.
And that's the other point. And that's the point that

(36:15):
I think you're somewhat driving at and I want to
drive home is Harry Potter is a white person movie.
There are very few ethnic anybodies in the movie, and
it's a fucking shame. And my hope is with the
new adaptation is that the cast is diverse and very
ethnically diverse, because like you said, and I will pairrot it.

(36:38):
Harry Potter, likes Star Wars, has spent almost all of
the time in these movies and in the books focusing
on one tiny, tiny corner, important corner, obviously, but a
tiny corner of this world, which is the story of
Harry Potter and how his singular story affects the world
at large. But like we've seen with Star Wars and

(37:00):
so many other things, there is a whole world out
there that has nothing to do with any of these people.
It has nothing to do with Harry Potter, has nothing
to do with Hogwarts. Even we know now thanks to
Fantastic Beasts, that there are other that the United States
has its own Hogwarts and its own Wizarding Council and
all kinds of stuff. And for me, that's my hope

(37:21):
is that the Harry Potter TV show leads to other
things in that world being created that are much more interesting,
because yes, I'm looking forward to this series being readapted,
but at the same time, I know the story and
they can't make that big of changes. They just can't.
There are some things they can't change, So as far

(37:42):
as I'm concerned, like Harry Potter needs to do a
better job at representation, which for me in this day
and age, is important because yes, I am a white man,
but I am also gay in a hetero hetero presenting relationship.
But at the same time, there are so many people
that aren't and there are so many kids that don't
get to see someone that looks like themselves on screen.

(38:04):
And you know what, I know people might ooh, whatever, Chris,
that's really stupid, you know what, your fucking answer to
that pisses me off if you say that, because you're
automatically discounting a whole group of people, namely children and
young adults who are impressionable and do want to see
people that look like them on screen. And that is important.
And I think I hope the adaptation of Harry Potter

(38:26):
on television fixes that because you know what, Hermione doesn't
have to be white. Maybe Ron does because he has
red hair and hey, a pisty British boy. But you
know what, you know what, I don't know if you've
never been to the UK, but there are a lot
of people in the UK that aren't white. Oh, and
they sound like a normal British people too, and that's

(38:46):
and I know, like, again, some people may roll their
eyes at me, and some people may say SJW or whatever,
But you know what, somebody has to say it, and
if it's going to be me, I'll let it be
me and whatever. But I'm genuine in my feelings just
as much as I know you. I know I speak
for both of us in that regard. So'solutely let's move
on to the second question maybe, or do you want

(39:07):
to add anything else to that?

Speaker 2 (39:08):
Uh no, I'll let that fly. Representation is important, and
anybody that says it's not, you're wrong.

Speaker 1 (39:16):
Right, it is. It's so important. It's important, especially when
it's stuff like this, the highest of high profile things.

Speaker 2 (39:23):
Well, maybe I do want to add one thing then,
the fact that you said, yes, it's a white movie.
I think the worst thing here is when there randomly
is like, oh, there goes a black kid at Hogwarts.
It is so obvious that they're like, oh, there's one
of them. Let's focus on that for a moment, and
it's so like, it's so cringe.

Speaker 1 (39:46):
Well, I'll point something out to you that will really
make your skin crawl. There's all of one Asian character
in the series, and do you know what their name is?
It's effectively the most racist name possible.

Speaker 2 (39:56):
Cho Chang pretty bad.

Speaker 1 (39:59):
It's pretty bad. You're like a couple syllables away from
being a stereotypical Asian name that someone would joke about
on the Simpsons.

Speaker 2 (40:06):
So in nineteen ninety one, not in twenty twenty.

Speaker 1 (40:09):
Three, he's doing the flapping dickie and that's the thing.
It was even, I mean it was they're even joking
about how in bad taste it is then in the
Simpsons like, yeah, cho Chang, really that's the wow wow
wow way to really flex your muscles there. So yeah, no,
I I again, the less we say about the author

(40:32):
the better, But the more we say about how important
representation is in film and cinema and media in general,
but especially in things that are super popular with people,
that helps to again foster a sense of belonging that
I think is important in this day and age because
othering people is very popular.

Speaker 2 (40:51):
Yeah, yeah, you're right on that note. Hey, Chris, for
our second question, why don't you let everybody know what
is a lesser known entry into this franchise that maybe
isn't the best first watch if you've never seen any
of these, but one that everybody would still probably appreciate.

Speaker 1 (41:11):
So I hope I don't steal your answer, but I
know that I'm going to I feel like at this point,
really I'm gonna go with Harry Potter and The Prisoner
of Azkaban, which I think for me, like is a
I think for me it's the best movie in the
series objectively.

Speaker 2 (41:28):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (41:29):
The fact that it's directed by Alfonso Quaron is just
we were talking about it offline when we decided to
do this topic, and now we get to talk about
it online. What in God's name? Like, it's like if
David Lynch directed Return of the Jed. Oh wait, David
Lynch was offered the job to direct Return of the Jedi.
It we do not see directors of the caliber like

(41:53):
Alfonso Quaron directing Harry Potter films. Now Like, well, actually,
I'm gonna take a step back and ask you, Jj Abrams,
Ryan Johnson, Colin trevorro They're not in the same camp
as Alfonsoquaron, right Like they're they make different kinds of movies.
Their expectations are different, and the people who go see

(42:16):
their movies expectations are different. I think when I remembered
reading that Alfonso Quron was directing as coband I remember
thinking what like because again, like the things that he's
made since obviously are immensely popular, immensely successful. Guys won
two Directing Act Academy Awards for two different movies. Neither

(42:40):
of those movies even one Best Picture, which is I
mean again, have have at that information with what you will.
But he is not only the first Mexican filmmaker to
win Best Director, but he also got nominated for He's
the Old the second person to get nominated for seven
different Academy awards. You know who? The first person?

Speaker 2 (43:01):
You know who?

Speaker 1 (43:01):
The first person was Kenneth Brona. Oh okay, well who's who?
Like I kind of alluded to, is my favorite part
of the second movie. That character of Gilderoy Lockhart. He
steals my heart every time. He's such a dickhead in
the best way. When he makes Harry Potter's arm turn
into like flappy arm, it's just like, this guy's a

(43:22):
clown and he's gonna kill people. But the third movie
is so dark tonally, it's more it. It is more mature.
I think it's more mature even than anything past it.
I know that it sets the tone for four, five, six, seven,
and eight. But I think number three is the is
objectively the best film in the franchise because the person

(43:44):
who's directing it has an eye for has an eye
for film in a way that again we're seeing, we've
seen past that in so many other ways, but he
brings it to the movie in a way that I
really appreciate every time I watch, because he's making a
Harry Potter movie his own, and he's doing things with

(44:04):
it that are memorable but different, but recognizable but different.
And again, Steve Cloves, I think we haven't really mentioned
him a whole lot, and I think you know, he
bears you know, some some of the praise here as well,
because he works on Sorcerer's Stone, Chamber of Secrets as Kaban, Goblet,

(44:26):
Prince and Deathly Hollows Part one in part two. Now,
I think again, beyond the third Movie is kind of
you know, you're kind of on your own if you
want to go any further than that. But for me,
the third movie, if I could just watch the third
movie and tell you to watch the third movie and
nothing else, I would. But the third movie I think
is really hard to watch on its own because it

(44:49):
is Furthered. The narrative has been furthered to the point
where lack of prior information is going to diminish your
ability to enjoy the movie other than just it's a
well made film, well directed, well shot, well lit too,
by the way, which I think is one of the
things for me that really stands out about Prisoner of
Azkaban is the way the film is lit. And and again,

(45:12):
the third movie also drops a lot of the things
you've ever seen before, and it's like, yeah, now, it's
like old had no pun intended at this point. But
the other thing I want to mention about the third
movie is it introduces, I think, for me, one of
the most important characters in the franchise, which is Remiss Loopin,

(45:33):
played by David Thulis.

Speaker 2 (45:36):
I was gonna champion someone else. I'll champion.

Speaker 1 (45:40):
Amazing Billy Is, But so is David Thulis, and David
character is David Dulas's character is one of the casualties
of the adaptation, which which is unfortunate because he doesn't
show up enough in the other movies past this one.
This is the the Remiss Loopin and Sirius Black show.
In a lot of ways, this movie especially the second

(46:02):
half of the movie. But David Thulis is so good,
and he's such an interesting father figure for Harry, because
Harry has all these father figures throughout the movies, and
each movie kind of introduces a new one, or reintroduces
an old one, or recontextualizes one of them. When you
get to the end of the series and I wish

(46:23):
there was more David Thulis. I kind of just hope
that I kind of hope when they cast the show
they just recast some of the people in the roles
that are still around, because I don't think anybody can
do as good of a job as David Thulis as Remassloop,
and I will be proven wrong when they don't cast him,
and whoever it is is just as good. But David
Thulis is amazing in the third movie. But that's the thing.

(46:46):
The third movie, for me, also opens the world up
more in an interesting way by saying, you know, it's
not all fun in games in the world of Harry Potter,
and here's why, and here's how, and oh, it's more
mature now, and oh, look, we understand that this is
a it's never told in the first two movies that
there's Wizard jail, but in the third movie that's literally

(47:08):
in the goddamn title is askaband the Wizard prison, Wizard's
truth sentence to hear Wizard Alcatraz too, like when we
end up seeing and it's literally Wizard Alcatraz on top
of everything else. But for me, the third movie, just
as much as I love the second movie, which is
my favorite in the in the franchise, on the third
movie is objectively the best film in the franchise. It's

(47:31):
just I can't in good conscience tell you to watch it,
because you will not if you've never seen anything else,
You've both understand what's going on. There's no previously on
Harry Potter at the beginning of the movie.

Speaker 2 (47:43):
Yeah, that's a that is a tough part. I will
say the introduction to Gary Oldman though, like I understand,
I understand the loopin and all that, it's great. Gary
Oldman is just easily one of the best actors of
all time, obviously, and when you see him as serious
black and he he brings this odd empathy and also

(48:04):
like suspicion about a character in this movie. And I
think a lot of that Kudos to Quaron because I
think the way he directs, specifically the scenes around Sirius Black,
it leads you to question so many things. And obviously
it's probably written like that in the books. I've never
read them, but I think the way that half the other,
the way that he actually directs those scenes is it's

(48:29):
like master filmmaking. It feels like a storyline taken out
of an old like late eighties thriller almostly almost where
you've got somebody that could easily double cross you in
a heartbeat and you'd be like, oh, I'm kind of surprised,
but also yeah, they kind of set that up pretty well,
and the interactions with Sirius is it's just all so

(48:50):
well done. Obviously heavily on the shoulders of Gary Oldman
because he pulls off that character very well well.

Speaker 1 (48:57):
And to your point, I mean, I think it's a
little bit of a cheat in the third movie that
it's like, if you've never read the books, they try
to make sure that you are misled that Sirius Black
is the villain. I mean, look, everybody who read the
books knew that that wasn't the case. But that's not
for their benefit. It's for the benefit of the film.
Going audience, and I agree with you. It could have
felt contrived, And I will say there are a couple

(49:20):
parts where it feels a little contrived, because like, why
don't you just tell him you're his godfather, you dickhead,
for fuck's sake, like tell him what you're doing. But
to your point, Quiron's direction is fantastic, and obviously Gary Oldman,
I mean, I look, I think David Thulis is as
good of an actor as Gary Oldman, but Gary Oldman
is given the part to play where you get to

(49:41):
really show how good of an actor you are. Right,
So you're the you are the titular prisoner of Azkaban
in the movie. So I have to hear what your
answer is though, because I am so curious.

Speaker 2 (49:53):
Uh So this one, I thought about it for a
while and I did like the third one is great. Obviously,
this is probably the highest quality film the entire franchise.
But for me, one of the ones that I think
back to the most often because it has more of
a memorable script for me is the next entry, which
is Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. And now

(50:16):
this one doesn't have the pastiche of Alfonso Quarron. However,
it was directed by the same guy who did Prince
of Persia's Hands of Time, so it's got that going
for it.

Speaker 1 (50:25):
I like Mike Newell by the ware like this would
have been the other answer, and I'm so glad that
this is your answer.

Speaker 2 (50:33):
So yeah, he's a disent director, especially like in the
late eighties to what he did in the nineties. He
did some really great stuff. Obviously, Four Weddings and a
Funeral is probably my favorite from him. But Donnie Brasco
pushing to in a lot of people love Monna Lisa's smile.
I remember being about but decent, you know, nothing terrible,
but man, the Goblet of Fire. So this is we've
we've heard about the Triwizard Tournament, I think in Passing

(50:55):
a couple of times, but some of the most exciting
scenes in those first couple of movies are the quiddage
scenes and the way that they set up like these
random ass tournaments in sports that gotta love a visual effect.

Speaker 1 (51:11):
See I in fact put my name in this Goblin
of Fire.

Speaker 2 (51:16):
Nice. Yeah, the way that they've alluded to these competitions
and the different sports that wizards can carry out on
and then seeing that play out on top of introducing
Robert Pattinson as just an interesting character. And I think
he plays obviously a big part in this movie, but

(51:36):
it showed a lot of his flexibility as an actor
early on, and this was, you know, before the whole
craze behind him, and I think it set up everything
that he was to do in the rest of his career.
But yeah, this movie's pretty well done. It's got some
dark scenes. It again carries on a little bit more
of that maturity. There's literally people like on the verge

(51:58):
of death in the of these the hard part. It's
certainly not as well made as the entry before at
Prisoner of Azkaban or as Command, however you say it. Yeah,
Mike Newell does not like this one nearly as well
as Caron. It definitely loses a lot of that, especially
the second half of this film. I am impressed that

(52:20):
they hold all of it together and that the plot
for this, centering around the Triwizard Championship, is so deeply
ingrained to the story, and I think it serves as
a really nice I guess, you know, we've talked about
the characters aging, but it's like it's like the adolescent movie.
It's the one where they are yeah, yeah, exactly. It's

(52:41):
like they're entering that weird phase into where they're almost
about to be older teenagers, and you can see that
that growth where they're forced to be facing more adult situations,
and they pull it off fairly well. I think this
is a really good entering to the franchise. Certainly not
the worst, far from the best, but I think this
is one that once you've watched a couple of others,

(53:02):
you'll probably really appreciate this film.

Speaker 1 (53:04):
I'm not sure it's far from the best. I think
it's still in the top. I think it's in the
top half of these movies.

Speaker 2 (53:09):
I get when there's only eight, I mean.

Speaker 1 (53:12):
Well, but here's the thing. I think, when there's only eight,
I think that the top. I think I'll leave it
this way. I think the quality of the top four
is vastly greater than the quality of the bottom four.
I mean, we have barely talked about the last four
movies of this franchise, and there's a reason for that
because for me, past Goblet of Fire, it becomes more

(53:34):
about look. In Goblet of Fire, the main villain of
the series is introduced Finally, we've seen him in other
forms throughout Goblet of Fire. As far as I'm concerned,
that's normally where I stop watching because I know how
this is gonna end. I'm not a huge fan of
the latter four movies. I'm also not a huge fan
of David Yates's direction. I think it's like, I don't

(53:58):
get why they stuck with him him for so long,
and for so long he directed all the he directed everything.
He directed literally everything else that wasn't directed by Mike Newell,
Quiron or Columbus, And I mean even the Fantastic Beast stuff,
because he directed all of the Fantastic Beast movies. Yeah,

(54:19):
And that's the thing, Like, you know what, I don't
know how to put this any other way. Those Fantastic
Beast movies are fucking terrible, all of them. And it's
and it's nothing to do with Johnny Depp. It has
nothing to do with Johnny Depp. It has to do
with the story that they're telling is just Harry Potter again.
Why are we doing the same though? We have a

(54:39):
we have a white wizard who's running around trying to
save everybody from a overwhelming threat that's being built up
to be similar to Voldemort. Shit, guys, what just go
watch Harry Potter. Oh but we're gonna and the And
the funny thing is, if you think about it, the
first movie has very little recognizable stuff other then like

(55:00):
it's the Magic World, and here are some things you've
heard mentioned in passing, like Newt's commander or you know,
some of the creatures. The second movie is like, oh,
now here's the Voldemort adjacent character. Now here's and it's
just like, you know, I don't need this again, because
those first eight movies as as kind of problematic as
the four later four are. With me, those later four

(55:22):
movies are like masterpieces compared to any of those fantastic
Beast movies. And I don't think it's solely because of
David Yates. But I don't think David Yates helped. I
don't think he does. He never rises to the occasion
of a Newel or a Quarn or even a Chris Columbus.
He just kind of it's very workman like. And the

(55:42):
fact that he works so closely with Warner Brothers and
that he's a Warner Brothers guy, that's through the reason
why he's directing all these movies. But man, when you
bring someone like a Quarn in to do the movie.
That's why we're talking about that third movie so lovingly,
is because everything else just kind of feels beyond. It
feels same, like the Order of the Phoenix, Half Blood

(56:03):
Prints in the last two movies all feel the same,
all the same, just like very plot driven, not character driven.
It's very much what we're going to get here and
here too.

Speaker 2 (56:13):
They look the same too, that's the other thing thing.

Speaker 1 (56:16):
Yeah, no sense of style whatsoever. They're all very gray
and muted and the colors pulled out. And again, like
I mentioned, you know, the sense of fun in the
world of Harry Potter is something that I really appreciate,
the sense of and it can be overwhelming in the
first two movies, but there still needs to be a
sense of it in the later movies. In the later
movies there's none of it. There's no sense of fun.

(56:39):
And yeah, I know some people may kind of roll
their eyes in me, but I don't really watch past
that fourth movie. I really don't.

Speaker 2 (56:46):
Hmmm. Interesting. Yeah, I don't know, if you know. Going
back to Christopher Columbus would have been a great move,
But I feel like they should have just had this
entire thing play out with either a different director on
every single film, or or clearly like when three and
four got pretty decent reviews, Chase people like that. Chase

(57:06):
people that were outside of the genre, that know how
to make a movie, and when you bring them a
good source material, they can make something great out of it.
I mean, it's not it's not rocket science. I don't understand.
It's it's just better choices come on well.

Speaker 1 (57:21):
And and what I don't understand is the Tishborne Claimant,
which is the first film that David Yates directed. I've
gone back and watched some of it. I don't understand
what they saw with his filmmaking that would lend them
to think this is the guy we want directing our
teenage children franchise. Like it's just he doesn't he doesn't

(57:42):
add anything the way Quirn or even a Mike Newall does.
I mean, I remember watching some of the documentary, like
some of the behind the scenes stuff on the disc
about the fourth movie, and like Mike Newell was was
a tough customer, like he's a tough director. But I
think when you have child actors like that's a good
thing because you kind of you someone has to have

(58:03):
a firm, a gentle hand to lead that ship, and
Quirn and Mike Newell clearly are in that camp. Same
with Christopher Columbus David Yates. Just yeah, why they like
committed so hard to him is beyond me. I mean again,
I hope he's not involved in the film. The film's
being readapted into a TV show, but there's a very

(58:24):
high likelihood that he directs the first episode because he
is the It's like, I don't I'm good.

Speaker 2 (58:30):
I'm good.

Speaker 1 (58:31):
And I think also that those again, those Fantastic Beast
movies are just whatever in a lot of ways.

Speaker 2 (58:38):
Right, well, uh, I don't know if I mentioned up top,
I still haven't seen any of Fantastic Beast movies, primarily
because they don't look interesting at all.

Speaker 1 (58:47):
Well past the first one, they're not really interesting. And also,
I mean, who doesn't love a good movie with Ezra
Miller in it? Right, speaking of problem adding people, I
always forget that he's in all three of those movies. Oh,
it's like some It's like somehow, even though the person

(59:09):
who wrote these books is terrible, somehow they one upped themselves.

Speaker 2 (59:15):
Well, let's move away from that quickly then, And number
three here, Chris, what is the biggest impact the Harry
Potter franchise has had on pop culture? Because this answer
could be like nineteen things.

Speaker 1 (59:29):
Well, I think it could be nineteen things, but I
think the singular answer here for me, And maybe this
is the obvious one, maybe it's not. I kind of
alluded to it already. Harry Potter the book series and
Harry Potter the film series created and it's still going
on now, the Golden Age of y a entertainment like it.

(59:49):
Harry Potter one and The Sorcerer's Stone book one created
an entire genre essentially of why a fantasy books that
everybody has been chasing No pun intended, the White Dragon
of Harry Potter since because I'm not gonna say her name.
The author is a billionaire because of this series, a

(01:00:13):
fucking billionaire because of a book series that they wrote
like and you know why, because everybody else has been
trying to copy an ape Harry Potter since, and they've
done it to varying degrees of success. You mentioned Our Pats.
Twilight comes out two years after Prisoner after Goblet have

(01:00:35):
fired us two years three, two or three years, then
we have Twilight with Robert Pattinson being the lead of
his own Why a fantasy horror? I guess I don't
know what anyone would consider Twilight other than under sexed
and over promised. But I think why a entertainment is

(01:00:55):
better for Harry Potter having come out? And I think
why a entertainment is what it is now because of
the mold that Harry Potter created and then promptly smashed
so nobody else could copy it. But as far as
I'm concerned, and again maybe somebody can check me on it,
Harry Potter is the pinnacle, peak, top everest point of

(01:01:16):
hya entertainment. There has not been anything better to come
out for people of a certain age looking for fantasy.
This is it. Could you make the case for Lord
of the Rings, Sure, but I think Lord of the
Rings is best enjoyed in your late teens early adults
versus like being a child, because I think the books
of Lord of the Rings and the films of Lord

(01:01:37):
of the Rings are talking about different things and asking
different questions, and Harry Potter speaks directly to a young
audience because it's about growing old, It's about getting old.
It's about keeping friends. It's again we talked about the
found family idea, not fitting in in the world, the
otherness that you feel that maybe isn't real in I
mean in our in so many of our cases, none

(01:01:58):
of us ever got our Hogwarts in it because it's
not real, guys, But so many people live in a
world where they'd like to believe that there's like so
many others got lost in the mail or I think
there's a literal plot device within the book series that
describes why people in the nineties wouldn't have gotten their
invitations to Hogwarts because of what was going on in

(01:02:18):
the book series. But for me, Harry Potter opens the
door for ya. Entertainment busts the door down in so
many ways. Unlike Again, Maze Run are Divergent, Hunger Games, Twilight,
the List of Percy Jackson, even directed by Chris Columbus.
Those things don't exist without Harry Potter. And maybe they

(01:02:39):
do exist, but in a different way. And I don't
think they're nearly as successful or popular because once Harry
Potter was over, there was a whole group of people
looking for something else, and there were people looking for
something else when they knew Harry Potter movies were ending
and the books were ending as well, So I think
for me it just it sets the stage and it
sets the tone for what YA entertainment has been since

(01:02:59):
these came out, which is rather well done and ever present.
I mean, it seems like we've kind of moved out
of it a little bit, but then a Hunger Games
movie came out this year, so have we really? And
I wouldn't be surprised if we get more Twilight something.
I wouldn't even be surprised if they readapt Twilight, Like,
as far as I know what happened, what should happen?

(01:03:19):
Because talk about a series of books that aren't as
bad as the movies, like the movies of Twilight are.
They're the example of bad YA entertainment, But again not
really because they speak to the people who enjoy them.
So it's just me who doesn't like Twilight. Look, Twilight
made more money than God, not as much money as
Harry Potter, but it made a lot of money. So yeah,

(01:03:42):
for me, it's it's the introduction of a YA franchise
that is unlike any other, and it is still a
powerhouse to this day. There's no Twilight Land at Universal Studios, guys.
But there's Harry Potter's Wizarding World, Like I mean to say,
it's just to introduce the character of Harry Potter into
the world is probably enough, because Harry Potter, I think,
is as ubiquitous as Darth Vader, Jesus and Mickey Mouse

(01:04:05):
at this point. Like sure, the inclusion in these theme
parks as a good point of reference. They build it
and people come in droves, to the point where I've
been to the Wizarding World twice. Both times I was there,
it was the most crowded part of those parks by
leaps and bounds. And you know why, because it's a

(01:04:25):
world that people want to live in. The World of
Magic is something that people have always wanted, and then
the author contextualizes it and turns it into something that
you can live in. Yeah. I mean again, ya, entertainment
has never been the same after Harry Potter period.

Speaker 2 (01:04:43):
This is a good answer and not one that I
went to immediately. So even you say it's the obvious one,
I felt like it was. I mean, looking at it now, yeah,
it might be. I think for me, the biggest thing
here is and I don't even know the right way
say this, but this franchise is just the perfect vehicle

(01:05:03):
to be a catalyst for so many incredible actors' careers.
I mean, Robert Pattinson would not be as big as
he is without Harry Potter, Daniel Radcliffe obviously, you've got
Emma Watson, You've got Rupert Grint has done and started
doing a handful of other things. There's a bunch finally, Yeah,
there's a bunch of these other like smaller actors that

(01:05:24):
are finally starting to do things because they were in
this and they've gotten calls for some other things. And
it's especially Radcliffe, uh and Emma Watson. Obviously, they've both
done major things past this franchise, and without you know,
without being cast at the age of like seven or
whatever they were, it never would have happened for them

(01:05:45):
the way that it has because they go they go
from the Harry Potter franchise to literally starring in other things,
not just like supporting actor to earn your way to leading,
you know, leading actor in a film. But they are
both coming off of those with the ability and with
the experience to hold up things like you know, perks
of being a wallflower, and Daniel Radcliffe being in fucking

(01:06:07):
Guns of Kimboat, which is, you know, wildly different from
all of the Harry Potter movies, and he can carry
a movie like that. Yeah, Beating the Beast is another
big franchise one, obviously, but it's it's so interesting to
see the way that some of these people respond to
being in these franchises, like Robert Pattinson and christ and
Stewart technically are both the perfect example of this, because

(01:06:28):
when you get cast in a YA franchise and you're
stuck there for five to eight films, I guarantee that
they both had the temptation to stay in that same
lane and just make a fuck boat of money, Like
you could have easily kept making movies like that, and instead,
Stewart and Pattinson have made the most interesting choices in
the world since then, and they've both excelled drastically. Like

(01:06:52):
the Robert Pattinson that's in Twilight two is not the
Robert Pattinson in Good Time or The Lighthouse.

Speaker 1 (01:07:00):
It's Batman or literally fucking Batman.

Speaker 2 (01:07:04):
I was gonna leave that one out because again, it's
just another franchise thing.

Speaker 1 (01:07:07):
Crazy though he's in like Robert Pattinson is Batman.

Speaker 2 (01:07:10):
Like right, it is wild? Yeah, obviously, I don't even
know how to explain it. And Kristen Stewart is maybe
the more interesting thing here to discuss because she's made
choices like adventure Land, in working with Olivier Assias and
getting you know, Underwater out of nowhere like the Christen

(01:07:34):
Stewart in Underwater is not an actor that you see
in the Twilight films. It's it's somebody carrying a film
that is well made and dramatic and tense and so
different from everything that you see in that franchise. So
I can go on and on about all these actors, obviously,
but it's it's it's impressive to see a franchise like

(01:07:55):
this that cast these people from a very young age
and mold into being literal great actors.

Speaker 1 (01:08:02):
I also, I would put an addendum on what you said,
which is also a really funny thing to think about,
and I kind of alluded to it already. Imagine how
many kids love Alan Rickman. Now what a fucking weird
thing like like again, like Hans Gruber like is now
like again, like he is. I would contend, like the
main one of the two or three main adult actors
in the series, and like, it's weird to me that

(01:08:26):
there is a group of people that love him for
one role that have never seen him in anything else
and maybe never will. But he's so ubiquitous as Snape,
just like Michael Gambon, just like Richard Harris, just like
and the one that always sticks out to me Maggie
Smith as McGonagall, Like, like these are actors like are
probably like thanking their lucky stars they were in these

(01:08:47):
movies because they are literally enshrined for people forever. Like
the complaints that we will see when these when these
movies are and these books are readapted, It's not gonna
be in the recasting of the kids, I'll tell you
that much. I think the people are going to be upset,
if anything, of who they cast as the adults, because
the adult characters are as important in this series, especially

(01:09:07):
in the later movies. But the fact that like a
group of like a large population of millennials love Alan
Rickman is just hilarious to me, Like, of all the actors,
Alan Rickman, Like, yeah, but I can't see Snape as
anybody else period, Like it's gonna be hard to watch
something else and it be like, this is a different
take on this pitch perfect version of the character.

Speaker 2 (01:09:30):
So I was gonna say something at the very end
of this episode, and you said the name, So now
I want to address it. I am astonished that we
get Maggie Smith in eight of these films, who is,
by all accounts, somebody that has been around for a
very very long time. Clearly she is, she's pretty old.

(01:09:55):
She was born in nineteen thirty four. She looked incredibly
old starring in Hook in the early nineties, and we
get her for eight Harry Potter movies, and she is
a foundational part of these movies. She is incredible. She
is that stern but also like carrying adult overlooker over

(01:10:15):
these kids for everything, and she's she's just so empathetic
at the end of it, she's you know, lovable, She's
just amazing. Like she's one of my favorite parts of
all these movies.

Speaker 1 (01:10:26):
Yeah, I mean again, we kind of mentioned the child actors.
You know, I think it's a little unfair because the
first four movies, the child actors aren't they're getting their
sea legs beneath them. It takes a while. The later
four movies I think are. I think the later four
movies are good examples of how good Radcliffe, Grint and
Watson can be. I think the first four movies really

(01:10:47):
are the adults like carrying the weight to get the
kind of story up to speed, as it were. And yeah,
I'm with you. I mean, Kenneth Brona, for fuck's sake,
Emma Thompson is in there again, Richard Harris, Michael Gambon, Like, yeah,
the fact that these are people that people my age
think lovingly of who have had thirty forty year careers

(01:11:08):
before this, and this is like for so many of them,
like you've kind of alluded to, no pun intended the
twilights of their careers or should be. And yet all
of a sudden, you could go to a con and
sit at a table and you'd have a line on
the fucking door. I've seen it for Tom Felton, like
you know, Draco Malfoy, like that child actor like now
doing his thing. It's awesome, but at the same time,

(01:11:32):
like if you're a Robbie Coltrane, obviously he's passed away.
John Cleasee, Warwick Davis, John Hurt even in a lot
of ways, Alan Rickman like they're loved by people for
this and nothing else, and that's crazy to me because
they're fantastic actors outside of these movies. Even Yeah, Well
said so to bring us home, Ryan, what is a

(01:11:56):
cinematic bridge to Harry Potter that think if they like this,
they might also like Harry Potter.

Speaker 2 (01:12:04):
I've got an interesting take here, and it's probably gonna
be laughed at a little bit. But considering I don't
love fantasy, the thing that I originally watched Harry Potter
and went, oh, this is kind of similar to some
of these other things. I two things come to mind,
and the first one is really obvious, so I'll get
it out of the way. But it's the Princess Bride.
The movie is an interesting, you know, fantasy approach for

(01:12:27):
a lot of people around that time. It was, you know,
something for millennials and younger gen X was probably one
of the more watched films in their childhood. But then
something happened while I was watching this for the like
third time, and I went, you know, I think one
of the reasons I like this is because I get
some of the same feelings that I got while watching Labyrinth.

(01:12:52):
I love Labyrinth first of all, everybody that knows me
well knows I love anything with Jim Jim Henson and
muppets and all that fun stuff. Labyrinth was a giant
movie for me as a kid. Obviously, the puppets are
a big part of that, and David Bowie was one
of my favorite musicians as a part of that. But
beyond all that, just that that fantastical approach to a

(01:13:14):
fairly benign storyline is something that you can feel in
many of these movies because you can take it out
of the fantasy setting and it still has that same drama,
still has that same tension. It's just amped up by
the fact that we're people arguing about which wands they're
gonna purchase, and you know, who's a mud blood and

(01:13:34):
why this kid is the chosen Wizard and all this
other things like those just enhanced the lore surrounding a
fairly common story. Like a lot of these things, it's
just the same story recycled over many of these movies
that we love. It's how you take that story and
make it exciting for a new audience. So I think
these are great movies. I think Labyrinth is an incredible film,

(01:13:56):
And if you like Labyrinth. I really feel like you'll
find something to love in the Harry Potter franchise.

Speaker 1 (01:14:04):
Yeah, I would agree. I mean again, like kids, I
think those are good examples. I think you're gonna laugh
at what I'm gonna say. Uh So, here's the thing,
and we've kind of alluded to it. These are movies
about teenagers, kids and teenagers, right, So if you're into
things like and I think this speaks more to the
school and high schooliness of these movies. If you're a

(01:14:25):
fan of stuff like mean girls, high school musical things
that are focused on high school kids, this is definitely
your bag. It's very different, but it's I mean, so
much of these movies are just high school kids not
getting along with each other, and then we drop that
into the fantasy setting and put some fantasy dressing on it.
But the some of the best scenes in these movies

(01:14:45):
are just these kids interacting with each other with no
magical pretense involved. And I mean, look, I think what's
kind of hard here, And I think when we as
we do these franchises, you know, making the cinematic bridge
in a lot of ways, Like do I need to
make a cinematic bridge to Harry Potter for someone like
you know what I mean, it's so ubiquitous as a

(01:15:06):
thing like Harry Potter, you know, like there's nothing else
you could mistake it for. And you know what it
is when someone says it, and if you don't, it's
I don't. I guess I don't know how big Harry
Potter is outside of the Western world. I guess is
my thing here, Like I don't know our people in
India or China or Saudi Arabia or Yemen or anywhere

(01:15:31):
where it's again like not necessarily ethnically European or white
people are in mass quantity. Is this a thing that
anybody there is into. I've got to assume that there's
some interest in it just based on the story alone.
But I think for me, like anyone who's into like
high school dramas or like high school movies, this series

(01:15:53):
is is kind of in that wheelhouse because so many
of the movies really are just about kids not getting
along with each other. Yes, there's a big bad guy, yes,
but like in so many of those high school movies,
there's always kind of this antagonist. Are the stakes his
eyes in Harry Potter? No, of course, not in those movies,
it's often like we're not gonna win the big game,
or we're not gonna have enough money to do the thing.

(01:16:14):
But in Harry Potter's like the world's gonna get destroyed.
So if you like a teen movie with steaks with
some steaks, I think Harry Potter is definitely for you.
I mean, I would say Lord of the Rings and
other fantasy things, but like, that's unfair because this is
just fantasy, and if you like fantasy, you've priority seen this.
So to your point, I was trying to figure out
a way to get people who have nothing to do

(01:16:34):
with fantasy in the door, and watching just the way
that these teenagers interact with each other made me think
of again the best and sometimes the worst of a
certain subgenre of film, which is the teen comedy or
the high school movie. So I don't know that's I
mean again, is it a little bit of a stretch? No?

(01:16:55):
Is it maybe too on the nose? Possibly, but it's
not as kind of far reaching is I'm not saying
yours are reaching, but yours are very.

Speaker 3 (01:17:03):
Deep this time.

Speaker 2 (01:17:05):
Yeah, I went for very singular films, which I tend
to not do too much for this answer, But another
one that I really sticks out. Like I loved Willow
when I was a kid too, and that's very similar
to these, and obviously as a lot of the same
you know people behind them, and Warwick Davis is in
this right, right, so I completely get it having the

(01:17:26):
same feeling. Yeah, this is this is an odd one
because it's it's it's a revolutionary franchise. It's it's kind
of like Lord of the Rings to to say, like,
let me recommend something similar. If you haven't seen this,
it's kind of hard not to have seen one of these,
if you right.

Speaker 1 (01:17:42):
Even my parents have seen these movies, like, and my
parents don't like fantasy at all. Like my folks have
seen these movies. So like, yeah, like you said, if
you're not into fantasy, I understand why this is a
hard sell. I will say, I think you would agree.
This is not high concept fantasy. This is essentially like
literally the high school experience, but with magic and increase

(01:18:05):
and instead of the bully just beating your ass, he's
gonna kill everybody.

Speaker 2 (01:18:09):
Right, which again I think that's one of the worst
things about a lot of these. It's got to come
up in every episode. This is one of the things
I hate about the MCU and like Harry Potter and
a couple of these other things, the stakes don't have
to be the fucking world, right, we don't have to
have everything is going to explode if he gets what
he wants. Like that is old and tired and makes

(01:18:30):
it feel so much more fake. Let's do something a
little more realistic and feasible.

Speaker 1 (01:18:35):
You can tell big stories in the small corners of
the universe. And Ord did it. The Mandalorian did it
for a while until it decided to just do the
thing that everything else does, which is just start ingesting
shitloads of nostalgia bait and you know, going back to
the things everybody loves one more time now, guys. But yeah,

(01:18:56):
I kind of find it hard if you'd never seen
Harry Potter movie, Like is that a thing?

Speaker 2 (01:19:02):
Like, Yeah, there's quite a few people that have never
seen any of them.

Speaker 1 (01:19:05):
And I get it. I get it at this point,
I get it.

Speaker 2 (01:19:09):
I get not starting them right now, that's for sure. However,
if you've never seen them and you want to start them,
check out the Harry Potter franchise. And now that you've
listened to this episode, you've got a lot of insight
on what might be a good entry point, ones that
you might be able to look forward to if you're
starting from the beginning, and some some things to consider
that made some giant impacts on pop cultures you go
through it. I hope you've enjoyed listening to this And Chris,

(01:19:31):
why don't you tell everybody where they can find you?

Speaker 1 (01:19:34):
You can find me over at the aforementioned weirdingwaymedia dot com,
where this show and so many other fantastic shows not
hosted by me with zero involvement of my voice can
be found, including Eighties TV Ladies, Feminine Critique, Twisted and Uncorked,
the Filmentaries podcast, The Projection Booth, Dark Destinations, and they're
like fifteen more. That's like five of the twenty. So

(01:19:56):
if you want to listen to podcasts about pop culture,
weirding Way Media is the place to go. There's only
one podcast you can't find on there. Want to find
more out about that Patreon dot com slash culture cast.
What about you, Ryan? Where can people find you and
your assorted.

Speaker 2 (01:20:10):
Works everywhere under the name they Disconnected and send you
Shouting out podcast? I will name some of the ones
on the Someone's Favorite Productions podcast network today as well.
Everybody needs to go check out. They Live by Film.
They do a really great deep dive on films every
other episode, and then in the alternating episodes they do
some interviews kind of like I do on my show

(01:20:31):
with some boutique label, some filmmaker stuff like that. The
other big one is Unsung Horrors. Every single episode they
take a horror movie that has less than a thousand
views on letterbox and do a deep dive on it
and try to entice everybody to give it a watch,
because if it hits a thousand, they will not cover it.
A couple others, I do host the Incinerator podcast with

(01:20:53):
my partner Billy Ray Bruton. We are going off and
on with episodes all the time, it feels like, but
he is a busy, busy man, So check out some
of the back catalog there because those those episodes get wild.
I love it. And then finally, Billy Ray also hosts
his own podcast, movie Mixtapes, where he gives somebody a
topic and they they come together and make a movie

(01:21:15):
mixtape based on the genre of film. And it's a
really great wholesome video podcasts or not video podcasts wholesome
podcast that you can Yeah, just get a lot of
recommendations about a deep dive on a genre, and yeah,
it's great.

Speaker 1 (01:21:30):
Like, rate and review this show wherever you get it,
more than likely iTunes, and we'll catch you back for
the next episode of Film Foundations, where we will continue
our film journey.

Speaker 3 (01:21:39):
Won't you join us? Only? Only, only

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Ruthie's Table 4

The Joe Rogan Experience

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Podcast!! Film Foundations Franchise: An Intro to the Sorcerer's Stone and more!!

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Ruthie's Table 4

The Joe Rogan Experience

All Episodes

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Podcast!! Film Foundations Franchise: An Intro to the Sorcerer's Stone and more!!

On Purpose with Jay Shetty