Do We Really Need More ‘Harry Potter?’

Spread the love

Harry Potter

If you haven’t yet blocked that one friend who still quotes Dumbledore on Facebook, you will have heard that Harry Potter is making a comeback (also, block that friend). This direct sequel to J.K. Rowling’s original series will be called Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, and it’s a play. This is a smart move, no doubt aiming to target fans who enjoy theater, but don’t like artistic integrity. Mostly joking about that last comment.

Don’t get me wrong; I loved the series when I was younger. The characters were always easy to relate to. Harry and I were quite similar; both of us wore glasses, had jet black hair, and lived in constant fear of being murdered in our sleep. And much like Uncle Vernon, I too keep all my orphans in a cupboard under the stairs.

Despite my love for a series that comprised the majority of my childhood when Dragon Ball Z wasn’t on, the cynic in me is wondering whether we really need a sequel to a well-contained series that ended on a high note. I already followed Harry and his friends through a lifetime of adventures, in book and film. Is the story of the rest of their lives all that fascinating? Should it just live on through fan-fiction? How about instead, completely new characters in the same universe? I don’t know, but then again, I’m just a filthy mudblood.

One thought on “Do We Really Need More ‘Harry Potter?’

  • March 29, 2016 at 11:58 am

    Yeah, totally agree! I’m way more excited for Fantastic Beasts for this exact reason. Cursed child seems just…excessive


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *