Reddit is asking the question that may matter most for HBO’s upcoming Harry Potter TV remake: what’s the point?
With so much attention on casting choices, visual style, and how closely the show will follow the novels, it’s easy to miss the bigger debate happening among fans. A popular Reddit discussion argues that even if the first episode turns out great, the series still has to justify why it exists beyond upgraded production values and a new cast delivering the same plot again.
The thread was sparked by user u/CharakterRant, who summed up the concern in a blunt way: why not create a different wizarding school instead? The argument isn’t that a Harry Potter series can’t be well-made. It’s that “better” doesn’t automatically equal “necessary” if the story being told is essentially identical. In other words, if audiences already know every major beat is coming, what’s the creative hook that makes this version feel essential?
To explain the difference, the Redditor compared the project to the idea of a visual remake that looks impressive but doesn’t really change what the experience is at its core. From that perspective, a faithful retelling could still feel like a repeat, just with sharper imagery and a longer runtime. What the user finds more exciting are reimaginings that take narrative risks, expand the story in unexpected ways, or explore new angles rather than simply re-presenting the original.
As an example of what they would prefer, the Redditor pointed to Hogwarts Legacy, which uses the familiar wizarding world but tells its own story by shifting the timeline roughly a century earlier than the books. For them, that approach captures what’s exciting about the setting: new characters, new conflicts, and fresh perspectives—without being locked into retreading plot points everyone already knows. They also noted that some ongoing casting controversies could have been avoided entirely if the series weren’t tied to established characters in the first place.
In the comments, many fans broadly agreed with the main idea: artistically, a remake can feel unnecessary. At the same time, plenty of users acknowledged why HBO would do it anyway. From a business standpoint, Harry Potter and Hogwarts are global brands with instant recognition. A new wizarding school with unfamiliar names might be more creatively open, but it would likely be a harder sell to mainstream audiences.
So what will determine whether HBO’s Harry Potter remake feels redundant or revitalizing? The answer, according to many in the discussion, may come down to whether the show uses the one advantage a TV format has over the films: time. If the series meaningfully includes storylines and scenes the movies left out—and uses them to deepen characters, relationships, and world-building—it could offer a version that feels more complete, more immersive, and more emotionally textured than what came before.
Ultimately, viewers may judge the reboot less on whether it’s “faithful” and more on whether it brings a genuinely fresh perspective to a story the world already knows by heart. If it can’t answer that “why now?” question, the debate raised on Reddit may follow the show for its entire run. If it can, the remake could become the definitive screen version precisely because it finally has room to tell the full story.
