We're a little more than a month away from the premiere of HBO's highly anticipated "Harry Potter" series. I've been a "Harry Potter" fan since I was 14 and started reading the books to the children I babysat after school. By the time the final book was released, I'd gotten married and had a baby; I took my four-month-old son to the launch party for "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" and read the book while he slept next to me.
So I am looking forward to the show, but not without some concerns. It seems like the producers and showrunners are going to add things to the story, which is unnecessary and a giant red flag. The books give us everything we need, including many things that were omitted from the films; use the books, and you'll have a smash hit on your hands.
There's also the very questionable casting of Paapa Essiedu as Severus Snape, probably the most pivotal character in the books outside of Harry himself. Throughout the books, Snape is described in a very specific way: "a thin man with sallow skin, a hooked nose, and greasy, shoulder-length black hair."
In the films, he was played by the late Alan Rickman, who did so masterfully, even if he was too old to play a character who should have been in his 30s. The issue with Essiedu, who is a fine actor, is this: his race adds a new layer of racial discourse in a movie that doesn't need it.
As a schoolboy, Severus Snape is bullied by James Potter, Harry's father, and the rest James' friend group. In the books, they're all white boys. You don't need me to explain the optics or racial implications of the scene in "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" where Harry sees a memory of James hoisting Snape up by his ankle under a tree on the Hogwarts grounds.
Fans like me want authenticity, and I fear that we're going to get something politicized to appeal to Modern Audiences.
There's also, of course, the trans "backlash" to anything associated with Rowling, who committed the unforgivable sin of standing up for the rights of women and girls against "trans women" (read: men). The LGBTQ activist crowd has called for a boycott of the show, which will undoubtedly be as successful as their boycott of the "Hogwarts: Legacy" video game, which ended up selling 40 million units worldwide for $1.3 billion in revenue.
With all that context, and a history of movies and shows getting absolutely creamed at the box office and in ratings (see: Disney's live-action remake of "Snow White"), one would think actors and those associated with productions like "Harry Potter" would keep their opinions on Rowling and the trans community to themselves.
You'd think wrong.
Already in the spotlight for his casting, Essiedu had to come out and virtue signal to the world that he's pro-trans and that he doesn't want to talk about the woman who is going to make him a lot of money when he portrays a character she created.
"Harry Potter" actor Paapa Essiedu supports trans people and says "I don't want to talk about [J.K. Rowling] at all."
— Variety (@Variety) November 10, 2026
"I believe, in my bones, that trans people, queer people, people of all creeds and color have got the right to be treated with respect and dignity and safety at… pic.twitter.com/1a8IWWIYww
"I believe, in my bones, that trans people, queer people, people of all creeds and color have got the right to be treated with respect and dignity and safety at all times— whether they’re in the workplace, whether they’re at home or in the street, whatever. That’s the creed by which I live," Essiedu said.
Guess what? That's what Rowling believes too. She believes it so much that she even thinks women and girls deserve single-sex spaces where they can change their clothing, shower, relieve themselves, or seek help after being abused or raped.
What a monster.
That's sarcasm, of course.
Women have the right to protect themselves from men, even — and especially — when those men say they're women and demand access to bathrooms and rape crisis centers. The UK High Court's ruling protecting women's rights also means women can request a female examiner after a rape and not be penalized for it.
Why would Essiedu oppose that?
And more to the point: if he objects to Rowling so strongly, why did he agree to star in this series? It's going to last about 10 seasons; that's a long time to be involved with a property created by someone you don't want to talk about.
Or is he trying to stir up controversy to get more eyes on the show? I will watch it, not only because I am a "Harry Potter" fan, but because doing so sticks it to the radical trans activists who can't tolerate a woman like Rowling who tells them no. But if the showrunners want to avoid further controversy, they'd better tell Essiedu Silencio. And soon.
