Author Topic: JK Rowling's Fantastic Beasts and Creatures and Where to Find Them  (Read 15296 times)

DKT

  • Friendly Neighborhood
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4980
  • PodCastle is my Co-Pilot
    • Psalms & Hymns & Spiritual Noir
So, taking a break from reading PC Flash Fiction entries due to the news on the internets today: J.K. Rowling is in fact returning to the world of Harry Potter. This time, however, she's not writing a new book series - she's writing a screenplay for a new series of movies: Fantastic Beasts and Creatures and Where to Find Them. Yes, this was a text book Harry had at Hogwarts. Yes, it was released itself as a book. (I haven't read it.) But it's a bit more than that.

Here's the Press Release:

Warner Bros. Entertainment today announced an expanded creative partnership with world-renowned, best-selling author J.K. Rowling. At the center of the partnership is a new film series from Rowling’s world of witches and wizards, inspired by Harry Potter’s Hogwarts textbook “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them” and the adventures of the book’s fictitious author, Newt Scamander. The announcement was made by Kevin Tsujihara, Chief Executive Officer, Warner Bros. Entertainment.

“Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them” will be an original story and will mark Rowling’s screenwriting debut. It is planned as the first picture in a new film series. Set in the wizarding world, the story will feature magical creatures and characters, some of which will be familiar to devoted Harry Potter fans.

“Although it will be set in the worldwide community of witches and wizards where I was so happy for seventeen years, ‘Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them’ is neither a prequel nor a sequel to the Harry Potter series, but an extension of the wizarding world,” said Rowling. “The laws and customs of the hidden magical society will be familiar to anyone who has read the Harry Potter books or seen the films, but Newt’s story will start in New York, seventy years before Harry’s gets underway.”

“We are incredibly honored that Jo has chosen to partner with Warner Bros. on this exciting new exploration of the world of wizardry which has been tremendously successful across all of our businesses,” said Tsujihara. “She is an extraordinary writer, who ignited a reading revolution around the world, which then became an unprecedented film phenomenon. We know that audiences will be as excited as we are to see what her brilliant and boundless imagination conjures up for us.”

In addition to the film series, “Fantastic Beasts” will also be developed across the Studio’s video game, consumer products and digital initiatives businesses, including enhanced links with Pottermore.com, Rowling’s digital online experience built around the Harry Potter stories.

The Studio’s expanded partnership with Rowling also covers the continued expansion of its Harry Potter activities, including the wonderful Wizarding World of Harry Potter theme parks in conjunction with partner Universal Parks and Resorts (currently in Orlando, FL; opening in Hollywood, CA and Osaka, Japan), digital initiatives (including Pottermore), video games, consumer products and visitor attractions.

In addition, Warner Bros. will serve as the worldwide TV distributor (excluding the U.K.) of J.K. Rowling’s upcoming television adaptation for the BBC of “The Casual Vacancy,” her best-selling first novel aimed at adult audiences. This miniseries begins production in 2014.

The relationship will be managed in London by Neil Blair of The Blair Partnership, Rowling’s literary agency, and Josh Berger, President & Managing Director, Warner Bros. UK, Ireland and Spain, who will serve as Warner Bros.’ chief business contact for all J.K. Rowling initiatives going forward.

Rowling’s expanded quote regarding “Fantastic Beasts” is below:

“It all started when Warner Bros. came to me with the suggestion of turning ‘Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them’ into a film. I thought it was a fun idea, but the idea of seeing Newt Scamander, the supposed author of ‘Fantastic Beasts,’ realized by another writer was difficult. Having lived for so long in my fictional universe, I feel very protective of it and I already knew a lot about Newt. As hard-core Harry Potter fans will know, I liked him so much that I even married his grandson, Rolf, to one of my favourite characters from the Harry Potter series, Luna Lovegood.

As I considered Warners’ proposal, an idea took shape that I couldn’t dislodge. That is how I ended up pitching my own idea for a film to Warner Bros.

Although it will be set in the worldwide community of witches and wizards where I was so happy for seventeen years, ‘Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them’ is neither a prequel nor a sequel to the Harry Potter series, but an extension of the wizarding world. The laws and customs of the hidden magical society will be familiar to anyone who has read the Harry Potter books or seen the films, but Newt’s story will start in New York, seventy years before Harry’s gets underway.

I particularly want to thank Kevin Tsujihara of Warner Bros. for his support in this project, which would not have happened without him. I always said that I would only revisit the wizarding world if I had an idea that I was really excited about and this is it."


So...I have so many different feelings right now. I LOVE the Potter books. Part of me is kind of glad at least there aren't going to be any more of them (yet). Because, man. This news scares me.

OTOH, Rowling's avoided Potter for a while now. She's written some other books. She's had some other successes. She sure as hell doesn't need the money and said she'd only return if there was a story she loved. Also, the idea that this is so far away from Hogwarts in time and distance is maybe promising? Hopefully, they'll completely avoid everything else but the setting? (If Harry's Great Grandpa shows up, or Voldermort, I'm gonna be annoyed. Though I do expect other Potter characters to show up, as the PR hints at.)

Setting in 1920s America (if I have the timeline right) is a very interesting setting...

One thing is for sure. I'm probably going to actually check this book out now, and if there's an audio version of it, listen to it with my daughter.


Scattercat

  • Caution:
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4904
  • Amateur wordsmith
    • Mirrorshards
Reply #1 on: September 12, 2013, 04:23:54 PM
I wish I could harbor more resentment for J.K. Rowling, but really, she's a solidly entertaining and intermittently brilliant writer, and I've never read anything of hers that I hated (though I have been very "meh" now and then.)  I am intrigued, if not excited.

(Did anyone else like "The Casual Vacancy"?  I thought it was great.)



DKT

  • Friendly Neighborhood
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4980
  • PodCastle is my Co-Pilot
    • Psalms & Hymns & Spiritual Noir
Reply #2 on: September 12, 2013, 05:29:10 PM
I haven't read Casual Vacancy yet, but I thoroughly enjoyed listening to The Cuckoo's Calling.


Fenrix

  • Curmudgeonly Co-Editor of PseudoPod
  • Editor
  • *****
  • Posts: 3996
  • I always lock the door when I creep by daylight.
Reply #3 on: September 12, 2013, 07:32:44 PM
I've been working my way through the audio versions of the Harry Potter series. It's done with a single reader (Jim Dale?) and I have to say he has done a pretty spectacular job. There's a good amount of character differentiation, although several of the more peripheral characters blur together somewhat. And there's a lot of freakin' characters to differentiate.

Once Rowling finally killed Roald Dahl, the books improved significantly. While I haven't even considered reading Fantastic Beasts and Creatures and Where to Find Them, I'm interested in this return to the world and I'm sure that I'll plunk my dollars down to go see this new movie.

All cat stories start with this statement: “My mother, who was the first cat, told me this...”


Wilson Fowlie

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
    • The Maple Leaf Singers
Reply #4 on: September 12, 2013, 07:35:56 PM
(If Harry's Great Grandpa shows up, or Voldermort, I'm gonna be annoyed. Though I do expect other Potter characters to show up, as the PR hints at.)

I wouldn't get too annoyed if things like that happen. The wizarding world - even around the world, not just in England - is far smaller and more insular than our own, and everyone knows everyone else, or seems to. It seems more like 3 degrees of separation with them, rather than 6.

So I think would be rather surprising, in such a milieu, if there weren't some passing reference to an ancestor of someone we've met.

To take the Great Grandpa example, Harry has 8 great grandparents, possibly all 'purebloods' (I'm not sure about this - it's been a while) - it doesn't seem outside the bounds of reasonableness that at least one of them could be a very minor character in this new (old) storyline.

Now, if she were to make a big deal out of an ancestor of a strong HP-series character, that would be a different matter.

I've been working my way through the audio versions of the Harry Potter series. It's done with a single reader (Jim Dale?) and I have to say he has done a pretty spectacular job. There's a good amount of character differentiation, although several of the more peripheral characters blur together somewhat. And there's a lot of freakin' characters to differentiate.
I actually prefer Stephen Fry's readings of the British editions of the books. Dale's not bad, but to me, he doesn't hold a candle to Fry. YMMV. :)

Once Rowling finally killed Roald Dahl, the books improved significantly.
She did what now?

"People commonly use the word 'procrastination' to describe what they do on the Internet. It seems to me too mild to describe what's happening as merely not-doing-work. We don't call it procrastination when someone gets drunk instead of working." - Paul Graham


DKT

  • Friendly Neighborhood
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4980
  • PodCastle is my Co-Pilot
    • Psalms & Hymns & Spiritual Noir
Reply #5 on: September 12, 2013, 07:38:05 PM

Once Rowling finally killed Roald Dahl...

I'm missing something. Please fill me in RIGHT NOW :)


Fenrix

  • Curmudgeonly Co-Editor of PseudoPod
  • Editor
  • *****
  • Posts: 3996
  • I always lock the door when I creep by daylight.
Reply #6 on: September 12, 2013, 08:37:53 PM

Once Rowling finally killed Roald Dahl...

I'm missing something. Please fill me in RIGHT NOW :)

All authors must acknowledge their primary inspiration. This generally starts with imitation, and at some point the inspiration must be killed in order for the student to move on. For Lovecraft it was Poe. For many modern horror authors it was Lovecraft (e.g. Bloch and Campbell). For a preponderance of fantasy authors, it's Tolkien. However for Rowling I'm pretty confident that it is Dahl.

Let's use the Dursleys as the primary example of the Dahl-ness. Dahl loves not just black and white but EXTREME behavior. How the Dursleys treat Harry starts far out on the ridiculous scale, but as the books progress the treatment gets closer to realistic and believable in our world. The Sorcerer's Stone is set in a world where all four grandparents spend their entire existence in the only bed in the house while everyone eats thin cabbage soup. The Deathly Hallows is set in our world with magic.

All cat stories start with this statement: “My mother, who was the first cat, told me this...”


Chuk

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 413
Reply #7 on: September 12, 2013, 09:15:01 PM
(Did anyone else like "The Casual Vacancy"?  I thought it was great.)
I generally liked some parts of it but didn't love it. Mark Haddon does that kind of thing better.

--
chuk


danooli

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1745
    • Who Doesn't Love Stories?
Reply #8 on: September 12, 2013, 09:44:10 PM
I am pretty excited about this news. 


Quote
I feel very protective of it and I already knew a lot about Newt. As hard-core Harry Potter fans will know, I liked him so much that I even married his grandson, Rolf, to one of my favourite characters from the Harry Potter series, Luna Lovegood.

This, to me, shows that it's the love Ms. Rowling has for the story, the world and her characters, that makes me happy she's returning.  It was inevitable that WB would try to make more money off of the franchise, at least this way the story isn't going to be watered down, the mythology won't be bastardized by another writers interpretation.  Canon remains pure, if you will. 

The wizarding world she has created is not done giving up it's stories and I'm not done learning about them.







DKT

  • Friendly Neighborhood
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4980
  • PodCastle is my Co-Pilot
    • Psalms & Hymns & Spiritual Noir
Reply #9 on: September 12, 2013, 10:17:49 PM

Once Rowling finally killed Roald Dahl...

I'm missing something. Please fill me in RIGHT NOW :)

All authors must acknowledge their primary inspiration. This generally starts with imitation, and at some point the inspiration must be killed in order for the student to move on. For Lovecraft it was Poe. For many modern horror authors it was Lovecraft (e.g. Bloch and Campbell). For a preponderance of fantasy authors, it's Tolkien. However for Rowling I'm pretty confident that it is Dahl.

Let's use the Dursleys as the primary example of the Dahl-ness. Dahl loves not just black and white but EXTREME behavior. How the Dursleys treat Harry starts far out on the ridiculous scale, but as the books progress the treatment gets closer to realistic and believable in our world. The Sorcerer's Stone is set in a world where all four grandparents spend their entire existence in the only bed in the house while everyone eats thin cabbage soup. The Deathly Hallows is set in our world with magic.

Huh. Yeah, I can see the Dursleys - particularly in the first book - being Dahl-esque, I guess. Kind of akin to the aunts in James and the Giant Peach.  And I guess Aunt Marge blowing up is reminiscent of Violet in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

Quote
I feel very protective of it and I already knew a lot about Newt. As hard-core Harry Potter fans will know, I liked him so much that I even married his grandson, Rolf, to one of my favourite characters from the Harry Potter series, Luna Lovegood.

This, to me, shows that it's the love Ms. Rowling has for the story, the world and her characters, that makes me happy she's returning.  It was inevitable that WB would try to make more money off of the franchise, at least this way the story isn't going to be watered down, the mythology won't be bastardized by another writers interpretation.  Canon remains pure, if you will. 

The wizarding world she has created is not done giving up it's stories and I'm not done learning about them.






I find this encouraging. Thanks :)


flintknapper

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 323
Reply #10 on: September 13, 2013, 06:56:32 PM

This, to me, shows that it's the love Ms. Rowling has for the story, the world and her characters, that makes me happy she's returning.  It was inevitable that WB would try to make more money off of the franchise, at least this way the story isn't going to be watered down, the mythology won't be bastardized by another writers interpretation.  Canon remains pure, if you will. 


I like Rowling well enough but sometimes I think an influx of new writers is a good thing. It allows people to take the concepts and come at them with fresh eyes. For example: I preferred the Knights of the Old Republic PC game story to the prequel movies set in the star wars universe. I hate to say it Mr. Lucas, but KOTOR might have made for a better movie.... or the book series which name I forget where there is the rogue imperial general and Luke is training the next batch of Jedi.

One universe, and certainly not the only one, to have really been helped by having fresh eyes look at it and reinvent it through time is Star Trek. The series stands the test of time and I love all of its various incarnations.

Also I will be honest with Rowling, I have purposely not seen all the movies. I have such vivid ideas as to what the characters and locations look like in my head, I have actually do not want to see those images challengedon the silverscreen. I want to keep my own interpretations.



Tanichcaf

  • Extern
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Reply #11 on: September 14, 2013, 01:05:14 AM
I'm pretty excited about this- I'm by no means a rabid potterhead, but I enjoyed the books and movies enough to be looking forward to this new spin-off.



Fenrix

  • Curmudgeonly Co-Editor of PseudoPod
  • Editor
  • *****
  • Posts: 3996
  • I always lock the door when I creep by daylight.
Reply #12 on: September 20, 2013, 12:00:05 AM

Huh. Yeah, I can see the Dursleys - particularly in the first book - being Dahl-esque, I guess. Kind of akin to the aunts in James and the Giant Peach.  And I guess Aunt Marge blowing up is reminiscent of Violet in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.


I'd go a bit farther and call the Dursleys in the first three books having that same ridiculous over the top response. Cupboard under the stairs, bars on the windows, cat flap in the door. The barbaric abuse contrasted directly with the ridiculous spoiling of Dudley. Only in the fourth do we really start to get a more measured approach to this family interaction. By the seventh book the Dursleys get motivations and character development. 

All cat stories start with this statement: “My mother, who was the first cat, told me this...”


Wilson Fowlie

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
    • The Maple Leaf Singers
Reply #13 on: September 20, 2013, 12:03:54 AM
I'd go a bit farther and call the Dursleys in the first three books having that same ridiculous over the top response. Cupboard under the stairs, bars on the windows, cat flap in the door. The barbaric abuse contrasted directly with the ridiculous spoiling of Dudley. Only in the fourth do we really start to get a more measured approach to this family interaction. By the seventh book the Dursleys get motivations and character development. 

You know, that was always something that bugged me about the early books, but I couldn't really put it into words. So much else was reasonably realistic (or at least internally consistent within the fantasy setting), but that struck a bad chord.

Now I know what it was - thanks, Fenrix!

"People commonly use the word 'procrastination' to describe what they do on the Internet. It seems to me too mild to describe what's happening as merely not-doing-work. We don't call it procrastination when someone gets drunk instead of working." - Paul Graham


Anarkey

  • Meen Pie
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 703
  • ...depends a good deal on where you want to get to

Once Rowling finally killed Roald Dahl...

I'm missing something. Please fill me in RIGHT NOW :)

All authors must acknowledge their primary inspiration. This generally starts with imitation, and at some point the inspiration must be killed in order for the student to move on. For Lovecraft it was Poe. For many modern horror authors it was Lovecraft (e.g. Bloch and Campbell). For a preponderance of fantasy authors, it's Tolkien. However for Rowling I'm pretty confident that it is Dahl.

Let's use the Dursleys as the primary example of the Dahl-ness. Dahl loves not just black and white but EXTREME behavior. How the Dursleys treat Harry starts far out on the ridiculous scale, but as the books progress the treatment gets closer to realistic and believable in our world. The Sorcerer's Stone is set in a world where all four grandparents spend their entire existence in the only bed in the house while everyone eats thin cabbage soup. The Deathly Hallows is set in our world with magic.


I'm not going to say that she didn't draw some stuff from Dahl.  She probably did.  Dahl's pretty widely influential in children's lit.  But I'm going to dispute the premise that he's her primary inspiration.  I believe her primary inspiration is probably Dianna Wynne Jones.  I've been reading one of DWJ's books aloud in my classroom (I last read it about twelve years ago, so it's been a while), and I'm struck by how much is similar in tone, how many of J.K.s characters echo the characters in the Chrestomanci world, and how much of the "rich detail" people praise Rowling for is borrowed from Jones with modifications.  I'd always known there was some connection there, but I'd forgotten just how interlaced those connections were until this re-reading.

In Jones' books, there are always people who are terrible to children, but others who are kind and sheltering to them (Dursleys and Snape vs. Hagrid and Dumbledore, say).  That's much more the model of the Potterverse than the Dahl worldview, in which case adults are never to be trusted, unless they are still childlike.

Not to echo Gaiman, but I agree with him: Jones is one of the great underrated children's authors.  I miss her. :(

Winner Nash's 1000th member betting pool + Thaurismunths' Free Rice Contest!


Fenrix

  • Curmudgeonly Co-Editor of PseudoPod
  • Editor
  • *****
  • Posts: 3996
  • I always lock the door when I creep by daylight.
I can't say I've ever heard of Dianna Wynne Jones. If you were to recommend a single book, which would you suggest I read?

I've picked through a bunch of Dahl recently along with listening to all the Potter books, so the connections seemed pretty clear to me. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory seems to be a significant influencer, and is quite evident in the Honeydukes candy shoppe.

I've now read through the Fantastic Beasts book (it's a super fast read and should be available at your local library). The front half that provides a sketch of the magical creature classification and rights movement is really great worldbuilding details. It supports in the background everything that was moving in the foreground in the novels including motivations and long-standing grudges. The second half is a list of monsters with descriptions that would have lit 12-year-old me on fire, but is a bit tedious to adult me. This is a great idea core, and provides a lot of room to build a new movie from it without significant constraints or preconceived notions.

All cat stories start with this statement: “My mother, who was the first cat, told me this...”


DKT

  • Friendly Neighborhood
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4980
  • PodCastle is my Co-Pilot
    • Psalms & Hymns & Spiritual Noir
Funnily enough, I've been reading Dahl with my kids too. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (I can see a lot of Violet in Aunt Marge) and Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator. I have no idea WTF to think of this book. It is soooooooooooooo all over the place nuts and seems to be a hodge-podge, but maybe I haven't read enough Dahl - just four or five books? (Several of them very short.)


Scattercat

  • Caution:
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4904
  • Amateur wordsmith
    • Mirrorshards
Dahl tends to make me a little uncomfortable because his underlying cynicism drifts into nihilism more often than I'm comfortable with.  There's an undercurrent of viciousness to his writing.  It's unsettling.  (Oddly, I was always a little leery of his stuff, even as a young kid, but it wasn't until more recently that I was able to really articulate why.)



Devoted135

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1252
I've never liked Dahl's works, myself. I agree with Scattercat, it all seems to have this weird edginess that makes me subconsciously nervous.

On a related note, I picked up this book (The Irregulars: Roald Dahl and the British Spy Ring in Wartime Washington) when Borders was going out of business, thinking it was historical fiction. It emphatically is not, but rather is an account of Dahl's time as a British Spy in Washington, DC before and after WWII. Apparently, he was not at all a nice person and fell into writing entirely on accident.



Wilson Fowlie

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
    • The Maple Leaf Singers
Dahl tends to make me a little uncomfortable because his underlying cynicism drifts into nihilism more often than I'm comfortable with.

Moral or existential nihilism? Or some other kind?

I've always preferred Robert Munch over Roald Dahl.

"People commonly use the word 'procrastination' to describe what they do on the Internet. It seems to me too mild to describe what's happening as merely not-doing-work. We don't call it procrastination when someone gets drunk instead of working." - Paul Graham


eytanz

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6109
Dahl tends to make me a little uncomfortable because his underlying cynicism drifts into nihilism more often than I'm comfortable with.

Moral or existential nihilism? Or some other kind?

I've always preferred Robert Munch over Roald Dahl.

Can't speak for Scattercat, but I'd say moral nihilism. This is especially apparent in Dahl's stories aimed at adults, because there the narrative tone he adopts is almost always entirely amoral - he often presents events in a way that not so much avoids judging characters' actions, but that rather judges the moral and immoral characters equally. In his more fantastical stories, especially those oriented to children, this attitude is often masked by the cartoonish nature of the worlds he describes, but arguably it's still there to be found.



Anarkey

  • Meen Pie
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 703
  • ...depends a good deal on where you want to get to
I can't say I've ever heard of Dianna Wynne Jones. If you were to recommend a single book, which would you suggest I read?


Nnnngggh....uhhhh....hmmmm.....no idea.  A lot of people like "Howl's Moving Castle"?  It's not my favorite, but it's pretty good.

My favorites are the Chrestomanci books, but I'm really sure that part of my love for them is of the blind preteen variety and can't really say you (or anyone else) would like them.  They are pretty awesome though.  For many years of my early adulthood "The Magicians of Caprona" was my lost children's lit book.  I was ecstatic when I finally found my way back to it again. 

A Tale of Time City is another good one in a mathy, sf kind of way. 

I dunno.  Hard to say where you might go wrong.  Maybe I didn't love the Derkholm stuff, or the stuff ostensibly for adults.  But she's pretty solidly good.  There's lots to choose from: http://www.leemac.freeserve.co.uk/books.htm

Winner Nash's 1000th member betting pool + Thaurismunths' Free Rice Contest!