Old School. Biblically Independent.
By Mike Redmond | News | March 27, 2026
Thursday saw the trailer drop for HBO’s Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, and like Dustin, I was mostly struck by the “Why?” of it all. I have kids who devoured the books and movies before J.K. Rowling’s heel turn, so all of this feels like a bland and pointlessly inert retread. Those films haven’t gone anywhere. They’re still widely watched to the point where streaming companies pay out the nose to have them in their libraries, so why do this?
With both the HBO trailer and Rowling’s villainous glee in the wild, Harry Potter became even more of a hot potato, and for some reason, Andrew Garfield decided to pick it up.
Because I know everyone just braced themselves, don’t worry, Garfield fights the good fight. He’s a good lad. That said, he does try to bring some nuance to the conversation, and that’s always a dicey move because the internet feeds on performative moral purity. Just log onto any social media platform of your choice or read our comments. (Hello, kids!) Andrew is walking into a minefield here, and I get why he’s doing it. Filmmaking is a collaborative process, and it must suck to have your work tarnished by a god-awful woman with god-awful views.
Here’s what he told Hits Radio while complimenting his good friend and fellow Brit actor Daniel Radcliffe:
Daniel is so godd*mn good. And honestly, I hadn’t watched the Harry Potters until recently. He’s really good in those Harry Potter movies. Those Harry Potter movies are really good. I really like that. Unexpected. I know we shouldn’t be putting money in the pocket of inhumane legislation right now through She Who Shall Remain Nameless, but the soul and spirit of those films. The kids are so good and all the artisans. I’m working with a wonderful makeup artist right now, Clare, who was working in the creature workshop. And I’m like, oh man, we can’t throw the baby out with the bathwater, there are so many beautiful artists who worked on those films.
Now, I know what you’re thinking: Mike, didn’t you just give John Lithgow crap for not walking from the Harry Potter series? I did, and here’s why: The tube is out of the toothpaste for the movies, and that cast has done yeoman’s work in telling Joanne about herself once her views became known. As for Lithgow, some argued how would leaving the series help anything since Rowling has already been paid for the rights. The money’s spent, so why shouldn’t he take a paying gig?
It’s pretty simple: Lithgow adding his prestige to the Harry Potter series gives it a chance to draw in more viewers. More viewers equals more Harry Potter books and merchandise sold, which equals more money in Rowling’s pocket. Money that she is not shy about using for hateful causes. It’s a perpetuating cycle, and Lithgow is one of the few actors who could’ve bowed out and been fine. (Nick Frost, looking at you too, buddy.)
Doesn’t watching the old films also perpetuate that? Absolutely, but Garfield does make a fair argument that the situation sucks for everyone involved. The trans community who obviously have the worst deal thanks to the inhumane legislation that Rowling champions, and the artists who got to watch years of their craft be tarnished by a horrible woman. She really did everyone dirty.
You can watch Garfield’s comments below:
Correction: A previous version of this article referred to Rowling as “Joanna” instead of “Joanne.” Mike deeply and sincerely regrets this error. The Joanna community did not deserve that stray.
