This weekend marked the premiere of Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, the second in a five-part prequel series to the Harry Potter franchise.

Since the books came out in 1997, the world created by J.K. Rowling has been everywhere from the big screen to Broadway. Is it time to bring Harry and friends to the small screen?

If the Potterverse continues on its current trajectory, a television version seems inevitable. As a massive fan of the movies, I have mixed feelings about an attempt. It is hard to picture anybody other the Emma Watson as Hermione or Daniel Redcliff as Harry.

However, it would not be the first time that a book that became a movie went on to be a television series. There is a grand tradition in television history of bringing books to life. Networks such as The CW and Freeform have a history of breathing new life into familiar franchises.

The CW brought us The Vampire Diaries, and Freeform brought us Pretty Little Liars, The Lying Game, and Shadowhunters. Shadowhunters is particularly significant because a movie got done first. More on that later.

Netflix has kept up the tradition with classics in the making such as Anne with an E and the upcoming Chronicles of Narnia series. The Anne of Green Gables books came out in the early 1900s, and the Narnia books were published in the 1950s.

Both have had countless television and film adaptions come out in the 20th and 21st century. They have what we like to call staying power. They are classics, and every new interpretation is like discovering this world all over again.

When bringing a book to life on the big or small screen, there are a couple of different directions directors can go. One is to strive to stay close to the source material, including everything that they can fit.

That method seems like it would lend better to television than movies because a television series has more time to tell a story. For some reason though, it seems to go the other way around.

The Mortal Instruments, for example, was first attempted as a movie interpretation. Even though the casting was brilliant and the movie tried to stay close to the books, the movie flopped. When Shadowhunters came out, it was another chance to tell the story.

The creators of Shadowhunters decided to change a lot of the story, keeping the most important elements, but altering plotlines, character histories, and even a number of the relationships. As a result, the show was a lot more popular. It provided something new and fresh that the movie did not.

Some naysayers claim the acting is subpar, or that the changes are too much.

Freeform has a history of changing the stories for the book to television shows. The Lying Game is nearly unrecognizable when compared to the books, and the Liars in the Pretty Little Liars television series are much more likable and relatable than the girls in the books.

How would Harry Potter come across on the small screen? Well, they could fix some of the mistakes made in the movies. The movies were epic, but anybody who read the books first may take issue with how much the books took out.

As the books got longer, it became harder to fit everything into the roughly three hours allotted to a typical movie. For the seventh book, the theatrical entries went as far as splitting it into two films, but still, plotlines were missing.

The third movie left out a lot of backstory about the marauders. The fourth movie completely ignored Hermione's founding of SPEW: Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare. Leaving this plotline out altered later storylines, such as Kreacher's Tale and how Hermione and Ron kissed for the first time.

Harry's relationship with Cho didn't get explored to its fullest, and Ginny Weasley's potential got ignored for what were presumably considered more important plots at the time.

Some of the other Weasleys didn't even get introduced until the final two movies when Harry should have met them earlier, and Tonk's romance with Lupin barely got conceived.

Parts got added, and while I prefer Lavender and Ron's break-up in the films to the way it was handled in the books, the fire at the burrow in the sixth movie had many Potterheads up in arms.

The movies were amazing, and I think they did as best as could be done with the material under the constraints of a film. A television streaming show would not have the same limitations. They would have the gift of time.

They could also utilize technological advances in the film industry that have come into development since the movies premiered. That's assuming, of course, that it is within the budget.

Then again, it could be a flop; the acting could be terrible, the effects could be dire. Still, it could also be amazing. It has not been that long since the first movies came out, or the books, for that matter. Only time will tell if they have staying power, but based on the number of Potterheads so far, the odds are in favor of the Potterverse.

I expect many adaptions and interpretations will come out over the years, and I'm excited for the first one, be it live action or cartoon. I think they should maybe wait a bit longer, but I wouldn't be surprised if, after the Fantastic Beasts series reaches its conclusion, we hear talk of a television series in the works.

What do you think? Are you ready for Potter to make the leap to the small screen? What changes would you like to see? Have you already started casting in your head? Let's discuss in the comments!

Shadowhunters: 21 Times Sizzy Sizzled Like Never Before!

Start Gallery

Leora W was a staff writer for TV Fanatic..

Editorials

Editorials Photos