New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Every now and then in this column, I like to break out of the television realm and cover a film mythology. Of course, Harry Potter, to be technical, is a book mythology, but with the release of the eighth and final film, I though it was time once again to explore a popular mythology of the big screen for a change.

Popular is indeed a key word here. A running theme in my ruminations on television mythologies is, with a few exceptions like Lost, the concept of a struggling, quality production, kept alive not by stellar ratings, but through the passion of hardcore fans, critical success, and perhaps a champion or two on the inside. Harry Potter, on the other hand, needs no such string pulling, it’s a legitimate phenomenon, perhaps the most successful cinematic mythology of the last decade.

Creator JK Rowling creates a world which combines real-life England, existing witch/wizard mythologies, such at the Philosopher/Sorcerer’s Stone, and a whole bunch of her own imagination, like the wizening sport of Quidditch. We enter the wizarding world through the eyes of the famous, both in reality and within the novel’s pages, Harry Potter, an abused boy with powers he never knew he had, and a dark history he sees as more of a burden than as a point of honor.

Of course, like sci-fi and fantasy mythologies immemorial, the fantastic is just the backdrop to explore greater themes, in this case growing up, but fans enjoy the minutia and continuity of the world building as much or more than any of the ideas the creator expresses.

Thing is, with Harry Potter (the films, at least), it debuted in the shadow of a far more fully realized, detail rich mythological world, that of The Lord of the Rings. The first installments of each literary fantasy adaptation came out a month apart in 2001 and, while both were well received, Harry couldn’t help but look lightweight next to the meticulously researched and realized Rings.

To be fair, given both the weightier source material from JRR Tolkein and the talented Rings director Peter Jackson, the fact that Potter was as acclaimed and as successful as it was is a testament to its near universal popularity. Prior to directing the first two Potter films, Chris Columbus had given us the likes of Home Alone and Mrs. Doubtfire, so the fact that the Potters turned out as well as they did in the face of the Rings behemoth is quite impressive.

It’s not that Columbus’ episodes are spectacular, especially as compared to Jackson’s masterpiece, but they are solid and represent probably the best work of his middling career. Fact is, their quality can probably be attributed more to Rowling’s clever novels than to anything he brings to the table. It’s also perhaps to the Potter franchise’s benefit that the least inspired director to work on the project tackles the first and lightest of the series.

As we all know, the series grows darker, deeper, more complex over each successive adventure, culminating in a pretty damned epic final battle for what is often considered to be a children’s story. Beginning with the third movie, the directors get more auteuristic, Alfonso Cuaron, Mike Newell, David Yates, and the series benefits. It’s still not in Rings territory gravitas-wise, but it’s certainly come a long way from the troll with a wand up its nose from the first story.

I’m looking back over this and I’m thinking that the Rings comparison makes it seem as if I’m dismissing Potter as mere fluff. I assure you, this isn’t the case. I would argue that were it too simple, the audience for Harry Potter’s adventure would be very limited. In fact, the Potter fan base is so broad, it encompasses far more than any one demographic, let alone children or young adults. I think the key to this is that Rowling never condescends to her youthful readers. She respects them and respects the process of coming of age. As a result, adults have embraced the series to perhaps an even greater degree than the kids.

One thing I cannot stress enough about Rowling’s achievement as well, beyond the fun mythology, beyond the maturing themes, even as early as the first book, she has a gift for clever storytelling. The big reveal at the end sure took me by surprise when I first read it, and yet it never seemed unearned. She has a gift for revelation, a narrative slight of hand, quite appropriate for a series about magic. All the way through the series, as the mythology grows denser, the separate tales grow more and more intertwined, emblematic of a greater vision for the series whole, she never loses her ability to surprise without resorting to narrative shortcuts. I gotta tell you, as we all ramped up to the final novel, I was probably as caught up in speculation mode as I was approaching the big old Lost finale last year.

So as the last stage of the Harry Potter phenomenon is now upon us, I reflect on its probable role in the nerd culture over the coming decades. Will it slip away into the cinematic ether or will it endure along side the likes of Rings and Star Wars? My guess is the latter. The clever storytelling, universal themes and fun, engaging mythology will continue to entertain old fans and welcome new ones. It’s quite the accomplishment already, a literary phenomenon in an age when literary phenomena are scarce, and a blockbuster triumph spread over eight movies. As the era of Harry Potter gives way to whatever new thing comes next, I have a feeling there will always be a place in our popular culture for the boy wizard and his friends.