Don't milk poor 'Harry' 'til he's dry

(Last updated: 08/28/09 6:19pm) I can only tightly clinch my Harry Potter novels and hope the little wizard's name won't become as diluted as the Star Wars manufacturing machine.

The novels are enchanting and the movies come close to doing J.K. Rowling's written word justice.

There's no need to ruin it all with a cartoon mini-series, reality shows where women unravel sassiness to win a date with Harry, books based on the movies based on the books, or the creation of the American Quiddditch League.

I know people like to make money, and there's dough to be made with anything having to do with Harry, but it will only put the kibosh on the true spirit of Rowling's vision if it becomes anything more than the novels and films.

Just like there's no need to still be making "James Bond" films, there will be no need to make Harry Potter films after all the novels have been reproduced on the big screen.

Bond flicks are still being made after all the Ian Fleming novels have been turned into films. Why? Because Bond films still make the massive moolah —not because to filmmakers care about staying true the ethics of Fleming.

Anything with the "Harry Potter" label attached to it will have the opportunity to rake in dough even after the seventh book has been made into a motion picture — but the urge must be resisted.

Just like George Lucas should've refrained from making the last three "Star Wars" films, the wand-waving wizard must be stopped from showing up on screen after the cinematic version of the seventh book.

The last three "Star Wars" releases aren't in the same spirit of the galactic films made in the late '70s and early '80s. The newer films were made to show off cutting-edge computer images and high-tech sound, rather than tell a quality story.

There's a disjoint between the old "Star Wars" films and the new ones just like there would be a detachment if anything more were made of "Harry Potter" than the films.

Don't forget there's a beauty in leaving audiences wanting more. I think seven books with seven films is quite sufficient for Harry.

Even though I don't know of any plans for "Harry Potter" spin-offs, I'm still extremely worried about the possibility because of the money-hungry nature of people in the entertainment industry. Look at the plans to make "Indiana Jones 4" with the decrepit Harrison Ford.

As much as I appreciate the notion of marvelously creative writers making the big bucks like Rowling, I hope she has enough sense not to let the Potter enterprise be exploited. Rowling is rich and will remain rich for the rest of her life — I just hope she doesn't become greedy.

Ryan McCormick is the State News film reporter. Reach him at mccorm87@msu.edu.

Originally Published: 11/17/05 12:00am