5 Reasons Harry Potter Would’ve Been Better As A TV Show
With the passing of the acclaimed British actor, Richard Griffiths, last week (aged only 65) I found myself thinking about…
With the passing of the acclaimed British actor, Richard Griffiths, last week (aged only 65) I found myself thinking about his ten-year role on the Harry Potter series (one among many) as the cantankerous Vernon Dursley, Harry’s magic-phobic uncle. Saddened by the series’ first post-production death, and by the fact that it was such as commendable actor, I began to consider the, notable, lack of Griffith’s character towards the end of the movie series.
Whilst, indeed, the Dursleys were characters strictly featured in the first few chapters of each Potter book, their onscreen counterparts weren’t even afforded this in later years and their roles became increasingly non-existent. In fact, if I recall correctly, Griffiths’ Vernon did not even engage with Daniel Radcliffe’s Potter in the final installment. Such a pity, seeing as now it would of been amongst the last pieces of TV work Griffths ever did. The ever-decreasing role of the Dursleys was one amongst many omitted plotlines which had started to annoy me more and more as the Potter movie series came to a close.
As such, being such an avid fan of the book and movie series alike, I have considered how much more proficiently the Potter story could have been portrayed had it been adapted for television, rather than the big screen.