Hasbro Harry Potter

spinc

spinc

Ponderous
Joined
Apr 7, 2025
Messages
108
Hasbro just announced they have partnered with Warner Bros and will produce HP action figures in 2027!

Hasbro, a leading games, IP and toy company, today announced a new multi-year licensing partnership starting in 2027 with Warner Bros. Discovery Global Consumer Products (WBDGCP), making Hasbro the global primary toy licensee for the world of Harry Potter and the upcoming HBO Original HARRY POTTER series.

Hasbro’s innovative team will bring the Harry Potter universe to life through a range of film and HBO Original series-inspired products featuring dolls, role play, action figures & collectibles, interactive plush, board games and more to be revealed later this year.

“The world of Harry Potter and its unforgettable characters align perfectly with our mission to deliver a lifetime of play to generations of fans,” said Tim Kilpin, President of Toys, Games, Licensing and Entertainment at Hasbro. “As longtime fans ourselves, we’re honored to partner with Warner Bros. Discovery Global Consumer Products as the official global master toy licensee."

“Our new agreement with Hasbro arrives as the world of Harry Potter celebrates the 25th anniversary of the first film and continues to expand its magical legacy—powered by one of the most passionate and enduring fan communities in entertainment history,” said Robert Oberschelp, President of Warner Bros. Discovery Global Consumer Products. “Our partnership with Hasbro will deliver fresh, innovative toys, collectibles and games inspired by the beloved Harry Potter and Fantastic Beasts films and the new HBO Original TV series.”

The HBO Original HARRY POTTER series, from Warner Bros. Television, will debut in 2027 on HBO and will be available to stream on HBO Max where it’s available, including recent launch markets Germany and Italy and in the UK and Ireland, where the platform is confirmed to launch in late March. Exploring every corner of the wizarding world, each season will bring Harry Potter and its incredible adventures to new and existing audiences.

The series will star Dominic McLaughlin (Harry Potter), Arabella Stanton (Hermione Granger), Alastair Stout (Ron Weasley), John Lithgow (Albus Dumbledore), Janet McTeer (Minerva McGonagall), Paapa Essiedu (Severus Snape), Nick Frost (Rubeus Hagrid), and many more.
Click to expand...

I've been saying for years that I wanted Hasbro to do a Black Series-style of line for both Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings, it would work so well with their style. And I'm sure they will also do figures from the movies as well, I mean they're classics as this point. I know HP is a tainted brand at this point but I grew up with the books and movies and I loved them dearly as a kid, and I really appreciate them now. The recent Hogwarts Legacy was great and the series looks really good so far, so I'm honestly pretty excited at getting new figures.

Hopefully they are actual 6" black series-style figures and not just stylized mini-figures and such. Collector-style HP figures have always sold really well, I mean look at SH Figuarts's HP figures and Neca's, they were always very sought out, at least where I've lived.
 
Man, if Hasbro announced HP figures before Rowling turned out to be such a piece of shit I would've truly been all in on them. Now, blah.

But mostly posting because you mentioned wanting a Black Series style Lord of the Rings collection and good GAWD I'd buy the shit out of LOTR at Black Series scale and quality. I know the line didn't sell super well but the Indiana Jones figures were gorgeous. They'd crush aan LOTR line.
 
So only based on the new series it seems. I think it will be interesting to see how that show does, both quality and popularity.
 
I'm morbidly curious to see if that backfires - not only do I think they lost a lot of the audience through Rowling's antics, I think they'll also potentially run into people who just... don't want anyone other than the original cast in action figure format. Licensing HP basically saved Lego but that was before the well was poisoned, not sure they can strike lightning twice.
 
I suspect the number of Potter fans who will not support this due to Rowling's stance is being overstated just because most folks don't pay that close attention - I hadn't really paid attention to it myself as a more casual fan. But even if it is a decent percentage that will not support there are still tons of fans left just because of how massive it was/is. (I won't get into the irony that there are some folks who wanted to ban the books for the "witchcraft" who are probably now fans of her...) I think it has grown beyond her to be honest, the way Star Wars grew beyond Lucas - might be different if the books series was still in progress, but it is already on people's shelves in in their blu-ray collection and so on...which makes it nostalgia.

The bigger question to me is do the now nearly 40 year-olds that were the main Potter fans in the late 90s to late 2000's really want to see another adaptation? Especially as I don't think there was a major sense that the films were bad or disliked.
 
Personally, I separate the art from the artist. I mean, to give an example, Tolkien was a staunch Catholic who would not agree with many people today who enjoy his work, but they don't think about that, do they? And who knows how many of the CEOs of companies we enjoy products of are just like JKR or worse, but because we know nothing of their beliefs, we still support those companies.

And besides, JKR is so incredibly rich, whatever she is gaining from the sales of this line does not actually matter to her. So, at least personally, I can separate the art from the artist, especially when it meant so much to me as a kid (and I still enjoy that art today). It's okay if anyone hates her, though, or does not want to support the brand, you have to do what you think is right.
 
I don't separate the art from the artist when they're still making money off of it. Got no problem with Lovecraft stuff cos the man's long dead and would TRULY hate some of the projects being done with his name referenced in it (I'd pay money to watch HP Lovecraft watch an episode of Lovecraft Country, he'd be apoplectic). It's just so easy to go no-thanks for JK since she's so deeply tied to the IP still (and unlike, say, Walmart or AWS, who suck but are often a necessity depending on where you live, goddamn there's so many good stories about magical schools out there to fall in love with instead!).

I do think, based on what I see tabling at comic cons and stuff, that a good chunk of the fanbase has soured on her but not so much I think the show won't make money. You definitely can feel the ick when people see someone in full Hogwarts cosplay (like I've seen whole groups of people look at those cosplayers like they just dropped a heinous fart in front of them just sitting in my booth at comic cons) but those fans are still out there and I do agree that there's a quiet population of readers and movie watchers who can't be arsed to stay up to speed on current events. And they aren't as socially aware, as, say, Neil Gaiman fans who seemed to abandon all his work en masse when he turned out to be gross. But his work, weirdly, attracted the sort of person who won't tolerate monstrous behavior.

But truly the main question was asked above: will those over-40 fans show up to buy the figures? I'm betting not really, just based on some other IPs that didn't do great. Specifically I'm thinking of Overwatch (AMAZING figures but the gamers didn't want the toys) or D&D (shitty toys but a fan base that will honestly buy almost any damned thing with the ampersand on it but wanted nothing to do with the Hasbro toys). Indy falls into this, too. Quality was there but audience wasn't super strong for the product.

EDIT: I do think an LOTR series would attract buyers because I think LOTR has a good overlap with like, the types of guys spending 50 bucks on Mythic Legions or Savage Crucible figures who'd devour a good non-boutique collection, though.
 
Not to derail things, but if you had a 12-year-old kid who said they wanted to read Harry Potter, would you discourage that due to JK?

Unlike say a Roald Dahl, who I think some of his views on race can be found in his books at times (looking at you Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator), Rowling's anti-trans stuff isn't found in the books near as I can tell, while the content of the books are pretty good in terms of social messaging overall.
 
I don't know the first thing about being a parent, but I think at 12 they're ready to have the, "This person believes horrible things and engaging with their art means engaging with that" and "This is how to research where your money's really going" talks. I was already listening to Rage Against the Machine and The Clash by that age and actively researching what the lyrics were about. I grew up on Twilight Zone episodes about concentration camps and Hitler still being alive. That's the age when you either learn all art is political or you pretend it's not forever. I don't know if I would ban Rowling from my household, that's just going to make her more appealing to a kid, but I would at least leave a lot of Ursula Le Guin books around on all the tables.

Also, Rowling's views and biases are not absent from her work, they're just less examined because she has no gift for metaphor. Looking at you, goblin bankers and happy slave house elves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top