“I'm still smelling dark magic here.”

June 4, 2017 4:29 PM

Voldemort: Origins of the Heir [YouTube] [Teaser Trailer] “We wondered, ‘What made Tom Riddle become Voldemort? What happened in those years, and what really went down at Hogwarts when he came back?’”director Gianmaria Pezzato said. “There are some clues in the books which have not been transposed at all in the movies, but a lot goes unspoken. This is the story we want to tell: The rise of the Dark Lord before Harry Potter and his first demise.” [via: WeGotThisCovered]

• Voldemort live-action fan film moves forward with Warner Bros. blessing [Polygon]

“In July 2016, the crowdfunding campaign was suspended and it wasn’t until a little later that Tryangle made the decision to move forward following a conversation with the studio. “We had a private and confidential discussion with Warner Bros who contacted us during the period of the crowdfunding campaign,” director Gianmaria Pezzato told Polygon via email. “The only thing we can say is that they let us proceed with the film, in a non profit way, obviously.” [...] The main reason that Pezzato and co-director Stefano Prestia were able to get away with Origins of the Heir was because they decided to make the movie for no profit and release it for free on YouTube. With the legal battle out of the way, Pezzato said they could focus on the story they wanted to tell. The director told Polygon the concept came from re-reading the sixth novel, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, which spurred a number of questions they hadn’t thought about the first time around.”

• Why 'Harry Potter' Fans Shouldn't Get Too Excited Over The Voldemort Prequel News [Bustle]

“Presumably, because of the fact that Warner Bros. nor J.K. Rowling will be involved in the film, the team around Voldemort: Origins of the Heir will have to take extra care not to utilize Harry Potter material that could be seen as copyright infringement. This is yet another reason to keep the excitement at bay. This aura of small scale production should keep expectations realistic, too: things like a wide theatrical release, widespread marketing, and, yes, even references to the Harry Potter films will most likely be minimal. That's not a knock on Tryangle Films or Voldemort: Origins of the Heir, mind you. It just means that they may have to follow the production of this fan-made film very closely, so you know when and where you can watch it because it won't have the boost of a big studio behind it.”

posted by Fizz (17 comments total)

Previously on the blue: discussion of a similar would-be fan film for Star Trek, including various copyright issues. (For updates on the situation and an overview, there's AxaMonitor.)
posted by Halloween Jack at 4:46 PM on June 4, 2017

99% chance this gets a Cease and Desist before the end of the summer.

(Sometimes I really hate the way copyright law works.)
posted by andreaazure at 4:49 PM on June 4, 2017 [1 favorite]

Presumably, based on the information in the FPP, WB have made informal representations of the type "we won't sue you as long as this is not for profit fan film and you don't x, y, z". While IP law isn't my field, and I note that the threat of legal action is often sufficient to scare people into submission, I do wonder whether the makers might be able to rely on promissory estoppel, were WB to sue in contradiction of any representations that they would not do so. The basis for a defence based on an estoppel would, I think, be made out in English law. Does anyone who knows more about this want to chime in and let me know how such an approach might fare, were it tried?
posted by howfar at 5:31 PM on June 4, 2017 [1 favorite]

If the project is non-profit, then the promissory estoppel point is probably moot (insofar as there would be no damages, or basis for injunctive relief).
posted by a very present absence at 5:59 PM on June 4, 2017 [3 favorites]

JK did say a while back that she was fine with written fan fic (but not slash). There's a possibility that she might say what the heck, or do so after checking the script.
posted by Ber at 8:17 PM on June 4, 2017

If this doesn't get axed, is it going to get an actual theatrical release? Not that that matters as much these days; showing up on Netflix would probably be more of a thing. And a substantial number of people will assume it's on par with the other films and their top-notch production values. In other words, this will largely be seen as a disappointment (insofar as it's literally seen at all), because comparisons with the other films are all but inevitable. I hate to have a defeatist, "why try?" attitude, but "go large or go home" would definitely apply in the "Making a Harry Potter Movie" category.
posted by zardoz at 9:13 PM on June 4, 2017 [1 favorite]

Promissory Estoppel and the Gavel of Fire.

Now THAT'S a film!
posted by fallingbadgers at 9:36 PM on June 4, 2017 [13 favorites]

No.
posted by Hermione Granger at 9:56 PM on June 4, 2017 [11 favorites]

From that Polygon quote:

The main reason that Pezzato and co-director Stefano Prestia were able to get away with Origins of the Heir was because they decided to make the movie for no profit […]

No. Just no. It looks like Pezzato was not at liberty to talk about the exact deal they made with WB and only confirmed one of the stipulations was that they would not be making a profit on an IP they don’t own. But the way Polygon is throwing this up as the “main reason” will just be construed by others into an example where it is OK to use other people’s IP as long as you aren’t making money off of it. Stop that.

At least they didn’t bring in nonsense arguments like Bustle:

Presumably, because of the fact that Warner Bros. nor J.K. Rowling will be involved in the film, the team around Voldemort: Origins of the Heir will have to take extra care not to utilize Harry Potter material that could be seen as copyright infringement.

No. They have been in touch with WB, so none of this will be infringing as they will have permission to use the material they want to use. We can be pretty sure that they have permission to use the name Voldemort for one, as WB did not make them rename the film.

Shoddy copyright reporting in regards to fanmaterial aside, it will be interesting to see what they make of it. And how easily it will be accepted as canon by the fanbase, or cast aside as an alternative universe spin-off. I do like how they are going to try and tell Voldemort’s history through an other character. This might also get them around having to include scenes from Hogwarts et al, making it easier to shoot as a fan film.
posted by Martijn at 11:49 PM on June 4, 2017 [3 favorites]

You know what?

I kind of feel like maybe every corner of this one story doesn't need to be explored relentlessly. I was a little bit disappointed that The Cursed Child returned to the same themes and events as the original novels. I want to see truly new stories that aren't weighed down with "AND THAT LITTLE BOY GREW UP TO BE..." moments. I don't want prequels presented as puzzles for fans to play connect-the dots. I want new stories and new characters.
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 3:48 AM on June 5, 2017 [7 favorites]

My reaction to this is similar to my reaction to the first Watchmen film trailer:

"Someone sure went to a lot of trouble...."
posted by He Is Only The Imposter at 6:12 AM on June 5, 2017

I want new stories and new characters.

Yeah but on the other hand I'm pretty psyched for the scene where we find out that Tom built C3PO.
posted by officer_fred at 6:42 AM on June 5, 2017 [5 favorites]

Yeah but on the other hand I'm pretty psyched for the scene where we find out that Tom built C3PO.
In Phantom Menace, the kids would shout, "Wizard!" I wonder if they'll shout Jedi in this one.
posted by cottoncandybeard at 7:12 AM on June 5, 2017 [1 favorite]

The whole point of the Polygon article is the rights-holders allowing this to go forward in exchange for no profit and a free release on YouTube so I'm a bit confused why everyone here is convinced this isn't going to happen.
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 8:22 AM on June 5, 2017 [1 favorite]

A few unanswered questions I'm curious about (perhaps others here can answer these):

Doesn't J. K. Rowling still have IP rights in the characters? Which would mean a threat of a lawsuit from Rowling if they don't already have her permission? (Do they?) I mean, even if Rowling sold exclusive film rights to Warner Bros., it seems to me WB alone wouldn't have the right to grant someone else the right to make a HP movie - WB's permission would be necessary but not sufficient.

Second, even if the movie's producers engage in this as a not-for-profit activity, YouTube (Google) stands to make money off of it of it is released on their platform. Does that complicate things? Would WB potentially have an actionable claim against Google?
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:49 AM on June 5, 2017

I am just going to say it is kind of nice seeing the big studios/publishing houses allowing what is in effect fans to proceed with a fan project, especially after all the horror stories about Paramount/Star Trek and Games Workshop/Warhammer 40K.
posted by Samizdata at 9:46 AM on June 5, 2017

I hope the acting is better than the voiceover. "Fan-made" doesn't have to mean "who needs talent?"
posted by Mo Nickels at 2:58 PM on June 5, 2017 [1 favorite]