Total Film: Harry Potter "Franchise of the Decade"
December 14, 2009, 10:59 AM
This week, Total Film magazine is releasing their newest issue with ten different covers as part of their special on best of the decade. Harry Potter will be featured on one of the covers (also here in our galleries) as "Franchise of the Decade." Coming in at number 8, the cover says about Harry Potter: "From page to screen, how Harry Potter made movie magic. Plus, first word on the epic finale." If anyone can get scans of the feature inside the magazine, please send them to firstname.lastname@example.org!
Also, thanks to our Order partner RupertGrint.net we know the magazine will also have a feature on Rupert dressed as one of his favorite film characters, Napoleon Dynamite.
What 8 franchises could possibly be above Harry Potter? (I mean I could see maybe 3 franchises, but 8?)
Meh… Lord of the Rings is a bit too confusing for me… I think I was too little when I saw it to get it. I don’t know. Harry Potter (more specifically Hogwarts) has had this homey feeling about which I love (the first film being my favorite). I’m excited to hear what this anoucment is and I laughed when they said that mr. Grint is gonna dress up like Napoleon Dynamite (“Gosh.”).
why is always the GoF picture?? o.O XD
When will they be building “Lord Of The Rings World” in Orlando???
i think theyre not categorizing “best franchises” per say. theyre talking about the franchises that made the most money, and presumably that makes them the best. im very curious to know how many neutral harry potter fans see the movies anymore, cuz if i were them, i probably wouldve stopped around movie three. its just got to be too confusing you know? they try hard and ppl whove probably read the books maybe once each can limp along, but a non harry potter fan cannot simply plop down on the couch and watch the films. get what im trying to say here? its just proving the sheer amount of harry potter fans who go to the movies still, because i think the harry potter viewers are now strictly fans. i dont think anybody who doesnt follow the books are watching the movies anymore.
so, rounding up (getting off track as i often do) i think this is a pretty solid choice. i wouldve moved it up to like say, maybe 5th or something, but not hating on the choice
Should’ve been #1…
Awesome. Gotta keep my eye out so I can buy it!
Harry looks possessed in that picture.
Lord of the Rings definitely deserves to be #1 honestly. But HP shoudl have been at like #5 I would say… definitely above Spider-Man and James Bond in my opinion. But congrats to HP anyways!
Oh stop being biased guys, be happy it made the list, the films above it are better films. Just because you love HP it doesn’t mean you need to be biased to the point of being delusional. I love HP. And I don’t think the films deserve to be on the list.
Allow this sleepy Slytherin (boo… hiss?) to clear up confusion.
Harry Potter IS the Franchise of the Decade. If you check out the Total Film website, it doesn’t appear that they’re ranked cover to cover. It looks as though each cover is highlighting a different category altogether. So Harry Potter isn’t the 8th franchise; it’s the 8th cover in the series.
Even the text below the images on the site lists them as such: “Epic of the Decade” (LOTR) and “Blockbuster of the Decade” (Dark Knight) and “Superhero of the Decade” (Spiderman) and so forth. When it comes to franchise success, it actually IS about quantity. Otherwise, anything that has a sequel would be considered a franchise, which isn’t the case. A franchise has come to mean several related films that are commercial successes. “Casino Royale” lends evidence to this, as I don’t think anyone would consider the three Bond films made this decade an actual franchise unto themselves. The franchise there would be the 22 (released) Bond films collectively, which are really a bunch of mini-franchises in one big franchise. :-p But only 3 of them are from this decade, so the overall number doesn’t really matter anyway. Same goes for “Star Trek” as well. I am a sci-fi dork and I love all the Star Trek films, but there aren’t enough post-2000 Star Trek flicks to really constitute the Franchise of the Decade (and this year’s flick is the only super successful one in recent years).
And then there’s “Shaun of the Dead” to deal with. Very… not a franchise. Which makes it quite obvious that each cover is a different category.
Harry Potter: Franchise of the Decade
LOTR: Epic of the Decade
Dark Knight: Blockbuster of the Decade
Spiderman: Superhero of the Decade
Star Trek: Sci-Fi Flick of the Decade
Casion Royale: Reboot of the Decade
Sin City: Coolest Film of the Decade
Shaun of the Dead: Comedy of the Decade
Donnie Darko: Cult Film of the Decade
There Will Be Blood: Best Film of the Decade
So… you know… poof? [Wall of text over. :)]