A group of unravel and Herald-Tribune staff along with family and friends at Barnes & Noble the night "Harry Potter & The Cursed Child" was released. Photo by Rachel S. O'Hara
“Harry Potter and the Cursed Child” was released almost two weeks ago, and initial sales were brisk — More than 2 million copies were sold in the U.S. in its first two days of publication. But then the feedback came in, and suffice to say some fans thought the charm was a bit tarnished. The play itself, in London, got rave reviews, though, so it’s a safe assumption that much was done on stage to give the script the context many readers found lacking.
A handful of us were excited to revisit the world of Harry Potter and snapped up copies of “Cursed Child” as soon as it released. Here’s what we thought of the script:
Because of the play format, there wasn’t as much exposition as in a typical Harry Potter book. The plot was really heavy-handed and hard-driving. Several exchanges between Harry and his son felt really cliched. Overall, the world in this story feels a lot less defined and rich than the world of the previous Harry Potter books. It’s nice to revisit these characters again and to go back in time. But the script by itself felt thin and I wanted to know more about the inner thoughts and feelings of the characters, which would ultimately be up to the stage actors to fill in. — Maggie Clark
It was fun to revisit the Potterverse, but the story too often felt forced. The dialogue was true to the characters, for the most part, but flat in some places and occasionally just hokey. Overall, a fairly forgettable diversion. The original Potter books were true magic; this one is smoke and mirrors. Read it if you’re a completist; otherwise, wait to see the actual production if you get a chance. — Kat Dow
The best descriptor for “Cursed Child” for me is “irrelevant.” While I am nostalgic for the Harry Potter world I grew up with, a play dragged over bitter spikes of out-of-character interactions with our original trio is not what I wanted. Scorpius Malfoy is delightful, but his character did not make the play worth it to me, and I do not consider it part of the “real” Harry Potter universe. — Dahlia Ghabour
I enjoyed it. I thought I might trip over the script style, but it read quick and easy like the other books. It was fun to meet new characters and revisit old favorites. I still felt the magic, though it may have been a little rusty. But it took me on a twisting adventure of friendship and a journey between good and evil, so still definitely very Potter-ish. — Elizabeth Johnson
It feels as though someone took my favorite blanket from childhood and turned it into a teddy bear. The nostalgia is pretty great. The original blanket was fine. And parts of the bear just don’t feel right. I do want to see it live, because a play isn’t meant to be read. It’s meant to be seen. There might be more magic in this than the text implies. — Maggie Menderski
In “Cursed Child,” much of the plot went back to telling the story of The Boy Who Lived. While it’s one we all know and love, it felt like the play was just retelling a story we’ve heard before, without adding much of anything new. Still, it was nice to pull out the wands and robes and relive the magic. — Caitlin Ostroff
What did you all think? Let us know on our Facebook page.
