In what seems to be an endless game of hot potato, the Harry Potter films have now, again, jumped ship from Peacock to HBO Max (ShowMax). The definitive tentpole fantasy franchise of the 2000s, which began with a record $93 million opening weekend and $974 million global gross (second only to Titanic at the time) in November 2001 and ended with a record $169 million opening weekend and $1.34 billion global cume (behind only Titanic and Avatar at the time) in July of 2011 essentially has two homes.



The films obviously belong to Warner Bros., but the theme park attractions (where much of the fandom is nurtured) belongs to Universal Studios. Anyway, to mark the occasion, and since I’ve never sat and done this before, I have used science, math and dark magic to create the official, 104% accurate ranking of all eight Harry Potter movies. I like all of these films to various degrees, but, as always, this list will not be your list, because what fun would that be?



<div class="wp-block-image"><figure class="aligncenter size-large is-resized"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" src="https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-51353859-1024x794.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-52426" width="652" height="505" srcset="https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-51353859-1024x794.jpg 1024w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-51353859-300x233.jpg 300w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-51353859-768x596.jpg 768w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-51353859.jpg 1528w" sizes="(max-width: 652px) 100vw, 652px" /><figcaption>LONDON &#8211; NOVEMBER 04: Writer J K Rowling with actors, Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson at the UK Film Premiere of &#8216;Harry Potter And The Philosopher&#8217;s Stone&#8217;, held at the Odeon, Leicester Square on 4th November 2001, in London. (Photo by Dave Benett/Getty Images).</figcaption></figure></div>



Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets&nbsp;(2002)



Budget:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$100 million



Opening weekend:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$88.36 million



Domestic box office:     $262.23 million



Worldwide box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;$878.75 million



By default, this Chris Columbus-directed sequel has the challenge of being the only chapter that’s essentially an “episode of the week.” It’s not the introductory chapter and it’s arguably the only one that doesn’t really establish key relationships or plot points within the broader eight-film saga. It also has to try and tell a supernatural murder mystery where no one actually dies, but it still gets gets for some genuinely terrifying creature effects (the deluge of spiders and the final monster are absolutely trying to scare your kids senseless). However, even in this “inessential” chapter, Richard Harris’ Dumbledore offers up the key thesis of the saga, namely that a person’s value is not about their destiny or lineage but rather about the choices they make in good times and bad.



Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince&nbsp;(2009)



Budget:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$250. million



Opening weekend:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$77.84 million ($158 million Wed-Sun)



Domestic box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$302.09 million



Worldwide box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;$934.76 million



I’m a little “biased” as they say, because this sixth film is based on one of my favorite books in the series, and yet seems to omit the very things that make the book pop. We get almost no “origins of Voldemort” material and very little in terms of Snape’s backstory, instead saving that for one long montage in the final picture. Moreover, and this is not necessarily a criticism (because it works for this adaptation, but the film painfully telegraphs what in the book was a jaw-dropping plot twist. Even with an overindulgence in hormonal hijinks, this one still works as a visual differentiation while Tom Felton’s Malfoy shines as a young man tortured by the implications of actually doing evil as opposed to merely “being” evil.



Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (2001)



<div class="wp-block-image"><figure class="alignright size-large is-resized"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" src="https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-78345740-1024x683.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-52425" width="354" height="236" srcset="https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-78345740-1024x683.jpg 1024w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-78345740-300x200.jpg 300w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-78345740-768x512.jpg 768w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-78345740-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-78345740-2048x1365.jpg 2048w" sizes="(max-width: 354px) 100vw, 354px" /><figcaption>Harry Potter Posters lined down 54th steet (Photo by Jim Spellman/WireImage) *** Local Caption ***</figcaption></figure></div>



Budget:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$125 million



Opening weekend:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$90.29 million



Domestic box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$317.87 million



Worldwide box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;$974.71 million



This table-setting chapter is a remarkable example of efficient character introduction (three of four main adults, Hagrid, Dumbledore and McGonagall, appear fully-formed in the prologue), and the sheer inexperience of our young actors puts the “burden” on the elder pros. Even so, Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Ruper Grint nail the core characters with able support from the likes of Richard Harris, Robbie Coltrane, Maggie Smith and Alan Rickman. The mystery is (obviously) kids stuff, but the film works as a refreshingly stand-alone story which didn’t feel the need to offer an entire saga’s worth of loose ends. That’s another example of Hollywood learning the wrong lessons from a blockbuster smash. At the very least, Chris Columbus deserved a special Oscar for casting this entire saga pitch perfect from the start.



Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban&nbsp;(2004)



Budget:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$130 million



Opening weekend:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$93.69 million



Domestic box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$249.76 million



Worldwide box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;$795.63 million



This Alfonso Cuarón-directed chapter is often considered a favorite for folks who otherwise don’t care for the franchise. The film refreshingly upends the comparatively conventional visual template, including putting Harry and his friends in civilian close and giving the adult cast a stake in the core story, but it’s also among the few that more-or-less requires you to have read the book to get the nitty-gritty details. Also, Gary Oldman’s Sirius Black has too little screen time, although Harry’s friendship with Professor Lupin (David Thewlis) is an emotional highlight and a delight for those of us who “discovered” Thewlis in Naked Lunch, The Island of Dr. Moreau and/or Dragonheart. A solid stand-alone chapter, and a “calm before the storm” entry which barely mentions “He Who Must Not Be Named.”



Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)



<div class="wp-block-image"><figure class="alignleft size-large is-resized"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" src="https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-828213258-1024x640.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-52428" width="398" height="249" srcset="https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-828213258-1024x640.jpg 1024w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-828213258-300x188.jpg 300w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-828213258-768x480.jpg 768w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-828213258-1536x960.jpg 1536w, https://cms.forbesafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/GettyImages-828213258.jpg 2000w" sizes="(max-width: 398px) 100vw, 398px" /><figcaption> (Photo by Jane Mingay &#8211; PA Images/PA Images via Getty Images)</figcaption></figure></div>



Budget:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$150 million



Opening weekend:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$102.68 million



Domestic box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$290.20 million



Worldwide box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;$896.68 million



The best of J.K. Rowling’s books results in a merely “very good” feature film adaptation. While I get Mike Newell’s decision to omit most of the non-Harry Potter material from the infamously long source material, the film ends up having a certain episodic feel. Moreover, in a chapter that should be filled with melodrama, the “stiff upper lip” British mentality makes it feel a bit more functional than it should while the visiting schools hilariously reinforce certain gender stereotypes (Clémence Poésy’s Fleur Delacour is miserable in each TriWizard competition). Nonetheless, the action scenes are pretty great, the climax works despite itself and Ralph Fiennes (cast to type) makes a fine entrance as Voldemort in the flesh. Robert Pattinson’s entrance as the doomed Cedric Diggory made my jam-packed IMAX showing sigh with thirst/lust. They weren’t wrong.



Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II&nbsp;(2011)



Budget:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$125 million



Opening weekend:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$169.19 million



Domestic box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$381.19 million



Worldwide box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;$1.342 billion



I’m not sure why director David Yates (who helmed the last four of these) decided that this series finale should the one to run barely two hours, especially when they spend much of the first act in a side quest to fetch a Horcrux from Gringotts bank. Nonetheless, if the last 2/3 feel a little rushed, with much of the “battle of Hogwarts” feeling a little truncated, at least it doesn’t wear out its welcome. This series finale nails the landing, giving big character moments (including Julie Walters’ Molly Weasley righteously killing of Helena Bonham Carter’s Bellatrix Lestrange) to everyone of consequence and prioritizing a satisfying finale over jaw-dropping twists. Rickman shines, the forest walk hits like a ton of bricks, and the Harry/Voldemort showdown cleverly adds a physicality to what was mostly a point-and-shoot duel.



Oh, and the epilogue is as effective now as it was in print form. These kids didn’t want to be kings and masters, they just (like Sam and Frodo) wanted to live another day. Especially ten years later, after so many other pop culture juggernauts came to a whimpering end, it’s beyond impressive that&nbsp;Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II&nbsp;just ended its story in a logical and satisfying fashion without trying to outsmart the fans or subvert expectations. Hell, in this pop culture, a smooth landing is the biggest surprise of all. Had it all ended here, without the thus-far botched prequel franchise (and, yeah, without the author earning the ire of her fandom), I still think&nbsp;Harry Potter&nbsp;would still stand alongside (or above)&nbsp;Star Wars&nbsp;as a definitive pop culture myth.



Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix&nbsp;(2007)



Budget:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$150 million



Opening weekend:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$77.1 million ($139.72 million Wed-Sun)



Domestic box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$292.14 million



Worldwide box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;$942.64 million



It is a little ironic that the worst, most padded book in the series makes for one of the very best movies. David Yates made his “Wizarding World” directorial debut with this fifth film. Michael Goldenberg took over (just this once) for regular screenwriter Steven Kloves and cut the source material to the bone, creating a coming-of-age adventure whereby our young heroes were left to fend for themselves as the outside world (and the adult authority figures in their midst) either turned on them or were unable to help. With nobody believing that Voldemort was actually back, it’s up to Harry to actually earn his stripes and teach his classmates to defend themselves, as this thrilling chapter culminates with a wizard battle royal that highlights all the heroes and villains kicking each other’s asses in IMAX-friendly fashion.



Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I&nbsp;(2010)



Budget:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$125 million



Opening weekend:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$125.02 million



Domestic box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;$296.13 million



Worldwide box office:&nbsp;&nbsp;$960.43 million



This “part one” of the two-part adaptation of the final novel sends Harry, Hermione and Ron on the run from a now dominant Death Eater army. The heroic trio has to fend for itself as their allies perish at the hands of Voldemort’s empowered genocidal army. Concurrently, now the actors have to step up as they all deliver franchise-best performances. While the film is generally a character-driven tone poem, drenched in fear and despair, it does have several exciting and exceedingly tense action scenes. As a stand-alone picture, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I is a pitiless plunge into hell, a sad and bitter drama where beloved childhood memories vanish in a puff of figurative (or in Hermione&#8217;s case, literal) waves of a wand. Seven films in, Harry Potter gets its Empire Strikes Back, and it’s awesome.



By Scott Mendelson, Forbes Staff

Premiere of “Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone”

All 8 ‘Harry Potter’ Movies Ranked Worst To Best

The first Harry Potter novel turns 20 this month, but the franchise’s earnings power seems to be getting only stronger with age. Author J.K. Rowling earned $95 million over the 12 months to June, before taxes and management fees, by FORBES’ estimate. That not only places the British novelist third on our list of the world’s highest-paid celebrities, it also earns her the title of the world’s highest-paid author, surpassing the prolific James Patterson (No. 9, $87 million), who has held the crown for nearly a decade.
<a href="http://www.forbesafrica.com/homepage/2017/06/13/celebrity-100-worlds-highest-paid-celebrities-2017/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Celebrity 100: The World&#8217;s Highest-Paid Celebrities Of 2017</a>
Rowling’s 12-month earnings have not exceeded $19 million since 2008, when she topped FORBES’ Celebrity 100 with an astounding $300 million. This year’s surge is largely due to her stage play, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. Though Rowling has numerous revenue streams from the Harry Potter franchise, she made nearly half of this year’s earnings from writing about the Boy Who Lived. The stage play, written by Jack Thorne based on an original new story by Rowling, Thorne and John Tiffany, was the bestselling book of 2016 in the U.S., U.K. and a number of other countries. In the U.S., it has sold over 4.5 million copies since its July release, according to NPD Bookscan, which covers approximately 85% of the U.S. print book market. Harry Potter and the Cursed Child also buoyed the sales of Rowling’s back catalogue. Rowling sold 8.4 million print units in the U.S. over the past 12 months, topping her nearest competitor, James Patterson, by 2.5 million units, according to NPD Bookscan. Though the vast majority of Rowling’s sales are hardcover units, a knowledgeable source says that her company Pottermore returned to profitability in this fiscal year largely thanks to a surge in e-book sales.
Across the pond, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child has also made millions for Rowling. The stage play topped the charts in Rowling’s native Britain with <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/dec/31/bestselling-books-2016-analysis-ghost-christmas-past" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">1,372,402 copies sold in 2016</a>. The West End production of Harry Potter and the Cursed Child is a smash hit, critically and commercially. It won nine Olivier Awards, an all-time record for a West-End production, and is sold out well into 2018. Next April, the play will transfer to Broadway, where it will likely bring greater profits for Rowling due to higher ticket prices (and perhaps a Tony).
The second-largest chunk of her income comes from the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, a chain of themed attractions at Universal Parks &amp; Resorts. Rowling receives low double-digit millions from a share of ticket, merchandise, sponsorship and food and beverage revenue. Wizarding World has been a massive boon for Universal Studios since the first one opened in 2010 at the Islands of Adventure park in Florida. Attendance at Universal Studios’ theme parks rose 80% to 47.4 million from 2010 to 2016, according to <a href="http://www.aecom.com/theme-index/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">industry reports</a> by the Themed Entertainment Association and AECOM.
Universal Studios spent a king’s ransom for the Harry Potter licensing rights and building the attractions—the first Wizarding World <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/16/business/media/16harry.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reportedly cost $265 million</a>—but it has more than paid off. “From my point of view being a theme park designer, the Harry Potter series is more valuable and even bigger than Star Wars,” says Edward Marks, Co-CEO of the Producers Group, an international theme park production company.
<blockquote>“Potter crosses all ages, all sexes and connects with almost everyone.”</blockquote>
He has worked with Universal on and off since 1990 but was not involved in Wizarding World. According to Marks, the Wizarding World attractions, which are highly immersive, were an artistic and commercial gamechanger for Universal. “Harry Potter changed the way theme parks are designed and built,” he says.
Rowling’s latest film, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, is her lowest-grossing movie ever with a “mere” worldwide gross of $814 million on an $180 million production budget. But thanks to her renown and her screenwriter credit, Rowling got a low double-digit percentage of the net box office, a much higher share than most authors, ultimately receiving over $10 million, by our estimate. Though the sequel, slated for 2018, will likely gross less worldwide (and certainly in North America), the warm critical reception to the first film could give the next few installments a leg up, says Scott Mendelson, FORBES contributor and box office pundit. “Since most folks liked the first Fantastic Beasts, all Warner Bros. has to do is make a decent or better sequel and they will have goodwill for at least one or two more, at which point they are home free even if the last two stink.”
As long as the films are budgeted reasonably &#8211; $200 million or less, says Mendelson &#8211; Rowling should be able to continue to make a pretty penny off the big-screen adventures of Newt Scamander if they can gross $600 million worldwide. As for the original Harry Potter movies, Warner Bros. recently sold the television airing rights to NBC Universal in a seven-year deal estimated at $250 million, according to the <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/nbcuniversal-places-big-bet-on-harry-potter-fantastic-beasts-1470628862" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Wall Street Journal</a>. We estimate that Rowling received a low-double digit share of the deal with payments divided over the seven years.
<a href="http://www.forbesafrica.com/homepage/2017/06/23/george-clooney-get-233-million-casamigos-tequila-sale/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">George Clooney Could Get Up To $233 Million From Casamigos Tequila Sale</a>
After a phenomenal year, Rowling’s earnings are set to dip since she will not be publishing a new Harry Potter book within our 12-month scoring period. But between her upcoming Broadway production, the Fantastic Beasts sequels and a possible Wizarding World in Beijing, she might continue to top Patterson in years to come.
The Celebrity 100 ranks “front of camera” entertainers around the world by pretax earnings from June 1, 2016 to June 1, 2017, before deducting fees for agents, lawyers and managers. Our numbers are based on figures from IMDB, Nielsen, NPD Bookscan and Pollstar, as well as interviews with industry experts and many of the stars themselves. &#8211; Written by <a class="link preload-hidden ng-binding" href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/hayleycuccinello/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Hayley C. Cuccinello</a>, FORBES STAFF

Tag: Harry Potter

FORBES AFRICA SOCIAL MEDIA

All 8 ‘Harry Potter’ Movies Ranked Worst To Best

How J.K. Rowling Earned $95 Million In A Year