One of the longest running issues fans have had with the Harry Potter films is how they’ve been adapted from J.K. Rowling’s books.

In this fascinating bit from Rowling and Dan Radcliffe’s one-on-one conversation found on the Deathly Hallows – Part 2 DVD/Blu-ray, the pair discuss adaptation and why it would never be perfect. Rowling also reveals a couple of times she put her foot down when she read a script, including a conversation with producer David Heyman about Harry’s green eyes.

Radcliffe: What was lovely for us, and I think I speak for everyone on set. You were around a lot at the beginning and early on. And as you kind of saw that we weren’t going massively off script you backed off. Was that hard?

Rowling: It was easy and a relief. I was around a lot early on. I wanted the Great Hall to look right, I wanted Diagon Alley to look right. There were details that I saw so clearly in my mind. I knew I could help. I knew I could genuinely help and make it right for the readers. I felt a huge protectiveness and loyalty to the readership. Once I knew it was running, it was fine.

I have to say, inevitably you have to depart from the strict storyline of the books. The books are simply too long to make into very faithful films. I could think of many places it works just beautifully.

It didn’t have to be a word for word transcription.

Radcliffe: I do sometimes think, if we did make a 6 hour Harry Potter film there would be an audience.

Rowling: And they’d still be complaining that things were wrong. And they’d still want the directors cut. So let’s not even go down that route.

Radcliffe: Is there anything – talking about things being cut out – is there anything we’ve cut that you were upset about? And is there anything we put in that weren’t in the book that you thought were great? Because I remember with Alfonso and the Dementors..

Rowling: No, I remember exactly what it was with Alfonso. First of all, on the Dementor point I thought he did those beautifully. I loved the fact that they created the visceral dislike for the Dementors. I love what he did for the Dementors. What it was, there was something in the script. Alfonso really wanted to get music into the film. He put the choir in, which I loved. But at one point he had this bizarre scene where Flitwick was conducting and there were miniature people in an orchestra inside something. And I just, you see, this is my geekiness, I said to him, “But why?” I know it’s visually exciting, but part of what fans enjoyed about the literary world is there was a logic that underpinned it. There was always logic to the magic no matter however strange it became. I know it’s intriguing to go through the mouth of whatever it was and see these little people, but why? Why have they done it? For you to film it! That’s just what it feels like. You know, normally with the magic there’s a point. So we had a bit of a discussion about that.

Sometimes I’d dig my heels in about the funniest things. I’d say, “Yeah change the costume. Yeah it can happen in that city instead of that city. And all of a sudden, I’d say, ‘But they wouldn’t do that spell. Why would they do that there? So I think sometimes I confused people. But I also remember, right back at the beginning when you were cast I remember David Heyman calling me up and saying, “We’ve tried green contact lenses. We can digitally alter his eye color in post production. How important is it that his eyes are green?”

Radcliffe: That I will thank you for.

Rowling: And I said, um, “The only really important thing is that his eyes look like his mother’s eyes. So if you’re casting Lily, there needs to be a resemblance, but they don’t absolutely have to be green.” “Oh thank Christ,” he said. Were the lenses that awful?

Radcliffe: There is a very small percentage of people apparently who have a very extreme reaction to contact lenses. And I was one of them.

Rowling: You poor thing. I feel really bad.

Radcliffe: No, don’t worry! It was 10 years ago. It was really fine.

Yesterday we shared a part of the conversation where Rowling thought Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson were too attractive for the roles.

After all that talk of inclusivity, Star Trek Beyond falls into the Hollywood trap of implied sexuality.

Mild spoilers for Star Trek Beyond.

Star Trek Beyond, already a wildly anticipated movie, made headlines ahead of its release because of the franchise’s decision to introduce the first openly LGBT character: Mr Sulu, played by John Cho.

While this decision was certainly met with excitement, there was disappointment, too. The original Mr Sulu, George Takei, openly voiced his opinion that they should have introduced a new LGBT character rather than expand on original canon (as they have been the whole trilogy), while Simon Pegg beautifully argued that there was power in using an established character who wouldn’t be defined by his sexuality.

Then came the movie itself, and while the introduction of gay Sulu is still a great thing, we’re left sorely disappointed by Beyond‘s decision to depict the LGBT relationship — or rather, hardly depict it at all.

As reported by our friends at The Mary Sue, the scene featuring Sulu and his husband Ben depicts a “lukewarm” relationship, although Sulu is very affectionate with the pair’s daughter.

This is, unfortunately, a common problem in Hollywood when an LGBT couple — almost impossibly — makes it into a big franchise film. They’re allowed to be there, but having any kind of physical interaction even remotely resembling what a heterosexual couple might have still seems to be off-limits.

Related: Hollywood is failing the LGBT community: GLAAD slams Disney, Paramount and Warner Bros.

And, according to John Cho, there was actually a kiss filmed. “There was a kiss that I think is not there anymore,” he told Collider. “It wasn’t like a make-out session. We’re at the airport with our daughter. It was a welcome-home kiss. I’m actually proud of that scene, because it was pretty tough.”

Cho points out that Ben was played by a non-actor, writer Doug Jung, and says, “Obviously, I just met the kid, and then Doug is not an actor. I just wanted that to look convincingly intimate. We’re two straight guys and had to get to a very loving, intimate place. It was hard to do on the fly. We had to open up. It came off well, in my view.”

And we wish we could have seen it. Introducing a major LGBT character in the Star Trek franchise is a fantastic first step, and depicting two POC actors raising a child together is a great statement — but, unfortunately, the decision to cut out their kiss (which was already chaste, by the sounds of it) is emblematic of Hollywood’s continuous phobia of depicting LGBT relationships and intimacy on the big screen.

As Screen Crush also points out, this exact same scenario played out in Independence Day: Resurgence, too. In Finding Dory, the lesbian couple are only implied, in a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it sequence.

LGBT representation (when present at all) is always so subtle, evidently in fear of offending straight audiences while not totally erasing non-straight sexualities. And, sadly, even that is considered a big step forward — but maybe it’s time we start depicting humanity as it is, and not what society wished it was 100 years ago.

Here’s looking at you, Star Wars.

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child reviews from theater critics are glowing, so when the hell can Americans get a chance to see the play in New York?

With just days to go until The Cursed Child script book is released around the world, The New York Post’s theater reporter has spoken to sources who say the play will be coming to Broadway sooner rather than later. Producers are currently holding discussions to bring the play to NY as early as 2017.

They haven’t yet announced a Broadway engagement for “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child,” but New York theater people say it’s only a matter of time. Word is that Friedman and Callender are in negotiations for a Shubert theater possibly for next season. They may hit Toronto first, however.

The idea of The Cursed Child hitting Broadway so soon (“next season” could mean around May 2017) will come as a relief to American Harry Potter fans who would rather not travel overseas to see “the eighth story” (though it’s a little more affordable to do so right now thanks to #Brexit). It also speaks to this important fact: It’s important to see The Cursed Child rather than reading it.

If the show does go to Toronto first as The New York Post suggests it might, a trip to Canada would also be easier for Americans. Sorry, people who don’t live in North America.

This writer saw the play in June and absolutely loved the characters and magic happening on stage. But the story is… not the best. I’m very eager to see what fans, myself included, think of the story after reading the script book this weekend.

For her part, Rowling has promised that fans around the world will get to see the play. Only time will tell if she’s hinting at a movie or a world tour:

If ‘Cursed Child’ comes to Broadway next year, will you try to see it ASAP?

The West End production currently has dates running into May 2017, but additional dates are expected to go on sale in early August.

Present day Han Solo may’ve left the main Star Wars series after the events of The Force Awakens, but the character’s time in movie theaters is far from over.

The new Han Solo film from Lucasfilm — scheduled to hit theaters in May 2018 — might turn into a trilogy for the reluctant hero, according to the New York Daily News.

The paper reports that star Alden Ehrenreich has signed a three-picture deal, suggesting that the studio intends to expand the Han Solo spinoff into a trilogy. “They feel that his character has the right potential to become a central figure in several movies,” a source told NY Daily News. “They’re keeping things under wraps at the moment, but the deal is that he has signed for at least three movies.”

This makes a lot of sense given the popularity of the character coupled with his absence in Episode 8 and beyond. We also know that Lucasfilm and Disney have many, many grand plans for Star Wars in the years ahead: The very first Star Wars theatrical spinoff, Rogue One, opens later this year. Episode 8 then hits theaters a year later (2017), followed by Han Solo’s own movie (2018). Next comes Episode 9 in 2019, followed by yet another spinoff reportedly focused on Boba Fett in 2020.

As for 2021 and beyond? Only time will tell, but we expect more movies set in the worlds of The Force Awakens, Rogue One, and now Han Solo.

The Han Solo spinoff will be directed by LEGO Movie helmers Phil Lord and Christopher Miller. They’re currently deep into pre-production, as this tweet from Lord this morning shows:

“This is the first film we’ve worked on that seems like a good idea to begin with,” the directors said last July. “We promise to take risks, to give the audience a fresh experience, and we pledge ourselves to be faithful stewards of these characters who mean so much to us. This is a dream come true for us. And not the kind of dream where you’re late for work and all your clothes are made of pudding, but the kind of dream where you get to make a film with some of the greatest characters ever, in a film franchise you’ve loved since before you can remember having dreams at all.”