Though the world loves J.K. Rowling, it was less than excited about her first post-Potter novel, The Casual Vacancy. In fact, you’d be hard-pressed to find a handful of people who say that they enjoyed it.

“It was too slow.” “It was too boring.” “Nothing happened.” “I didn’t like any of the characters.” “I couldn’t get past the first few chapters.” I’m in no way trying to trivialize the opinions of those who didn’t like The Casual Vacancy or insult their opinions in any way. These are simply the complaints that I’ve heard most often, even from other Hypable staff members. It’s totally okay for people to feel that way. Not everyone has to like everything. (Hey, the Hypable review of the book isn’t even totally positive!)

However, now that the miniseries (starring, notably, Dumbledore himself) is about to premiere in the United States, it’s time to reconsider your stance on The Casual Vacancy and at least attempt to watch the miniseries.

Related: J.K. Rowling’s The Casual Vacancy premieres to strong ratings on BBC One

The story is better than you think

A quick summary

Because The Casual Vacancy has, over the last few years, faded into the background, I feel that a short synopsis of the general plot would be useful:

In the wake of Barry Fairbrother’s sudden death, a casual vacancy has been left on the Pagford Parish council. Because they’re in the middle of an important rezoning debate/decision, Pagford residents scramble to elect another council person. Chaos ensues and secrets about the villagers begin to hit the Parish Council online forum from an anonymous user who calls themselves “The_Ghost_of_Barry_Fairbrother.” While the adults deal with the vacancy, the younger generations try to deal with the consequences of the adults’ actions and decisions.

(Hopefully my summary was at least a little more enticing than the one on the book…)

It’s an interesting character piece

Yes, The Casual Vacancy can be described as slow-moving, but it’s meant to be that way. We’re meant to examine these characters whose personalities are more prevalent in the world than any of us would like to admit. We’re also supposed to either see qualities of them in ourselves or figure out how to learn from their mistakes. At least, that’s my take on it.

The story is set in motion by the death of an average middle-aged man and a lot of the characters are quite a bit older than ones we’re used to reading about or watching, but none of them are 100% unrelatable. I found that I could relate to quite a few of the adult characters, even the ones who are married or who are a decade or two older than I. They’re all flawed people, some more than others. But the majority of them are doing the best that they can, given their circumstances.

That’s not to say that there aren’t any young people to relate to. Sure, the adults get a lot of emphasis, but it’s the young people in the story that really move things along. They’re the ones who are forced to live with their parents and their elders’ decisions, which is a great departure from following Harry Potter & co. while they forge their own paths and make their own choices.

Essentially, the most interesting part of this character piece is that there are no villains or heroes, just people living with the consequences of decisions (whether or not they’re the ones who made them).

It’s political, but it’s not lofty or preachy

I’m not one for politics. I don’t like the way people or ideas are dragged through the mud, or how selfish and close-minded politicians can be when making certain decisions. Politics especially don’t make for great reading material. Yet, I found myself drawn in by the politics in this book.

Though it’s a bit cliche that a seemingly perfect village like Pagford would have a dark side to it, J.K. Rowling’s version of those kinds of politics are more heart-wrenching than shocking. The village’s turmoil stems from one of the oldest conflicts: rich versus poor, an issue pretty much everyone can relate to or empathize with.

Krystal, one of the novel’s resident young people and main characters, is at the center of the political issue. She’s my favorite character in the story not because she’s charming or highly intelligent (because she’s neither), but because she’s the one most affected by Fairbrother’s death and it’s through her character that the rest of the book comes into focus. (It just takes the book a little while to get to that point.)

It takes place in the real world, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s boring

Yes, The Casual Vacancy is pretty bleak. It’s not a happy-go-lucky story or a book that has a happy ending, which is what a lot of us (myself included) look for in novels. But, while the book can be depressing (as well as slow-moving), it does have a few charged scenes. In fact, the book’s climax is a race against time.

For all of its depressing points and storylines, it’s important to note that the book ends with a glimmer of hope. Hope for change. Hope for learning from past mistakes. Yes, the book is heavy, but it’s not all doom and gloom all the time.

Plus, the characters in the story speak how you’d expect normal people to speak. There are no insightful monologues or long and eloquent tales of regret. Instead, there’s quite a bit of swearing and #realtalk going down, which I really like. As much as I love J.K. Rowling’s dialogue in Harry Potter, I’m a big fan of the way she captures the way real people speak and behave in this story. It makes things and characters (mainly Krystal) much more entertaining.

You might like the story better as a miniseries

Many times, stories can feel more digestible and enjoyable when in a visual medium, like movies and film, rather than in a book. You might find that you like The Casual Vacancy more as a TV series than as a novel (which is totally okay!).

From what I’ve gathered, the miniseries has trimmed quite a bit of the fat to get to the meat of the story. It’s a slightly more exaggerated version of the book’s events, which may hold your attention and interest far better than the novel ever did (sorry, J.K. Rowling). The miniseries also clocks in under three hours long, so you know that everything that could have been cut or sped up has been.

It’s a BBC production

I’ll be honest: I only started watching BBC programs last year (and even then, I’m not the most avid consumer). However, it quickly became clear to me that BBC takes pride in the quality of their programming. The great majority of their programs are extremely well-done and really have a great effect on people (Sherlock, anyone?).

The point I’m getting at here is; since the BBC put this together it should be some indication of the quality of the series. Sure, the fact that J.K. Rowling wrote The Casual Vacancy is probably a very large part of why this story was made into a miniseries in the first place. BBC and HBO were probably banking on the fact that Potter fans would watch it.

But because it’s BBC that created it, you know it’s going to be of the highest quality. It isn’t going to feel non-cohesive or slapped together. In other words, if the book didn’t hook you, your second best chance of liking The Casual Vacancy is through this BBC-created miniseries.

It’s only 3 hours of your life

If you decide to give The Casual Vacancy a chance, just remember that watching the miniseries will only take up three hours of your life. That’s about as much time as a Hollywood blockbuster. It’s not that long. And, if you don’t like it, you can say that you gave the story a(nother) try without spending hours upon hours getting through the book.

But, if you do end up liking the BBC miniseries, you may find yourself gravitating back towards the book and giving it another go. Moreover, you might find that you like the book more this time around than you did originally. You never know!

So, here’s the big question: Will YOU be watching ‘The Casual Vacancy’ miniseries?

The first two parts of The Casual Vacancy air in the United States tonight on HBO at 7 p.m. EST.

Related: J.K. Rowling’s The Casual Vacancy mini-series is better than the book