Harry Potter books sold millions of copies, giving birth to a franchise that includes hit movies, video games and An HBO MAX's upcoming television series This is rumored to be the most expensive show ever produced. However, despite his enormous success, the worldwide saga of wizard may not be completely original. Court proceedings against author JK Rowling has been well documented in terms of plagiarism, with authors as Nancy Stuffer claiming that she stole ideas from her novels "Legend of Rah and Mugles" and "Larry Potter and his best friend Lily". Not only that, but also the filmmakers behind the 80s Troll fantasies believe they first came up with the image of Harry Potter.

Directed by Johnon Carl Buhler of one Naha's script, Troll tells the story of Torok (Frank Welker), a wicked troll king that torments and owns the Potter family in an attempt to restore its former glory. The father and son of the family also seem to be named Harry Potter (a feature of Michael Moriarti and Noah Hathaway, respectively), so you can understand why some people believe Rowling has seen the film before writing his best -selling fantasy saga. After all, the film is for a boy called Harry Potter who downloads troll (what happens in "Harry Potter and the wizard's stone") ... but is it accidental?

Rowling claims that the name of her character is to merge her childhood friend, Ian Potter and her nessube to the name Harry. Troll filmmakers do not buy that story, but claimed that similarities between the two properties do not end there, as their film has an older witch (similar to Professor McGonagal), a young hero wearing plaid clothes and a villain hiding in other people. Moreover, they made their feelings for the famous situation.

Troll is not considered one of Best dark fantasies of all timeAnd some Harry Potter fans are unlikely to be aware of its existence because of its low -key cult status. As such, it is easy to overlook his similarities to the stories of FC Rowling and the whole drama arising from the situation - some of which have almost resulted in battles in the courtroom. In 2015

In short, studio representatives thought Buchler and Davy wanted to profit to the success of Harry Potter filmsclaiming that they would sue the copyright infringement if the remake went forward. However, Buchler, while talking to Ann -Bi -Los Angeles, rejected the idea that their film could disrupt Rowling's intellectual property because they first came up with the idea:

"Even if someone who took it for a while makes him hurt, it doesn't take away any of the fact that this is ours. We have the right to do our stuff over and over."

After all, "Troll: Harry Potter Runior's rise." It has never come true and the legal dilemma seems to have been avoided. That said, maybe the "troll" directors had a point, like their Harry Potter character technical precedes The boy who lived and why shouldn't they be allowed to use it in other projects?