Top 10 Times Fantastic Beasts Ignored Harry Potter Lore

[@MsMojo]

What are YOUR thoughts on the "Fantastic Beasts" movies? Let us know below, and be sure to also watch our video about the 5 Questions Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore Answered & 5 We Still Have - kzbin.info/www/bejne/rJvSZ6uLgtp0ppI

[@chasehedges6775]

They’re all kinda mediocre. The first one is decent.

[@moonprincesst.s.h.4ever115]

The Fantastic Beasts franchise is a slap in the face for hardcore Harry Potter fans! It's all about so-called fan service and the ability to write anything that they want to and justify it as "magic." Now, you would think that Ms. J.K. Rowling would be the first person to point out these inconsistencies and flaws, but concerning that she, herself wrote most of them... it kind of looks like she has stopped caring about her magical fantastic creations. 😢🤬

[@chasehedges6775]

@@moonprincesst.s.h.4ever115 Pretty much. 💯

[@SuperMoviemaster21]

The first fantastic beasts is either my favourite or second favourite out of all the Wizarding world movies so Far, let alone within my top three favourite movies of all time and possibly my favourite live action movie of all time :-) The second one is also better than pretty much all of them except for the first fantastic beasts, the first two Harry Potter’s, and goblet of fire. Both fantastic beasts movies have Truly captured the essence and feeling of being in the Wizarding world especially [and ironically surprisingly] more than David Yates’ harry potter movies. Indeed, I cannot believe how it’s actually possible for the same Director who gave us the worst harry potter movies actually gave us the leagues better fantastic beasts movies, let alone the fact of whether you agree or not, the fantastic beasts movies just feel and seem like they were made with more and better passion and effort, as if David Yates actually wants to make them out of passion and genuine interest as opposed to his other movies seemingly only being made for a paycheque/just trying to find the most efficient way of doing them/ the movies Just overall having this “let’s just get this over with” attitude. I mean, the fantastic beasts movies do not have the horribly abysmal colouring and lighting that the David Yates harry potter movies have, even though they are still of course dark but at least you can actually see let alone actually care about what’s going on. As well, they have a lot more nuance with their filmmaking and just do a better job of capturing the emotion and connection and relationship between the characters without either over or under doing it or making it overly complicated. As noted before when you watch them it just feels and seems like they’re having a lot more fun with it when regardless of what was in the script, as in the half blood Prince movie it was literally David Yates, Not originally the Script’s idea for the bridge scene, and even though the scene is decent in the movie, it still doesn’t feel like it was fully realize what it could’ve been, unlike literally everything that was in the fantastic beasts movies only suffering if any at all from the material that he was given. Again why couldn’t he have fully realized and made the scene more engaging in better with half blood Prince even though of course it was long before fantastic beasts? Same with the Sirius Black and Bellatrix dual in order of the Phoenix which he has stated that he apparently “understands“ why people are supposedly upset with the duel being cut short when it was in fact filmed [An even featured a bit in a teaser trailer and then some prominently released B roll footage], And would not of interrupted The overall pacing and flow all that much, When they were even other scenes they could’ve cut out to help with that. #FantasticBeastsTheSecretsOfDumbledore

[@JessH1]

What about Dumbledores age in Harry Potter to fantastic beasts. With the one teacher looking not to far in age in fantastic beasts yet in Harry Potter there's definitely a bigger age gap. It just feels they didn't get that right. I could be wrong.

[@walterude6323]

That McGonagall flaw is the most irritating one for me. Like, did these writers not know that fans are calculating these time differences and would spot a gaffe that big?

[@mattieblackeyes957]

exactly! the events of the Harry Potter series take place in the 1990s (in the books, at least). In GoF, it is revealed Tom Riddle killed his father and grandparents 50 years before that, when he was still a Hogwarts student. That means he was a student in the 1930s, or early 40s, and a middle-aged Dumbledore picked him up at the orphanage in the early 30s. McGonagall is nowhere near as old as Dumbledore, and wouldn't even have been a teacher when Riddle was a student. But, since she teaches transfiguration, that might explain why they made Dumbledore a defense against the dark arts teacher rather than a transfiguration one

[@edwardvolcan14]

The “writer” J.K. Rowling is penning the script. Which makes it even more irritating

[@TOY2SHO]

the movies are adopted from the books, and they are not the same. so I get if the mcgonagall one goes different from all other source materials.

[@catherinekeena4657]

@@edwardvolcan14 she has said that Witches and Wizards don’t age the way humans do

[@michaeld5458]

@@edwardvolcan14 this is what makes me the most mad. On top of her problematic Twitter, she can’t even make the new movies fall in line with her books that she wrote herself?

[@erictoncray966]

Again, for the whole Apparation on school grounds. It could’ve been that Dumbledore himself set up the spells necessary to prevent the act after he became headmaster, which was likely to prevent Voldemort and his Death Eaters from attacking the school.

[@nero89ca]

That could be but it also might depend who you are. The example they used was ministry officials I'm guessing the people who make up the magical laws know ways around them

[@erictoncray966]

@@nero89ca yes, which is why the ministry is separate from the school.

[@carlosbenjaminturner5123]

To quote no less than Queen of Magical Nerdies herself, Hermione Granger: "Are you ever going to read «Hogwarts: A History»! ?!? You just CAN'T appparate within Hogwarts grounds!!!". 🙄💁‍♀️😒

[@jayarshibhattacharya2554]

No. Dumbledore also can't apparate according to the books. Harry and Dumbledore flew to hogsmid by broomsticks before apparating. Apparation is prohibited since the school was formed according to Hogwarts a history, mentioned in Goblet of Fire by Hermione.

[@Teresita023]

@@jayarshibhattacharya2554 excatly 👏👏

[@m.w.9940]

My biggest complaint is that Newt is still allowed to carry a wand and do magic despite having been expelled from Hogwarts... Hagrid's wand got broken when he was kicked out

[@blaznskais2048]

Maybe rules changed? We see the killing curse being used at a drop of a dime in the three Fantastic Beasts movies, even by ministry members. So obviously the rules where very different back then.

[@m.w.9940]

@@blaznskais2048 You can come up with an in-universe explanation for almost everything of course, but one of the basic rules of writing fantasy is that you have to stick to your own rules or at least explain how you're bending them.

[@libertydensinger3583]

I figured it was because Newt was expelled post OWLs. In canon, once you sit for OWLs you can quit Hogwarts because you have a basic education. So I thought Newt was expelled sometime in his 6th or 7th year, meaning he would get to keep his wand because he had passed some OWLs. Hagrid, on the other hand, was expelled in 3rd year. Also, Hagrid is a half-giant, and the WW is incredibly racist, which could play a role. However, Harry was in danger of having his wand snapped at the start of OotP, so I think it more likely that wand snapping only happens if you're expelled pre-OWLs.

[@Gaia_Seraphina]

@@m.w.9940 Rules and laws change with time. It's as simple as that.

[@DougiePlaysSoccer]

The producers could care less about the rules, so long as it gets seats in movie theaters. RIP Harry Potter 😔

[@tvaccount306]

MY EXPLANATIONS: 10. Lack of Robes - We get eccentric as we get older, this is very trivial though. 09. Accio - there's no specific rule that it cant be used on living animals, so as Accio being used on enormous objects, being a skilled magizoologist Newt could've mastered that "special" magic. We see wizards being skilled on being an Animagus, Occlumens, Seer etc which is not for all, even inventing spells , or doing wandless or unspoken magic- im pretty sure Newt is also a special kind of wizard inventing and capable of "special" magic. 08. Dumbledore couldve just switched subjects. DADA teacher claiming to teach 50 years still given ample time from 1930 to 1990 (and it was never said it was consecutive years) 07. It could just be a different tree. Or the same kind of tree but not the one planted leading to the Shrieking Shack. 06. Our desires change which I think applies to the Wizarding World too 05. It was never established when that "Apparition Security" happened. It could be an additional security planted when Dumbledore became headmaster or after the fantastic beasts timeline after the Wizarding War happened as added security 04. Mcgonagall timeline- The claimed flaw is that McGonagall mentioned she taught at Hogwarts for 40 years- But it was never established if it was "consecutive years", she couldve been assigned for a non teaching position at some point or left teaching Hogwarts and came back 03. It could just be a different branch of the lesser known or less prominent branch of the Lestrange family (remember how we associate the last of the ____ family on just the prominent branch? (rumors and media) 02. Aberforth is an introvert kind of person so its not a surprise we never heard of Credence from the HP books. We're also not sure if there's someone else aside from Newt, Albus, Aberforth and Grindelwald who knew about this. 01. Accio is not a disarming spell nor a defensive or attacking spell. And Grindelwald was not using the Elder Wand when he was disguised as Graves.

[@travelandfamily]

makes sense on most part

[@brielleskincare1657]

nice one, thanks

[@GameMaster-pl7se]

JK Rowling or Warner Brothers should hire you!

[@digitallivechat7628]

This should be top comment, bump

[@briellemontilla490]

the simplest explanation that works

[@plumdutchess]

Dumbledore just got more excentric as he got older. Many people do and he had a lot of time to develop that style.

[@hokton8555]

yeah but this already started at best 10 years after fantastic beasts

[@Meganedere]

It's established in the books that MOST of the Wizarding World cannot dress like Muggles, they're isolated in their magic world. The fact that not only young Dumbledore but most of the wizards and witches dress cleanly and fashionably despite assumingly being equally isolated within their own magic bubbles doesn't add up.

[@motor4X4kombat]

Deadpool: Its almost like if the studio didn't have enough budget for costume desingners

[@justjamie5006]

They also left the wizard stuff behind in the later movies of Harry Potter

[@justjamie5006]

They also can’t wear their wizard close close in public because they would be known as wizards

[@Meganedere]

@@justjamie5006 Just the opposite, in the beginning of Sorcerer's Stone swathes of wizards go out in their robes and no one seems to conclude wizards in the newscasts or conversations. All they think is "huh, weird people" and just go on. The only muggles that might be suspicious either know about or already suspect wizards.

[@SuperMoviemaster21]

Remember this a different time period Where wizards were being haunted and despised a lot more [see what was featured in Where to find them with the Salemers Etc.] So therefore they need to wear more “normal” clothing in order to be able to blend in with the rest of the world, plus it would also add on to the fact that Dumbledore could’ve been merely substituting/per when he was teaching Newt And Leita and wore that outfit, he most likely kept that same outfit simply because he found a comfortable and or so in a level of class and authority Etc.

[@rafaelmatos5851]

10 - The wizards in the movies are portraited to use cloaths that are more Muggle than what is described in the books. Despite it's possible that Dumbledore had changed his style, we can't ignore his more trimmed beard. After all, when he gets to meet Tom Riddle, he already had a long auburn beard. Sure, FBSOD happens just a few years before that meeting, but even so... 9 - The term "object" can be very... flexible when it comes to magic. Maybe that's a more generic description of the spell. 8 - Dumbledore teaching DADA despite it already had a teacher can be explained by the fact that he was just filling in for Professor Merrythought. After all, if she was an author as well, she would have gone in trips to promove her work, sometimes during school time. Meaning she would need someone to fill in for her. 7 - I think it was never confirmed that was the Whomping Willow (as far as I know). 6 - What a person sees in the Mirror of Erised can change depending what they desire at the moment they are looking into it. At that scene, Dumbledore's desire was to be able to return to what he and Grindelwald had, as it was a time when they were not enemies. 5 - Yeah, no one can Apparate in Hogwarts grounds. But the Headmaster appears to have control on that. We have to remember that the headmaster on that time was not Dumbledore, but possibly Armando Dippet or his predecessor. The Ministry could have required the Headmaster to lift the charm that prevents Apparating, so they could appear there. Or maybe the Minstry at that time had some influence on the charm. 4 - This one is very controversial, because we got a date to McGonagall's birthday. But I think the year they say she was born was calculated having in consideration her biography and what she had told Umbridge about her tenue in Hogwarts. However, we have a lot to consider. She said to Umbridge she taught for thirty-nine years. But she never said those thirty-nine years were consecutive or that those thirty-nine years represented all her teaching career in Hogwarts. As we know, Dumbledore was the Head of Transfiguration department when she was accepted to teach in Hogwarts. He was still the teacher and McGonagall acted basically as his assistant, filling in for him when he couldn't teach or when he would fill in for other teachers. It's very possible that those thirty-nine years she references is about her career as the Head of the Transfiguration department, what it would make sense, since Dumbledore would stop teaching when he became Headmaster. 3 - It's obvious they were talking about the French branch of the Lestrange family. The Lestrange family is not of British origins, but French. The fact that English-speaking wizards pronunciate the name wrong is proof of that. The French branch would have been the main one, so they were most important. 2 - Just because Credence is never mentioned during the Harry Potter books, it doesn't make it a plothole. Only that it was not relevant to the story. We can't forget that book 7 puts light into Albus' life, not Aberforth's. And what Grindelwerd told Credence about him being a brother to Dumbledore could have double meaning: either he told Credence he and Dumbledore were brothers in the way that they share the same blood or he lied to him about them being brothers. Grindelwerd was a liar, after all. He had lied to many wizards and witches to convince them to join him, like Queenie. 1 - This one is tricky... Yes, for one to conquer the Elder Wand's loyalty, they need to defeat its current owner. Because Harry defeated Draco and conquered the wand's loyalty, then we can assume the wand's master doesn't need to hold it for its allegiance. So it would be assumed that the Elder Wand's allegiance would shift, possibly to Tina, as she was the one to take Graves' wand from Grindelwerd. However, we can assume that, because Grindelwerd technically won the battle during the rally, he may have recovered the alligiance of the Elder Wand or that he had won it back afterwards.

[@1001nevermore]

I was about to come here and make all of these same points. Thanks for saving me all of the typing! In regards to 7 (the Whomping Willow), the Crimes of Grindelwald script only refers to it as a tree, so I assume any visual similarities to the Whomping Willow were just coincidence. Likewise, for 5 (apparating), the script only describes the Aurors as walking up to the castle, so having them apparate in was possibly a mistake by the filmmakers (I've kinda felt that these movies have relied a little too heavily on apparating at times). But I'm also in agreement that the Ministry may have some control over this charm or maybe Aurors have the authority to apparate into the grounds when necessary. I don't remember if we ever learned when this charm was placed on the grounds, so I think it is also possible that this charm simply wasn't in effect in this time period; Dumbledore may have added it during the first war with Voldemort to keep him from coming back to the castle to recruit Death Eaters or attack students, or maybe another headmaster put it in place as Grindelwald became more of a threat.

[@matthewrosenthal753]

You forgot one thing about McGonagall, she is listed as Gryffindor team Captain on the quidditch award that shows James Potter as Chaser.

[@MaluhXav]

@@matthewrosenthal753 the McGonagall in the trophy is her brother, according to the writers/ director of the movie

[@dalyazul]

Why is that the fans need to come with reasonable logical explanations for the lack of care of JKR? Let’s admit it’s bad writing.

[@Yuan3986]

@@dalyazul I agree. If you are forcing fans to guess and even come up with excuses why things are the way they appear in over 10 scenarios (I have more besides those mentioned in the video)... then I see 3 possibilities. First, you have a forgetful writer. Second, you have one who just likes to retcon what should be canon for fun I suppose. Third, you have a writer who simple likes misleading and/or confusing the audience. Either way... it all leads to 1 fact: It is bad writing.

[@amethystsavage4018]

How do mistakes like these even happen when you have the studio who made Harry Potter, the director of half the Harry Potter movies, and the woman who wrote the damn series working on the movies?!

[@patrichavez]

Another big one is the fact that Dumbledore didn't even knew that the room of requirement existed.

[@qr5452]

That's not entirely accurate he did find it when he needed a bathroom really bad

[@Devlinator61116]

He knew it "existed" but the jury is out on whether or not he understood what it was that he found.

[@capitalistpig1967]

He always had a creative interpretation on what is true.

[@Ecl1pse09]

One of my biggest complaints about this franchise is Why is Newt Scammander still in these movie? The first movie was good because the story is about Scamander trying to clean up the mess that he accidentally make; and somehow, he got involved with first Wizarding War. The last movie go ahead and done a 180 on us, and make everything about Dumbledore and Grindelwald. Scamander is front and center of the story, but he no longer the main character. The storyline is now about Dumbledore and Grindelward and their preparation for their legendary duel…….And for some reason Scamander is involved. Don’t get me wrong, Eddie Redmayne is a great actor and Newt is great character; but the story is clearly moving so far away from him, that he doesn’t needs to be anywhere near it. They are clearly trying to justify Scamander involvement in these movie. I mean the title of the series is called Fantastic Beast. So the series should have been about Scamander and all the fantastical beasts around the would; and not about the First Wizarding War Another the thing is that they either broke the blood pact too early and/or the time skip is not long enough. Since the 3rd movie is set in 1932 and the the Legendary duel isn’t happening until 1945. So, they got about 13 years time gap, what was Dumbledore doing to justifying him waiting that long to face Grindelwald again. I originally thought that they was going used the blood pact as an excuse for why Dumbledore wait so long to face Grindelwald, but apparently not. They should have make this franchise into a trilogy. The first movie could set up the storyline, 2nd is about Dumbledore trying to break the blood pact, and 3rd is about the leading up to and the legendary duel. That could have been an great action pact trilogy

[@ariadnefrolich7243]

I told my boyfriend it would've been better if the Fantastic Beasts trilogy was about Newt taking down an international exotic magical beasts smuggling ring. The War should had been it's own set of movies. Still enjoyed the movies though.

[@kellydowell3050]

ok

[@nanalove3819]

the last movie was so unnecessary that it could just not be there... But they have to make money.

[@AdorabubbleDragon]

@Eris so couple of things. The author apparently had no writing credits towards the 3rd film. Secondly, Katherine Waterson had complications due to covid, and hence why Tina was not as prevalent in the latest movie.

[@gcm9059]

The 13 year time gapp is explained in the fact that it was a 5 movie plan. While the last 2 movies might not happen, There would clearly be some action that we are not yet privy to. It is, supposedly, explained that WWII parallels the Wizarding War.

[@Chanwills0]

AND THEY DID MINERVA’S TIMELINE DIRTY FOR WHAT!?! 😡 she’s barely in FB and not important to the story 🙄 her backstory literally doesn’t make any sense now 🤦🏽‍♀️

[@Brandon_427]

The Minerva in FB is the Great Grandmother of the Minerva in HP

[@dreamsteddybearsmaster]

@@Brandon_427 Is it confirmed but? I thought she was the first of her name in the fam and her father was a Muggle or maybe he was a Squib?

[@Chanwills0]

@@dreamsteddybearsmaster Robert was a muggle, the magic was from her mothers side so not McGonagall. That comment’s not true 😊

[@davidpumpkinsjr.5108]

10- People's personal styles can change over the years as could wizard fashion. The films appear to indicate wizard styles seemed to backslide a bit from a late-19th/early-20th Century style in the 1920s to early/mid-19th Century style by the end of the century. As seen in real life, retro fashions have resurgences. 9- It was never firmly established that accio can't be used on living things. The only implied limitations were distance and size of object. 7- It's clearly a different tree. The leaves, bark consistency and branch growth patterns are not even similar. 5- Even the HP-proper films played fast and loose with this rule. Voldemort was apparating like crazy in his final battle against Harry. 2- Grindelwald may have been using the term "brother" in a non-literal sense. 1- It shows just how powerful Grindelwald really is. He's doing all this incredible magic without a mastery of the wand.

[@DinosaurNick]

Wait only Dumbledore could aparate at hogwarts ... he said being him had advantages ... he had the elder wand ... then voldemort had it and was aparating at hogwarts ... maybe they could do it because of the elder wand?

[@moonprincesst.s.h.4ever115]

The Fantastic Beasts franchise is a slap in the face for hardcore Harry Potter fans! It's all about so-called fan service and the ability to write anything that they want to and justify it as "magic." Now, you would think that Ms. J.K. Rowling would be the first person to point out these inconsistencies and flaws, but concerning that she, herself wrote most of them... it kind of looks like she has stopped caring about her magical fantastic creations. 😢🤬

[@hammerr3]

THIS 🙌🏻🙌🏻

[@Gaia_Seraphina]

So? Not your circus, not your monkeys.

[@Keyboardje]

​@@Gaia_Seraphina BUT all our *entrance fees,* without which Rowling would still be the pennyless nobody she once was.

[@Gaia_Seraphina]

@@Keyboardje That's bully talk! Everyone is someone. There is no such a thing as a person being nobody. PS: I sense a rich people envier.

[@tom-nb7dk]

Every so called " plot hole" can be easily explained.

[@tinas_hotdog_sophie]

That isn't the whomping willow, it's another tree. Some wood used for wands as Newt explains right in that scene you are showing.

[@erictoncray966]

I’ll actually argue that due to the Ministry intervention, Dumbledore was forced to switch subjects. And the new teacher could’ve gone on to teach for 50 years, as the time difference between FB and HP is the late 1920s to the early 2000s. Plenty of time for all of the “discrepancies” to be fixed. Plus, we don’t actually know when Voldemort attacked the Wizarding world. He could’ve been in his early 20s or early 30s.

[@Hannahgal11]

Actually it was the 90s but sure. Harry was born in 1980

[@AdorabubbleDragon]

Also Voldemort cursed the position after being denied the teaching role for it, so that a new professor was required every year.

[@libertydensinger3583]

Voldemort was a student at Hogwarts in the early forties, and by the time of Harry's parents' schooling had begun amassing followers and using terrorism. He would have cursed the position some time in the late fifties or early sixties, since he still looked human at the time of his interview with Dumbledore. I do agree that he could have been forced to switch subjects. We know he was the Transfiguration professor by the time he met Tom, and that he only became Headmaster sometime between the end of WWII and the early sixties. I think Dippet (the headmaster before him) retired some time in the fifties, which would give Dumbledore roughly 30ish years as Transfiguration professor.

[@erictoncray966]

@@libertydensinger3583 thank you for this information.

[@salsa1521]

The tree isn’t the whomping willow. It’s just a willow. Hence why it’s not.. well, whomping. As for the ending, it’s been well known that JK is not “the master of her own lore”. She provided insight and put her name on the Cursed Child, which we all know was a disaster, she’s famous for making up random things about her characters and posting them on Twitter, and of course a lot of the things pointed out here really don’t make sense. I love Harry Potter, but I’m not going to pretend that JK Rowling hasn’t been sloppy for quite a long time now. Every project she’s been involved in after the last HP book has been incredibly flawed.

[@ashleydowney1222]

I didn't have an issue with the Cursed Child.

[@SofiaBerruxSubs]

Cursed child is amazing

[@salsa1521]

@@ashleydowney1222 not everyone does, but it had a lot of plot holes and retconned some of what happened in the novels. It’s cool of people enjoy it, I don’t blame them, it just shows JK isn’t the master of her own lore.

[@ryanmugz4644]

that tree there at 4:50 wasn't the woomping wilow.

[@peterang6912]

Still mist Richard Harris as Dumbledore... the best one...

[@aadretachakraborty5292]

As far as I can remember Dumbledore also can't apparate from Hogwarts grounds. In the 6th book, he had to go hogsmead first to apparate... However 6th film changed this rule. In the secrets of Dumbledore film, I also didn't understand how Jacob could see and be in Hogwarts, when Hogwarts have its protection enchantments against muggles.

[@s6r231]

10: they do this in the movies. All the adults are supposed to wear robes and don't. Young Dumbledore was depicted (in the books) as wearing a flamoyantly cut plum suit when he went to visit young Tom Riddle at the Orphanage. That wasn't so long after the events of the FB movies. 9: Accio does work on humans and animals. Harry used it in Deathly Hallows to pull himself towards Hagrid (it didn't pull Hagrid towards him, because he's so big and half a giant) 8: Yes, he used to teach Transfiguration. But that doesn't mean that he never teaches any other subject. Quirrell used to teach Muggle Studies at Hogwarts for many years before taking on DADA for a year before he was killed. Dumbledore has been at the school for decades, it stands to reason he could have changed subjects a couple of times. Galatea Merrythought had been at Hogwarts for 50 years when she retired, but she will have changed around what subjects she taught in that time. Or, they could have had two DADA teachers for a time? Any number of things could explain this. 7: That's not the whomping willow. A bowtruckle is shown to be living in it and why would bowtruckles make a whomping willow their home? I mean, come on, you can tell in the clips that you used that that's not the same tree. 6: I don't know about this one - the mirror is a powerful object, the extent of its power has not been fully explored. Dumbledore knew how to do other things with the mirror than just see your hearts desire. This is evidenced by the fact that he was able to hide the Philosopher's Stone inside it during the events of the first book. 5: Yeah this is iffy. Though, the headmaster/mistress of Hogwarts is able to pull back the anti-apparition spell on the school if they wish. This is evidenced by what Dumbledore does each year when students need to learn how to apparate - he removes the spell from the great hall. 4: Yes! The first one that's actually an inconsistency with the lore. Well done. Yeah she shouldn't be there. Likely though they'll explain this later that she was using a time turner or some other absurd cursed child type thing. Or maybe it's fan service and that's it. 3: Leta and her baby brother belonged to the French Lestranges. Rudolphus is descended from the English family. They were connected hundreds of years ago but they'd be something like 16th cousins or some such. Bellatrix is actually much more closely related to Leta than her husband. Her mother was a Rosier and Leta's grandmother was a Rosier too. 2: Yeah this is called shoehorning and Jo's done it before (see Nagini). It's likely that Aberforth was ashamed that he didn't know his son for very long and stopped talking about him. He wasn't relevant to the Dumbledore story in the HP series and Rita Skeeter never uncovered it for her book. 1: Mastery of a wand doesn't always change when you get disarmed. Otherwise most school children would have lost mastery of their own wands. In DH, Harry just takes Draco's wand and becomes the master of it. Basically, the wand has to want to change hands. Maybe the elder wand didn't want to change allegiance to Porpentina and that's why it didn't. It wanted to shift to Dumbledore during his great duel with Grindelwald. It's a hard one because wand lore is so complex.

[@HNKNAChick52]

For 1, in addition to what you say about Draco's wand, that's because Draco disarmed Dumbledore, who had the elder wand. Which was supposed to be the most powerful wand in existence. So 'beating it' was a great accomplish. So (at least in my theory) when Draco beat Dumbledore, his own wand acknowledged it, and then then harry bested Draco, making Harry the rightful owner of the most powerful wand.

[@jamesburton7756]

For the apparating on to Hogwarts grounds, I think “laws” changed concerning this

[@amandalemus38]

At least it’s not the Cursed Child… god knows how many things went wrong with that..

[@ronniijtoyhunter1412]

It's sad how little J.K. Rowling cares about her own books

[@ryanmugz4644]

At one point harry did summon his frog in a charms lesson in the books so yeah.

[@tinas_hotdog_sophie]

Actually Accio-ing animals also happened with Harry in charms lessons with a frog. It got away and Harry accioed it back to him.

[@ChildOfDarkDefiance]

In the books, not even Dumbledore could apparate on in or out of Hogwarts, they had to walk into Hogsmeade.

[@jenniferhiemstra5228]

Exactly…half of these contradictions are comparing the 2 film franchises and the original ignored the books A LOT. But regardless, there’s so much contradiction all around in all of it.

[@jenniferhiemstra5228]

@@angelalim4638 Not even just approved…she had a hand in writing them or coming up with the story.

[@tom-nb7dk]

Dumbledore lifted the charm for the students to train apparition in the books. So he had control over it.

[@ChildOfDarkDefiance]

@@tom-nb7dk True, but it seemed like he just made a little bubble in the great hall. He couldn't apparate at will.

[@REDridingh00d16]

And don't forget the fact they had the aurors tossing out Avada Kedavra's like they were candy, when the use of unforgivables by the aurors was not legalized until the first war with Voldemort. Or the fact that everyone seemed to be capable of doing it nonverbal.

[@theoretical8665]

Now this is a better fact that they ignored. I don’t think msmojo did a good job with this video. Most of these facts could very well have been canon and the evidence that supports the arguments is mostly circumstantial apart from a few.

[@imaginasong7625]

There is a sentence in the actual fantastic beasts "textbook" newt wrote that states that macusa/the ministry's auror training at the time of his first publishing was a "shoot to kill" reaction for wild unknown animals (hence his need to educate wizards and witches on these creatures) I always assumed it was the same training used for suprise human attacks. Something tells me it's gonna become "shoot to stun" sometime in the next couple films.

[@bowtotheking8403]

there is no blood relation between Leta and Bellatrix whatsoever. At most, Leta and Rodolphus Lestrange (Bellatrix's husband) are very distant cousins.

[@DizzyedUpGirl]

Yeah, I rolled my eyes in the theater when he said "Minerva" and then when they said "McGonnagal".

[@mimull1378]

Dumbledore is portraid as a moraly gray character in the book but in the last movie he is pure of heart.

[@xxsorenxx]

When grindelwald used cruccio on Jacob, he simply cast it and did not maintain focus, like in the HP books.

[@sanddagger36]

Apart from the mcgonagall one all of these can be explained away.

[@sanddagger36]

@Alfie Bell I didn't mean they could be explained away well, just that the answer would not break the established lore. 10. he changed his clothes 9. animals can be summoned, as shown with the toad. Only wizards that have magic and can resist being summoned cannot be dragged by the spell. 8. Maybe he was filling in for DADA that year. 7. That tree did not attack the two. Probably was a willow that was uprooted and replaced with a womping one. 6. Mirror sees what you desire most. At the moment, Dumbledore was thinking about Grindelwald a lot and saw him. 5. They do not apparate into the castle, just to the bridge. Also, the movie is wrong about dumbledore being able to because he is headmaster. The books reveal that if enough teachers cast the same charm they can change the rule, as was done when training Harry to apparate. 4. This can only be explained as it being another person entirely. However, I know the writers intended it to be the original Mcgonagall, therefore I said no amount of explaining would convince me they weren't just stupid for trying to milk nostalgia with easter eggs. 3. Maybe they meant he was the last Dumbledore, as Albus had no kids of his own. Also it is never mentioned if the powerful line is the Lestrange line or the other parent of the kid that drowned. 2. This is just complaining that he was never mentioned. Not an actual continuity error. 1. Wands don't switch owners just because of being disarmed. They switch when they feel a more powerful wizards deserves them. Otherwise everyone who ever cast exspeliomous would own someone else's wands. It just so happened that the elder wand betrayed dumbledore. Also, maybe Grindalwald acquired the elder wand after her lost Graves wand in the tunnel.

[@rainahale9209]

It could have been McGonagalls mother. They never call her Minerva in the fb movies, just professor McGonagall.

[@sanddagger36]

@@rainahale9209 No, her mother eloped with a muggle and spent her whole life hiding the fact that she was a witch. She never taught at a school. Also, the name McGonagall comes from her muggle father so it was not like one of her other relatives could have been a witch teaching at Hogwarts. They just did not care about the continuity.

[@420simpson]

The age thing doesn’t bother me cuz the movies clearly changed the ages of a lot of the adults. I guess it’s just movie cannon that mcgonagall is older. I think they were just thinking that dumbledore actor and Maggie smith were both close to the same age in real life so would be close to the same age in their characters. Snape is supposed to be like 32 in the first book and Alan Rickman was much older. I think it’s just movie canon that some of the adults are just not the same age as they were in the books. Maggie smith is 6 years older than Michael Gambon who played dumbledore in most of the movies.

[@pauocampo0525]

' Casting is not even the point. It's the fact that McGonagall have a canon birthday in which she wouldn't even be alive yet by the time Fantastic Beasts happened.

[@thomasnieswandt8805]

@@pauocampo0525 true, and a bad example to use Alan Rickman to show "why the characters age is wrong" Rowling started the first HP book in the middle 80´s (or at least collecting all her ideas) and she wrote Snape with Alan Rickman in mind. who at this point was in his 30s so it fits.

[@veroniquegwili2395]

@@pauocampo0525 Exactly. And did you notice that her birthyear has magically disappeared from most Internet sites? She is now supposed to have been born on October 4th, no year. This is very annoying.

[@MermaidGinz]

I disagree about Accio. I think it surely can be used on animals too. I mean, I didn't see anything in the book that contradicts it. As for mirror, the desire can change and Grindelwald was much more than a friend.

[@Hannahgal11]

Exactly if Draco supposedly loses possession of the elder wand when that wasn't even the wand taken from him and it was not magical it makes no sense how Dumbledore somehow got it even though he didn't do more than Tina

[@georgiegal6745]

Can't worry about Dumbledore clothing. I mean, really. Who's going to cover up Jude Law?? Even Dumbledore had to strut his stuff! Lol

[@guilhermesevla]

Please, let's just forget this new franchise existed. It's only about bad writing, poor developed characters and canon inconsistency. Can't help but hate how shallow the stories are.

[@stephenhirsch8521]

It's not just dumbledores change of clothing that goes against the Harry Potter series. It's all wizards. In the books it's mentioned a few times how wizards do not know how to dress like muggles properly yet every wizard in fantastic beasts are dressed perfectly in muggle clothing....

[@prinitykat]

It appears the biggest crimes that these movies committed was breaking the lore.

[@gerardosalazar1442]

accio does not grant ownership of the elder wand, as is a summoning spell, as for expelliarimus is a disarming charm

[@AkriteChea]

yes truuu but remember that Harry Potter didn't use expelliarimus to take the wand from Malfloy

[@gerardosalazar1442]

@@AkriteChea true , but he DID disarm him in a confrontation, and that counts as disarming, while newt did not confront grinderwald, he just captured him while grinderwald was dueling the aurors, the rule of allegiance of the wands says, disarm

[@AkriteChea]

@@gerardosalazar1442 yeah but he was disarmed and by that fakt he shouldn't be the owner of the elder wand anymore

[@gerardosalazar1442]

@@AkriteChea try watching the scene again he wasnt disarmed, he was engaged in a duel, newt disteacted him and captured him, tina summoned his wand , but did not disarmed him, they did not mess up in this one, if tina would have used expelliarimus, then she would be the new owner

[@AkriteChea]

@@gerardosalazar1442if I had a sword and you took that sword no matter how you did it you disarmed me. So however you try and look at it Grindy shouldn't own the elder wand anymore

[@edsterrock]

Honestly, the first Fantastic Beasts movie should have been just a one of film which would have lead to a mini series about the Dumbledore and Grindelwald conflict as a mini series on HBO Max or something with maybe Newt Scamander playing a supporting role.

[@XeniusChannel]

8:33 The train said it's gay...!! :D

[@peytonfaour396]

yk who WAS alive during this time: TOM MARVOLO RIDDLE if he had a cameo ad one of the hogwarts students that would’ve made more sense

[@coremagnumplays4684]

y'all do realize that "the writer" you're all complaining about is literally JKrowling herself ? right ?

[@CJ-im2uu]

The whomping willow was in HP: DH2 -- Lily and Servus were lying under it. The tree could be replanted and made to womp when disturbed. Everyone wore muggle clothing. The robes were part of the uniform like a school blazer. There were scenes in all the movies with students were in uniform, minus the robes. A teacher can swtich subjects. Minerva could be family name. The line of demarcation could be at the bridge. Maybe in FB IV Corvis was saved. A woman is shown trying to reach him. She does and is able to apparate. We shall see in IV.

[@kellyheighway5411]

You made a tiny mistake about the spell the summons objects, if you watch the first fantastic beasts the muggle Jacob was holding an egg 🥚 so Newt was actually summons the egg which Jacob was still holding. So that's why Jacob was pulled towards Newt

[@krisynthiagomez5883]

Here’s my 10 issues with the movies. 10: The robes, anyone notice how the Hogwarts robes are supposed to be black, but in COG they are navy blue with cranberry lining plus their house colors. Yeah, that’s the color scheme for Illvermory, like if that was the goal they should of just staged the film there instead of Hogwarts, such a waste😩. 9: Minerva Mcgonagall vs Tom Riddle- Fun fact Tom Riddle was older then Minerva by about 5-6 years he was born in ‘25 and attended Hogwarts in ‘35 meaning that in the timeline where COG is happening we could have gotten Tom there as a student but instead we get Minerva as a teacher when she had only been teaching at most since the mid 60’s.🤨 8: Johnny Depp Look: now I didn’t necessarily hate Depp as Grindelwald, I never pay attention to actor’s personal lives if I can help it so my only judgement is about the acting and looks. Acting wise he was okay, if he had been playing a little more along the lines of Jack Sparrow with more wickedness to him that would have been cool because it would have matched that “wild, reckless, playful” personality he was supposed to have in the book. Really it was his look that threw me off. The white hair and mismatched eyes were off putting, and not in a good way, he just didn’t resemble the description in the book and with a wig change he could have. That was disappointing😕. 7: Nagini the snake woman: I hate, hate, hate this change, I feel like J.K Rowling or the film makers saw this theory and thought huh that’d be cool and in theory it is. A blood curse is interesting, I just didn’t like that Nagini was a part of it. Forgetting the whole “Nagini should be dead since it’s been 70 years” thing, Nagini was already a good character without any thing added, Voldemort’s loyal snake and Horcrux, she didn’t need more improvement than that and worse than that is when they did add her she did really do anything that significant. It just felt like she was brought to be the loyal pet of the “baddie” again except in human form and then was thrown away. ☹️ 6: The Jacob issue: don’t get me wrong Jacob was a really good character, often the straight man to the more ridiculous magical counterparts but he should not have been at Hogwarts or had a wand. Hogwarts is for wizards and while I realize it was likely a bit of fan service it somewhat diluted the experience for me. According to the originals, Muggles are not able to use magic so why is Jacob given access to a wand and for that matter why is he marrying Queenie in New York when intermarriage between No Maj’s and wizards is illegal there and she also happens to be a fugitive, like am I supposed to believe the same government who cut out somebody’s tounge was just okay with that? Though I do admit that the Slytherins toying with him was just so on point 😂. 5: Credence/Corvis/Aurelius- I can not be the only one who just felt done with the series after all this confusion. Also the idea that Aberforth would abandon his own son after seeing what happened to his sister is laughable much less the fact that he would have a dalliance with a random woman while his sister was being mistreated plus his thing with goats is curious.🤯 4: Blood Pact- a lot of people have already proved the impossibility of the blood pact so to summarize they could not have made it before they separated because they had a three way duel against each other with Aberforth and the blood pact was supposed to prevent that and they couldn’t have made it after since Grindelwald was implicated in Ariana’s death and he and Dumbledore had not contacted each other since then.😕 3: Dumbledore and Grindelwald Duel- this duel wasn’t supposed to happen until 1944 not to mention that they shouldn’t have even met at this point yet.😫 2: The Plan- this convoluted PLAN that was born on a train where no one is supposed to know what’s going on and our heroes are given pieces of an elaborate puzzle is something that could only come from the mind of Albus Dumbledore left me feeling so confused and unsatisfied, at the very least we know how it feels to be Harry, Newt, and Severus.😏 1: Magic inconsistencies- this isn’t just an oversight of FB franchise the originals did it sometimes to, I mean specifically the Avada Kedavra curse, it’s supposed to be unblockable when it hits you and yet we see characters like Newt and Ginny be able to fend it off with Shield charms when in fact they should be dead. Apparition has always been a bit of gray area in the movies as well, for example in the originals they made it seem like the Death Eaters were capable of flight when only Severus and Voldemort could do that.😤

[@AaronJamesMediaProductions]

#5. Maybe the spell/enchantment stopping apparating hasn’t been cast yet and the events of the movie(s) are the reason why it was cast #1. It’s possible that because accio is a summoning charm (as you stated) instead of a disarming charm (like expelliarmus) that it doesn’t count as disarming

[@dowix]

Apparating… interestingly was also done in the movies the deathly Hollows part 2 by Draco when he rescued his friends from the dungeons

[@FlagCutie]

With all the topsy turvy inconsistencies in the Fantastic Beasts movies, I chose to view them as in a parallel universe lol

[@stefb9313]

what about the killing curse Grindelwald is trying to use on Credence at the end of the movie? According to HP books, killing curse can be stopped only if a person sacrifices themselves for the one about to be killed. It's the base story of the entire HP book series, how Lily sacrificed herself for Harry. But here, just by Albus and Abeforth protective spell stops the curse? And how conveniently it also destroys the blood pact (which again, should not be possible to do)? Also, this "parallel universe" or "pocket univers" that Albus created whenever he has to duel with someone and not hurt people? Where was this in the HP books? When he was trying to protect Harry from Voldemort during the ministry duel? Plus, how can Jacob see Hogwarts? He is muggle, so he should see only ruins of an old castle.... Honestly, the whole series of Fantastic beasts is loosely, very loosely connected to HP, but respects no law established in the original books.

[@tom-nb7dk]

The scripts are book Canon and the movies are canon to the movies. For example Grindelwald didn't use the killing curse on Credence, it was just an unknown curse.

[@felixnimo]

7:21 | Dumbledore cannot apparate in and/or out of Hogwarts. This was only in the movie for absolutely no reason. In the book, Dumbledore and Harry had to went to Hogsmeade before disappareting 😬

[@princerayromillano3417]

The tree in Fantastic beast flashback is NOT a whomping willow. And Newt mentioned it that the tree is one of the materials in making Wands. Whomping willow tree is moving, rotating, have access to the ownership and especially very aggressive to strangers while being kind to the people who are authorized to keep close to it.

[@plutonian123]

For #10, in Half Blood Prince in the flashback scene where Dumbledore visits young Tom Riddle in the orphanage, he is seen wearing a very ornate formal suit. I can imagine overtime that his style slowly shifted from muted suits, to ornate suits, to more eccentric robes as he gained more leadership roles.

[@DesAnanieva]

I think Newt used accio only on Teddy aka the niffler. But Teddy's "bag" is always full with stuff so.... is he accio the animal or the object in his "bag"?

[@LegioXXI]

This is the best explanation to prevent this spell from becoming a huge plot hole. I mean, if accio was possible for living beings all along, why is no one calling accio on Crookshanks in Book 3 when hie tries to eat Scabbers (more than once)?

[@chadrowland7430]

Newt said accio Nifler.

[@DesAnanieva]

@@chadrowland7430 I know. Only once in the first movie.. but still

[@kellyheighway5411]

Your views on number 7, I don't think it was the whomping willow I think it was just a normal willow tree & by the time Lupin arrived at the school they could have cut this tree down & replaced it with the whomping willow

[@haziqkhairy]

7:30 while in the movie, Dumbledore Apparated with Harry to the island where Voldemort hid his "locket" (which is a fake, switched by R.A.B.), in the book, Dumbledore walked with Harry towards Hogsmeade and to the Hog's Head before Apparating to the island. Just something to take note

[@hillfoxtc]

And the worst part it that they were all written by JK Rowling. Yes, even the movies. She’s the screenwriter and producer of the fantastic beast franchise lol 😂

[@AdorabubbleDragon]

I thought she wasn’t credited as having writing credits towards the most recent film?

[@Keyboardje]

@@AdorabubbleDragon She did. She wrote the original screen play for it, but after all the criticism they got the screen writer of most Harry Potter movies (Stephen Kloves) back to assist her. He re-wrote parts of it, so now it says "Screen play: based upon the screen pley by J.K. Rowling".

[@AdorabubbleDragon]

@@Keyboardje Ahhh I don't even remember where I heard that she wasn't credited.....lol. Thank you ☺

[@debrasweeney8676]

How do we know that is a whomping willow vs a willow? It would make since to replace a willow with a tree that looks the same........

[@fabianaguilar6288]

For McGonagall, she only told Umbridge that she was a teacher for 29 years. That doesn't mean that she was a teacher for 29 years straight. It could be that she had gaps of time in between her teaching years.

[@benthecat4345]

The whomping willow seen in Fantastic Beasts is likely an ancestor of the one seen in Harry Potter that was likely removed to make the secret passageway for Remus and had a sapling replanted in its place to cover it up

[@ladymcgonagall]

Well since Minerva never had a canon birth year, she could absolutely be there

[@ladymcgonagall]

@@angelalim4638 1935 was never her canon birth year, it was something that the fans *assumed* by her pottermore biography. Now it is canon that she was, in fact, alive decades before, being probably about 10 years younger than Albus

[@Keyboardje]

@@ladymcgonagall That's not true. Her birth year WAS mentioned on Pottermore, but has since been deleted after many fans pointed out the fact she was not even born yet in the time these movies play.

[@ladymcgonagall]

@@Keyboardje I've seen people talk about this but I can't be 100% sure since I wasn't a fan during this period and did not found any record of this information. But still, I have read pretty much everything JKR wrote about Minerva and all the times she tried to mention her age, she got contradictory. Minerva's age was never as clear as people like to pretend, JKR have said she was same age as tom riddle, then apparently that she was born in 1935, then in the beggining of the XX century. Now she has settled down in the early 1890s, and I really don't see why people are so mad about it

[@Keyboardje]

@@ladymcgonagall I WAS a fan from moment one and on Pottermore as soon as it started, and I myself DID READ her Pottermore biography, and it stated her date of birth. For years. Until people got angry about Minerva popping up in FB at a time she wasn't alive yet. Then it was suddenly deleted. Edit: And people got extra mad about it because Rowling then denied ever giving Minerva's date of birth, so she gas-lighted her own readers. Again. THAT's why people are so mad about it.

[@amazingactor2009]

A movie and book on the founders would have been better than fantastic beast in my opinion

[@tvfantatic3957]

The Harry Potter movies messed up some book lore too. You CANNOT apparate on Hogwarts grounds, no exceptions. Not even Dumbledore is supposed to be able to do that. That is something Half Blood Prince movie got wrong.

[@MyBengaliLife]

The Fantastic Beasts series was awful. I don't know how someone who created this world could consent to/write a story that ignores so much of its core lore. It feels like a shameless cash grab.

[@johnnylawrence6172]

And at least better than the cursed child and besides most of what MsMojo listed are just nitpicks

[@ashleydowney1222]

I thought they were fine. I preferred the second and third one. And there is two more films.

[@nanalove3819]

That's what happened when you are more insteresting about the money than about your lore, I guess.

[@MyBengaliLife]

@@johnnylawrence6172To be fair, everything and anything is better than Cursed Child , even Crimes of Grindelwald.

[@Spud_g0D]

JK Rowling confirm bellatrix leastrange is not a leastrange she is not in the same family

[@UmbraKrameri]

Not even an honorable mention for the fact that they invented a Supreme Prime Minister for the wizarding world, while all prior sources clearly depict the geographically individual wizarding communities to have their own legislation? The main conflict of the 3rd movie doesn't make any sense from a worldbuilding standpoint. (Sure it could have changed since then, but given that the wizarding communities are relatively small in number and isolated due to the Statue of Secrecy and communication technologies not advancing the same rate as muggle ones do, it's geopopilitically rather unlikely.)

[@dreamsteddybearsmaster]

I personally think the tree is a different one... it does not look the same and I reckon with Dumbledore also, he could have changed specialisations. Sometimes teachers do that if they go back to school in the human world... maybe its hell easy with the Wizarding World!

[@gcm9059]

On #10, in fact, the whole point of wizarding wardrobe was that they DIDN'T know how to dress like muggles. But in the 30s they were the pinnacle of fashion?

[@leonbrooks2107]

Not going into all of these but as for the apparition they do state in Order of the Phoenix that Dumbledore has allowed apparition on the grounds to allow people to train for their license so clearly the Headmaster has control of this.

[@alicemissemer5990]

Most of the points are arguable as the story takes place 70 years earlier a lot of laws and rules may have changed Edit : It's JK Rowling herself who has been writing all 3 movies and the following 2 so saying it's bad writing is an insult to her beautiful work on the wizarding world not only the books and scenarios but the website, lore, and everything she has built around it

[@tanasha67]

Apparating - I only see them apparating onto the bridge, and I have assumed that they apparate there, because that's the exact point of the enchantment ending

[@stephenr.wattsauthor7029]

This tends to be the problem with prequels in long-established franchises. No wonder the Fantastic Beasts movies failed to appeal to the more knowledgeable fans of Rowling’s earlier work.

[@shaneflores5657]

I know this has nothing to do with the movies and has to do with the soundtrack, but anybody else feel weird when they start playing hedwig's theme when the owl isn't even alive or associated with anyone in these movies? I know it's a technicality and I know that when you're talking about Harry Potter, you think of that theme, but I thought since these stories are decades before Harry Potter, they would have brought in other songs that represent Hogwarts the school, not Harry Potter, the movies.

[@kellyheighway5411]

Your views on number 5, it could be possible the headmaster & the minister of magic of that time could have changed the rules or laws on this spell due to what was going on at the time & if you've noticed they only Apparated outside the front gate and not actually inside the school.

[@olvialee7221]

I’d like to know about the Lestrange family cause I’m getting confused

[@rainahale9209]

I think Rabastan and Rudolphus are Corvus's sons. It would make sense.

[@Keyboardje]

I think Rowling herself got confused about a lot of her own previous writing. :D

[@jenniferhiemstra5228]

Yes to all of these…except one. This just happens to be one of the reasons that I don’t find myself in to HP anymore. JK ignores her own established canon, then turns out to be a TERF…I could go on. Now as for the one thing that you have incorrect…this whole franchise is the lead up to the famed duel between Dumbledore and Grindelwald. So of course yes, what we see in the mirror can change (this happens in real life all the time. Our wants change), but even if that weren’t the case, all of the movies up until the 5th and (hopefully…) final one are pre duel Albus and Gellert. They had a bit of a faking out before that of course, but he still wouldn’t be seeing his family like he had for years in the mirror before that duel, since it was the duel that caused it. The rest of these can be argued…I suppose. But like you said, it’s just bad writing. That CLEARLY is the McGonagall we know and love in the second film, and that was the first one of these contradictions that I noticed and I nearly threw my phone at the screen in the theater. She was literally a STUDENT of Albus’ and they went and done made her his coworker?????

[@ZippedUpKitz]

The thing with Dumbledore teaching transfiguration when riddle was there, is perhaps he taught that because was no longer allowed to teach DATDA…. I'M pretty sure that there is more than one whompIng Willow around Hogwarts…. Apparating within Hogwarts … does it say specifically in the books that it is Hogwarts Grounds or Hogwarts Castle itself?

[@RevanSecura]

I don't know about anyone else but the Harry Potter cinematic universe may continue producing movies until the timeline goes full circle since event wise the next set of events to cover would be the marauder's era which does include the first blood war. it would be a great way to end the franchise since that set of events didn't get much fleshing out in the original movie saga aside from revealing that James was a no good bully in his youth which made Severus a jaded anti-hero who held a grudge for too long.

[@callumdrage5889]

In fact, Accio can summon people! Harry summoned Hagrid with the spell during the Battle of the Seven Potters and it worked. Just a small note aha

[@chasehedges6775]

The Harry Potter movies are hit and miss but awesome. The Fantastic beasts Movies are beyond mediocre.

[@plumdutchess]

I find the FB films way more entertaining. With HP I'm just annoyed at all the book to screen changes. I love having films set in the universe that I can just enjoy.

[@Missmagazinebura]

Harry potter is better than The Fantastic Beasts

[@ewar27]

4:45 THAT AINT THE WOMPING WILLOW THATS A TREE

[@corpsman1980]

They apparated to the bridge. Also there is no clear time-line when the rule of apparating was set. That wasn't a whomping willow.

[@Anthonycheesman33]

Also Dumbledore hair grows when he’s older lol.

[@agshinsanili505]

As a fellow potterhead I don’t think all excuse-like explanations to almost all loopholes are making sense. I assume many of us read the books multiple times and are aware of the details and references to history of magic and some exceptions to established rules. Sorry but all these are clear sign of bad writing. I think writers and JKR in particular neglected established storyline and timelines just to make money off Fantastic Beasts movies.

[@jesusurzua3988]

Number 10, 9 : have no solid factual base but rather interpretations in the writing. Number 8, 5 : who says once or twice (or in a specific time period) they didn’t happen/were permitted in so many magic history? Number 7 : interpretation from the picture misleading Number 6, 3, 2 : shouldn’t even be there / you even clarify as so haha Number 1 : wand chooses the wizard! Know your lore. Many cases I can bring. I give you number 4, but none has said it is Minerva in fact (as you clarify)

[@hangeyokai]

1 - Yup. I made this comment after I saw the movie. I was hoping to see the wand fail Grindelwald in the next movie. Tina should have been the new master of the Elder wand.

[@samdickenson5852]

Actually Harry used the accio charm on Hagrid in the deathly hallows books.

[@davidisrael8537]

Now I know why everyone hated COG.

[@garethtrevor2920]

in harry potter and half prince blood in flashback we see Dumbledore with Tom riddle aka voldemort in orphanage you see Dumbledore was wearing suit and tie back then

[@bellehogel8665]

I think they wanted to use a more established position (at least in the movies) for Dumbledors job.

[@lisemartino1995]

If you’ve read the HP books, ‘Fantastic Beasts’ is full of irritating inconsistencies. However…… this doesn’t mean I didn’t enjoy watching them!

[@autumnranderson]

Dumbledore wears a purple suit to go get Riddle from the orphanage so I’m not offended by the suit itself. I’m offended by the lack of quirky personality that Jude Laws portrayal lacks.

[@CyclopsWasRight616]

I know it's just head-canon, but I always assumed you couldn't apparate on Hogwarts ground because Dumbledore set up some kind of spell that stopped it. Hence why HE could do it.

[@jenniferhiemstra5228]

Not at all. In the books they had to go to Hogsmeade first to apparate, him included. It’s just another example of how bad the original film franchise really is. They ignore A LOT of book lore and canon. Hermione is always reminding the others that you can’t apparate in the school grounds and she quotes Hogwarts, A History to do it, and we all know that book predates everyone in the Potterverse except the 4 founders anyway, we never really find out how/why you can’t apparate on the grounds.

[@carlosbenjaminturner5123]

The general explanation for all those mistakes, canon break-outs and poor Just Kidding Rowling's writing: It's all in the name of the fan-service. The fans: That's not canon, this is outrageous!!! 😂💁‍♀️🤡

[@logan__hite]

I think the takeaway is obvious: The Crimes of Grindelwald sucks

[@CyclopsWasRight616]

Once you admit you can summon a toad, you're throwing away your argument that you can't summon a Niffler. You might as well argue that wizards can't have British accents in the prequels because only some of them have them in Harry's time. Because that makes the same amount of sense.

[@sarahtaylor2823]

The thing is a lot of people stopped watching this and supporting this series because of the firing of Johnny Depp plus the countless instances of Rowling shoving her foot down her throat.

[@jazzjsavage7310]

Isn't fantastic Beasts before Tom Riddle which means things could be different

[@kellyheighway5411]

It's possible after the battle against grinwald Dumbledore choose to switch jobs, there is still a lot history before harry we don't know about that weren't in either the HP films or books Dumbledore is quite an old wizard so I'm sure he has done alot of things before working as a teacher & when he did become a teacher, another idea maybe he was moved to a different post not by choice but was forced by the headmaster. Meaning is it not possible the headmaster that at the school during Tom Riddler's time was a new headmaster?