Why Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald Failed

This video is sponsored by Skillshare. Get 2 FREE months of classes here: skl.sh/captainmidnight7
The Crimes of Grindelwald can't even measure up to the first Fantastic Beasts film, let alone the best of Harry Potter. Here's why.

[@captainmidnight]

Get 2 FREE months of classes here: skl.sh/captainmidnight7 What did you think of the movie?

[@icantthinkofagoodname4130]

E

[@katherinealvarez9216]

I haven't seen it yet, but because I didn't block it fast it enough, I pretty much know all the twists and the basic plot. From what I'm gathering the criticism is that the movie is too convoluted and the twists don't make much sense, nor does the character development. And this video is talking about how we all grew up with the Harry Potter books and films, and I find that interesting. I enjoyed the first movie (yes, I really liked Newt), but I kept thinking "They want to make this a movie for an older audience but same time they don't." So its like we're watching a franchise having a bad case of growing pains or stunted growth. I can't say fr sure until I see this movie. Also, I get why some people are not into Newt, but there's one thing I can't get- one guy said that he's whiny. Is he whiny in this movie? Because I can't remember him being particular whiny in the last one.

[@dakshpraveen6746]

Not great but not bad

[@bendover2884]

Good but to much twist. Why are McGonagol a teacher when she aren’t even born.

[@insertname8506]

It was ok

[@JurassicLion2049]

The Fantastic Beasts movies shouldve just actually been about Newt Scamander and the Fantastic Beasts not Harry Potter Prequel Shenanigans.

[@Moodyheartt]

or they should have done one Fantastic Beasts movie and if they wanted a franchise about the history of the wizarding world. It felt like trying to put two not matching pieces of puzzle together

[@drogadepc]

The new franchise's name could be Wizarding World or anything but Fantastic Beasts

[@CouchSpud91]

I think both movies would have fared far, far better if they were made as mostly if not completely separate entities from each other. Like maybe have each "Wizard World" story contain elements of each other (like keeping the Grindlewald twist in Fantastic beasts), but then following movie have little to nothing to do with the previous (basically The Crimes of Grindlewald having little to nothing to do with Fantastic Beasts aside from maybe having Newt be the one to inform Dumbledore of Grindlewald's whereabouts and have the conflict between Gandalf, Grindlewald, and the wizard world being the focus of the story).

[@19Rena96]

nah that would have been boring

[@hannahdyson6391]

@@19Rena96 Sorry to tell you but movie Grindewald is boring ...

[@ringodoom2559]

Im just sad fantastic beasts isnt just movies about Newt going on magical safaris. I like the character, but he doesnt fit in the Dumbledore plot. Hes just kinda there.

[@emmaesta9444]

I honestly just wanted him to find beasties and occasionally come across baddies like let precious, anxious Newt l i v e

[@alfiethomas5632]

It's a nice enough idea if that's what your niche is, but it won't attract mainstream attention (which, let's be honest, is what all films go for now) without a more overarching plot. It's unfortunate how convoluted this one ended up, but it would have been even less successful without it

[@19Rena96]

i'm not, because the first movie was pretty boring.

[@irrevenant3]

@@alfiethomas5632 It could still have an overarching plot. This particular plot seems an odd one given the initial premise of the series. . There was a really strong theme established in the first film: Newt loves and empathises with all the Fantastic Beasts, whereas the Wizarding World views them as monsters to be either destroyed or used. *That* is a strong core for a series. You even have a really interesting triangle already established in the first film: Newt wants to protect and care for the creatures, MACUSA considers them dangerous beasts that need to be locked up or destroyed, and Grindelwald considers them dangerous beasts that need to be used as tools against his enemies. That could be a trilogy-spanning conflict, with Newt trapped in the middle trying to save the beasts from these two opposed destructive forces. I'd totally watch that.

[@jamestomato1744]

@@irrevenant3 That...actually sounds really interesting.

[@kbucket]

The fact that jk Rowling was the sole screenplay writer always concerned me because writing a screenplay is so different from writing a novel. She needs a team of professional screenplay writers to help chisel out a tight story for a film

[@princessthyemis]

YUP!!!

[@Kasino80]

Yeah, a Steve Kloves pre-Yates.

[@batatinhacomics]

@@Kasino80 Definitely. And they should let go of Yates.

[@ilonakatona9835]

Rowling changed a lot during the years. Wealth and success of HP totally messed up her head and lost humility. She really believes she knows better than anyone.

[@ruminationstation4200]

Especially because even professional screenwriters struggled to adapt a few of her books. The 4th, 5th, and 6th all had serious pacing issues where they really struggled to figure out how to cram all of it into something that resembles a 3 act structure. And several of those films really didn't fully work coherently as stand alone films and were extremely clunky unless you knew the books.

[@VivaciousVixen]

This movie to me, was the messiest shit I have ever seen. I was so lost, bored, and confused throughout most of it. And during the ending, where all the characters came together had me cracking up because of how much it didn't make sense. I vaguely remember it.

[@Magicminis]

SAME

[@itsmartinside7248]

My speech. I didn't understand how Newt and Teena, Kowalski, Creedence all the others suddenly came together

[@theEXOaudio]

same here

[@CHLOCHLOLP]

seriously. i think part if that is because none of it is particularly interesting, but then they just have way to many random sub plots and characters to keep track of in a very short amount of time. But yea i had a similar reaction to the end, i was just like lol ok den...... deff not gonna waste money on the next one

[@VivaciousVixen]

@@CHLOCHLOLP Right? It was also so hard to watch the first movie and compare it to this train wreck. I only recently saw the first one but it's not hard to develop likeable characters and show off fun creatures. I'm also trying not to crack up thinking about the ending with them trying to explain Credences backstory. Like wtf was this movie on???

[@mads9112]

"Dumbledore in the movies never quite lived up to the books' version" Me, immediately: HARRYDIDYOUPUTYOURNAMEINTHEGOBLETOFFIYAH?!?!?!?!?!

[@biznubizzness4783]

He said calmly.

[@SylentVoidkeeper]

Velvet Robot That's the reason why I think Half Blood Prince is the worst movie adaptation of the series. For being my favorite book from the franchise, all of the things they had to remove are... incredibly disappointing

[@prashantgaikwad9808]

Dumblebee is gaey 🐸

[@herreguda6199]

This!! Absolutely hate the movies for doing that

[@system0fadowner251]

@I. Th. First 2 imo. Never liked Michael Gambons interpretation.

[@anthonyvillanueva5226]

WB and Rowling bamboozled me. With a title like "Fantastic Beasts" I was expecting the adventures of magical Steve Irwin, not a convoluted retelling of the rise of wizard Hitler.

[@Dark_Magnolia]

Agree!!! ^_^

[@sgtfrozty]

I would rather watch Steve's death on repeat than anymore of this HP spin-off drivel.

[@squidsquiddly5970]

@@sgtfrozty That was Ray too soon... ;'(

[@rizkaarifiandi5670]

yes !

[@Uroboro_Djinn]

I know right!? What the fuck even is this series and its titles anymore? This title is so absurd, how is nobody talking about it. Imagine a movie called "Wacky creatures" and then the sequel comes and it's "Wacky Creatures 2: Hitler's Warcrimes" Who greenlit this?

[@pussygangster5976]

Why they could not do this: Queenie really began to sympathize with Gellert’s ideas, and the only one who could convince her was Jacob. But here's the problem: he remembers nothing. And on the return of his memories and build their storyline. “This spell erases only bad memories, but I didn’t have them!” - wow, class! This is soo stupid, i just cant see how my favorite universe ruined by J.K

[@irrevenant3]

I can understand Queenie buying into Grindelwald's sales pitch. After all, from where she sits, MACUSA *is* a repressive regime. But dear lord did they handle the execution terribly. . I like your version, BTW.

[@adampkalb]

38 minutes in, the first Fantastic Beasts film already established that in advance, about only erasing bad memories. I checked it.

[@mossyrocks3652]

*Important plot point of first film* Crimes of Grindelwald: Well yes, but actually no.

[@ObserveTheCelestial]

It felt like a film adaptation of a book that doesn't exist. Certain details missing, others not translating well to screen, and characters being watered down for cinema. If this movie was a book I have a feeling it would be an absolutely amazing book with a decent movie attached.

[@richardrobertson1886]

RandomFace that’s the problem with both films. Rowling is an author not a screen writer. These films need the books.

[@axelpetersson5787]

prolly bcs it's co-written by a novelist.

[@alexiz0013]

@RandomFace That's a perfect description of the problem, tbh

[@catherinelastname]

The other replies here sum it up pretty well. This movie perfectly illustrates the differences between a book author a and film writer. I think these movies would be much more of a success if Rowling didn’t insist on writing them.

[@jordanreed3675]

To me it feels like we have went from chamber of secrets which was the first one and we have skipped all the way to half blood prince that’s how jarring this feels

[@tylergaylord3]

I think the big problem was that JK wrote the screenplays for both films. While she only looked over the screenplays that actual professional screenplay writers would adapt her novels from. She is clearly a novalist writing a screenplay, they contain way too many names and plot points mentioned without being seen. Too much exposition. This stuff works in a novel when you can digest it, but film is a visual medium, and it can really drag down a movie by having too much talking. That's my problem with Crimes of Grindlewald

[@slavmetal]

Yes, great point. The way we visualize books in our minds while reading (and writing) is always different than the way a film adaptation will be. To make the transition to cinema you need to understand cinematic language, which she clearly doesn't. Also, while Rowling wrote 7 great novels, everything she's done since has been at best mediocre, so who knows if she has it in her to produce more original work.

[@julianWmontgomery]

Yeah. I think I might have to agree with you. Nothing against J.K. because I love her, but I think this movie makes more sense as just one aspect to a drawn out story

[@shajedulshuvo6141]

Yees....exactly what i was thinking....the script seemed like what it would be in her books...way too much explanation through dialogues....you have to tell the story through visual content and interaction....the talking took away the signigicance of their acting and interaction on screen....although the story as always is entertaining which JK ROWLING never fails to deliver....

[@madisonbrooks8672]

As a writer and someone who's spent their entire life studying all the ways to tell a story, I've never agreed with this. There are differences between the two mediums, but they're not as big or strong as they may seem. If the movie failed at exposition or dialogue, that has nothing to do with the medium. I've watched plenty of movies before while hardly looking at the screen, it's not just a visual medium.

[@slavmetal]

​@@madisonbrooks8672 if you can watch a movie without looking at the screen, it's probably not very good.

[@Verebazs]

The way I see it, they should've either: A) Make a series about Newt's adventures with magical beasts, as the title suggests. B) Make a series about Grindelwald, with each movie showing his rise throught the lense of a different character/cast in each installment: first film Newt Scamander get caught-up in his plot by pure accident when he travels to New York. Second film show him handed over to the German/Bulgarian/Russian/whatever (or at least explain why he's handed over to the Brits, eventhough he's not a british wizard) Ministry of Magic and escape, and focus on the international auror force hunting him. It could even be led by Newt's brother, it can even involve Tina, but leave Newt out of it.

[@LDranzer1]

Voldemort learnt the Avada Kedabra on Skillshare

[@squidsquiddly5970]

Does it bother anyone else that the trailers showed the Kelpie swimming in the lake like he had just discovered it "making me think FUN JOURNEY!" when in reality it was in yet another dark suitcase aquarium? And it also advertised the Baby Nifflers like they were going to matter, then they were so un-needed they could have all 3 caught fire and no one would have noticed..?

[@micamarayvos]

I thought the same, the movie it was only referencing harry potter movies or the prequel. It feels like an improvised movie that brings nothing new to the table.

[@aspenyoung2914]

thats good imo not bad, trailers are shit nowadays. they give away the entire movie, trailers should be as barebones as possible.

[@dilospino]

Dark house* aquarium, Newt didn't keep the kelpie in his suitcase, i get you point though.

[@deleted663]

I must admit Jude Law is a perfect young Dumbledore, looks strikingly similar to Michael Gambon. Perfect casting choice; hope he gets more screentime in the next Fantastic Beasts movie.

[@noorazraq2245]

Review13 I’m just a little mad cuz Dumbledore is supposed to have long auburn hair.

[@MrTuas]

He needs to dress less like a hollywood superstar and more like, you know, dumbledore.

[@squidsquiddly5970]

I really thought that was what this one would be about. Maybe even the relationship between him and Grindlewald only. But nope.

[@uknowho9074]

@@MrTuas Wasn't Dumbledore like over 100 years old when he died though? Obviously the guy wouldn't dress and style himself the same way forever. Dumbledore seems rather young in the newest FB movie, so it makes sense that he looks fashionable. The comfy pjs and not caring about looks thing comes usually with old age.

[@chor2336]

The problem is that Gambom was not the best Dumbledore someone could have been ... I mean, i love him and grew up watching that DUmbledore, but read the books... Dumbledore is much more calm and quirky than the one from the movies

[@Bubble170]

I don’t get it. It’s called “crimes of grindelwald” but barely anything bad happens on his part. Seriously think about it. Not enough happened for it to warrant that name. He’s not doing much or being actively evil enough.

[@irrevenant3]

Nope. And it's not even clear that he was actually *wrong* in much of his rally at the end. Okay, yeah, he laid a trap for the Aurors at the end of it, but they *were* planning to capture him and presumably torture him again (they cut out his freaking *tongue).*

[@vibraniumghost7822]

Didn't he kill a bunch of kids or something

[@gaguiar]

Yeah, the crazy fascist leader is just talking about creating a new society in which billions of people will be enslaved since their birth. Nothing wrong tho

[@theophrastusvonhoenheim4022]

I hated the movies too but was grindlewald killing all those babies not enough, lol

[@Bubble170]

@@gaguiar you’re misunderstanding me. I’m saying he didn’t commit enough actual crimes for this movie to have that name. Feels like they should’ve waited for like the 3rd or 4th movie to bring out the “crimes of grindelwald” title. He didn’t actually do enough. He’s nowhere near as terrifying or as fleshed out as Voldemort. They should’ve built it up over a few movies and then revealed the true extent of his atrocities in a movie titled “crimes of grindelwald” instead of throwing it in our faces like “Look! He’s evil! He’s done some shit! Hate him! He’s a CRIMINAL!” We should KNOW he’s evil by the actions we see, not be TOLD he’s evil.

[@chickendrawsdogs3343]

Totally wasted potentials for an actor as charismatic as Eddie Redmayne.

[@NeawsThe]

Wait what? This irritating, badacting and ugly loser is everything but charismatic. Scenes without him are actually the best ones.

[@someoneontheinternet6378]

@@NeawsThe Whats your age?

[@NeawsThe]

@@someoneontheinternet6378 20-25, btw like for that Sweeney Todd

[@someoneontheinternet6378]

@@NeawsThe I'm just fucking with you. I don't think Eddie looks handsome or ugly.

[@takeafuckingshower]

He's the worst

[@PrettyMuchBlack]

"It's Harry Potter, with the soul sucked out" Damn, that's accurate

[@imaadshahrukh4829]

Vutto Technically a Harry Potter movie after a Dementor kiss.

[@DMG380]

It's bullshit. I grew up with the HP movies and they suck ass. The Prisoner of Azkaban is especially bad. All 8 movies are quite bad and disappointing, but I like the Fantastic Beast ones. I really enjoyed the movie and my friends who saw it also did both HP fans and not.

[@imaadshahrukh4829]

DobromirMG You're opinion. After all, the movies are great but they don't live up to the books.

[@paulosalles9206]

@@DMG380 you stated an opinion and still managed to be wrong that takes some special genes.

[@DMG380]

@@imaadshahrukh4829 I am opinion? The movies are shit, because they try to cram the whole shchool year in a couple of hours. Don't get me started at the stupid giant clock or the mangy pathetic werewolf.

[@xPoemi]

Can we just talk about the fact, that Dumbeldore told Harry in the last book, that he avoided confronting Grindelwald out of pure fear of finding out, who of them casted the spell that killed Ariana? Well...let's just cast that character developpement right out of the window! I guess now he just COULDN'T do it because of some silly bloodoath or some sh*t, not because he simply was afraid to confront his own mistakes! AND Dumbeldore NEVER teached Defense Against the Dark Arts! He used to be the teacher for Transfiguration. He even wrote his biggest works on transfiguration! AND why in the world did they dress in SUITS in freaking Hogwarts!? I can understand the "muggle clothing" in the regular world but why would they wear this stuff inside Hogwarts when they are cleary all wearing wizarding robes in the books and original movies? AND what was that McGonagall cameo? Minerva McGonagall would NEVER run screaming after a student and take around 200 points from them in the process. WHAT IN THE WORLD was that all about?! AND don't even get me started about this "secret Dumbeldore" and how that somehow explains how powerful Credence is. Albus Dumbeldore literally stood out in the family because of his talents and his younger brother Aberforth always struggeled because he never could meet his standards. The Dumbeldores where NEVER considered especially powerful. Only Albus Dumbeldore was!

[@g.d.graham2446]

Lol

[@Mozgokepmusic]

1. That is understandable but would be a bit weird in sight of the fact that Grindelwald literally causes major losses in WWII. 2. Suits is a good point. I like the design in this Dumbledore but yeah, they should've worn more magical clothes. Like Snapes black suit like outfits. 3. The DoD teaching is a f*ckup that's right. McGonagall COULD BE this agressive as a young teacher. This characterization COULD work. If it wasn't for the fact that she is -3 years old at the time in the books. 4. The plot twist... I hate it how people actually get angry over it... because Grindelwald wants to manipulate Creedence. He actually says he needs the kid to go and murder Dumbledore. And being a dumbledore is not an explanation for his power. He is powerful because he is an Obscurate... He is literally a bottle of coke with mentos. He is not the strongest. But has such uncontrolled!!! power that can get on par with Albus. And Grindelwald goes for the most hurtful motivation for Creedence. The kid just wants a family. And he uses it against him. He creates him a family that resents him. He forces him to hate Albus... HE IS LYING! And I'm sorry but I just don't know how anyone would ACTUALLY believe that he is a Dumbledore.

[@TheDawnofVanlife]

I agree about the relationship stuff. Like if no one in the HP series ended up dating, it still would have been a strong book. So much of Fantastic Beast: The Crimes of Grindelwald is who's with who and who's into who and who use to date who and who has romantic drama with who. And this is a story about ADULTS, not teens.

[@PriyankitaPant]

Nobody was invested in Harry & Ginny in the movie

[@emilykruger2844]

Priyankita Pant Agreed I always wanted Harry and Hermione to get together because in the movies Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson had a lot of chemistry

[@joeyjerry1586]

Kind of weird that Daniel Radcliffe has great chemistry with every female cast member but the one that he barely has any chemistry with is the one that plays his girlfriend.

[@johnpark4650]

I can understand why Harry-Ginny connection had to be made, though. Only by this there's a more iconic connection between the trio (friends become family) and it makes Harry being welcomed by the Weasleys as a family member. Still doesn't cover up the fact that the relationship was painfully underdeveloped.

[@wallywest4727]

Sure but in the books we were.

[@CHLOCHLOLP]

@@johnpark4650 yea it just feels like they got together because ron and Hermione did. that was so forced lmao, but yes i agree with oyur point about harrys relationship with them coming full circle, but yea she really should have made ginny a more prominent and interesting character from earlier on then. but she probably didn't plan it that far back.

[@user-qv4ip5if9x]

Does the twist that Dumbledore can't move against Grindlewald because of some blood pact bother anyone else? Is it not enough for Dumbledore not want to attack his former best friend/brother, hell even former lover? Especially since the last time it happened it resulted in the death of his sister? It really kind of ruins dumbledore's character.

[@blyzer7373]

I wouldn't say ruin but it sure does take a lot away.

[@anthonyvillanueva5226]

That Dumbledore/ Grindelwald thing was one- sided if I recall correctly

[@MrPedrogiorgi]

But maybe there is magic involved, like you can die if you break the pact, idk. There must be something more to this pact than just a simply "we made a promise that we wont break"

[@user-qv4ip5if9x]

@@MrPedrogiorgi well I do assume that something bad would happen, but that doesn't make it any less worse in my opinion. But then again, if something bad does happen, why not just use the unbreakable vow? It's essentially the same spell, I don't understand why Rowling insists on ruining her well crafted universe.

[@alextrill5829]

Yeah, me too. I actually liked Dumbledore helplessly saying he can't go fight Grindelwald several times because I thought that yeah, there's some deep drama in his soul, expressed in a simple "I can't", that's good. But then it turned out it was merely "I can't because there's a powerful magic that prevents me and which I didn't tell anyone because audience is not supposed to know yet." it really took all the punch out of it.

[@steev-sensei]

I agree with a lot of his points, but I think he failed to understand what made Grindelwald's speech so shocking. WWI was the war to end all wars. If you told anyone who lived through WWI that there would be a new world war soon, that would invoke an extreme emotional response. So I thought it was handled very well. IMO, it felt like the movie focused too much on trying to fool us and could've just gotten rid of a few character subplots. It was a confusing mess that was just trying to set up the next 3 films instead of being its own story.

[@ScaryMason]

Tim Stuart movies have a beginning, middle, and end. This is something in common with real stories. This rule can be broken and still be really a good story but not here. I left the theater thinking of all the more satisfying endings in other movies. My one upside is getting to engage in all this Internet criticism over Crimes.

[@cameliaberghean1300]

This movie could have been so much better if it had restrained itself a bit with the number of characters it tries to introduce/reintroduce us to. We could have done entirely without Yusuf. Actually, I would say that Credence being led to just Leta would have had a bigger emotional impact. Nagini was such an exposition dumpy non-character. The poor actress barely got any lines. Also what the hell was up with that follower of Grindelwald that he threatens at the beginning of the movie and then kills at the end? Lol, I completely forgot about that guy until someone mentioned him in a review. Speaking of Grindelwald, I wish we had gotten more of the character whose name appears in the title. Since I actually really liked Depp in this one.

[@winterdragon4125]

The only *character* who actually understood any of the broader context in the actual story and had that severe emotional reaction was the muggle who served in WWI. The context is more for the audience, who actually know about that the Holocaust and atomic bomb because it happened, which makes it a mess in terms of storytelling...

[@godot8694]

It wasn't confusing at all

[@realtsavo]

@@godot8694 I agree, I had absolutely no problems following the story. I am starting to suspect that the Harry Potter fanbase is just a toxic one, bitching about anything they don't like.

[@TFconfused]

I remember YEARS ago when I was still in Highschool when these movies were first being talked about. I remember reading how they would be all about the study and interactions with magical creatures. I thought that was a brilliant idea: make a movie in an established universe so you have some stuff to play with, like all the magical creatures already introduced through the franchise, but still distance yourself enough that your not retreading/retconing and stepping on your own toes. But it was clear from the first that Fantastic Beasts is everything I feared. Why isn't this prequel series about ya know FANTASTIC BEASTS, they take a back seat to all this weird evil wizard crime drama plot that is just awful. Imagine a movie that was about Newt traveling the world discovering new beasts and monsters instead of all this shit. The worst part is how heavily J.K. seems to be the one to blame for all of this , should've left well enough alone

[@jereboy2005]

Thats what I was hoping they would be. I actually pretty well liked the first one because it had a lot of stuff like that. The dark wizard stuff felt more tacked on. It felt like a bit of a wondrous fantasy type story. This sequel really was a bit of a letdown for me.

[@irrevenant3]

Or change the name of the series. The bait and switch means that essentially noone is happy.

[@karolinakuc4783]

First movie was good though. But next as you said should follow book "Fantastic Beasts & Where to find them" more closely. Newt, Tina, Kowalski, Queenie and maybe Theseus on an adventure to find new beasts. That'd be cool

[@sys434]

maybe what JK Rowling needs is a comic book platform so that she can do all the multiverse, alternative timeline alternative universe stories she wants

[@wendy5256]

Maybe rowling is doing the thing where she tries to rewrite everything, only worse and nonsensical

[@Adamnme01]

She's doing a George Lucas

[@tomtheconqerur]

@@Adamnme01 worst than George, at least George didn't retcon some character races and sexuality for the sake of diversity.

[@tomtheconqerur]

@Guilherme Martins dumbaldore(sorry I missed spell) was retcon to be gay after the books were finished and I am not going into detail about the hermine being retconned to be black just because of a fucking stage play

[@cannonfodder5766]

@@tomtheconqerur bro it's not that serious

[@oof-rr5nf]

@@tomtheconqerur I like the idea of people of colour being given the opportunity to play roles of originally white characters in further adaptations. So much of media is taking what was old and recreating it for nostalgia, that I think making casts more diverse is a fine cause. That is just my personal opinion, you are of course free to disagree. What I do not approve of is how J.K. pretended that Hermione could have been interpreted as a black person the whole time. That is not how you do representation! She does not deserve credit for that.

[@ikenosis8160]

“If it sounds like a snake, it’s a mistake.” -Mr. Plinkett

[@stevenirizarry1304]

The one time that saying makes sense

[@TheSalts]

This movie was full of great ideas with bad execution. J.K needs a writing team working with her to balance her ideas out. The Yusuf plot was unnecessary for one. I still enjoyed my time in the theatre though in the end.

[@stephaneconstant1302]

great ideas- yes... but bad execution.... i'm not sure... it was one of the most exciting movies which i saw since i became boxxy's software user and started to watch everything i want and for free

[@jarrodedson5441]

@@stephaneconstant1302 question

[@OlleForsberg]

I just saw it, and I already forgot what the hell Yusuf was on about.

[@ScorchipProductions]

In my opinion, the Yusuf plotline needed to be the center of this movie. Keep Grindelwald in the background and let him take center stage in the next movie. Use this movie to build the mystery of Credence's true identity. They could have had Yusuf completely dominate the main cast and then have Grindelwald show up at the end and completely dominate Yusuf, letting us know how far from Grindelwald the cast really is. But no, just a throwaway plot that literally went nowhere despite taking up the majority of the film.

[@irrevenant3]

IMO, the Yusuf plot was mostly just badly integrated into the rest of the movie. It's point is to mislead the audience into thinking Creedence might be the long-lost Corvus Lestrange. But they drop that reveal just before they reveal that actually he isn't - so what was the point? . If they were going to do the Yusuf plot, they probably should've let the *audience* (but not Tina) know early on that he was hunting Creedence because he'd identified him as Corvus and wanted revenge. Then there'd be some actual tension in that plotline. (Plus you'd be wondering how Creedence - never the most stable character - would react once he learnt the backstory behind Corvus's conception).

[@SomeHarbourBastard]

Missed Opportunity: Not casting Jared Harris (Richard Harris' son) as Young Dumbeldore

[@leaslej7128]

I think it should have been Lars Mikkelsen

[@ecentricsummer338]

Honestly Jacob was more likeable than Queenie and had more potential to be a great character. I was hyped o when the trailed came out, I thought there would be a great yet emotionali way to bring Jacob's memories there... But I was let down by the first scenes of the movie. Queenie's choice didn't really stab me as much because she's not a fully developed character. I think Newt did great but this movie did him dirty. I really like his character and I thought I could see him grow as a character, but this movie took a weird turn and the plot was scattered. The actors did a great job, but the script is a dead no

[@silver_desperado]

*spoilers* One of the biggest problems with this movie was Grindelwald’s lack of crimes. The movie is literally called the Crimes if Grindelwald. The only crimes I have seen committed by him in the film is his escape from prison, him ordering a baby killed, and then killing people with the blue fire. When the Aurors came to the rally I laughed aloud when the lead one was like, “let’s not go in there wands blazing, it’s not illegal for him to talk” I thought with Dumbledore there we would get a flashback or something that would tell more of Grindelwald’s past. In the original series, Voldemort committed crimes all the time and it made us understand how everyone came to fear him.

[@renskedunnewold1995]

I completely agree. Surely they could have named this one something else and keep that title for one of the sequels where he actually commits a bunch of crimes? Also the deathly hallows imagery in said title is weird, seeing as how they play no role whatsoever in this movie.

[@Sovereign506]

Well if killing or mass murder isn't enough of a crime in your eyes than there is clearly something wrong with you. Grindelwald is the Hitler of this franchise and if you couldn't understand the entire meaning of his acts than you should go back to school and try to learn something about the aftermath of WW1 and the beginning of fascism.

[@winterdragon4125]

@@Sovereign506 "Show, don't tell," dude. Grindelwald's crimes are mostly vague in the film, while we had a much stronger sense of Voldemort's behavior and actions and his and his followers notions of blood purity. This is a severe problem for the storytelling. It's a no-sell to some viewers, including myself. (I'm very big on "if you are going to do a story about something horrific, actually be willing to show the horrors and deal with it.") The closest the audience could get to knowing that Grindelwald is Wizard Hitler is because of the last Harry Potter book, which doesn't expound his crimes in depth, and no characters in the films actually go in depth with his ideology or their thoughts on it. Since the Fantastic Beasts series is clearly meant for an older audience and follows around adult characters, you would expect a Wizard Hitler to be discussed and shown in far more depth than in Harry Potter, due to the characters' and audiences' age being younger for HP. Especially since Grindelwald is a larger threat than Voldemort due to his country-hopping and his larger focus than Voldemort being primarily centered on Britain.

[@ontos8534]

You clearly weren’t paying attention

[@silver_desperado]

Winter Dragon 💯💯💯

[@thatRyzzle]

Was J. K. Rowling's editor fired or something? Makes you think …

[@jyu467]

She's probably so famous that no one want to question her anymore. Probably has a bunch of yes men working for her.

[@depressedbreakfast2614]

Woke, female Lucas

[@alexiz0013]

@Depressed breakfast Oh noo... lol. This really is kind of like Lucas all over again

[@SQUIRRELSONASTICK]

@@depressedbreakfast2614, except she ain't woke.

[@franziska9260]

Why can't Fantastic Beasts just be Newt messing around with cute things. Why can't Fantastic Beasts just be Newt messing around with cute things.

[@KeyBladeMaster-Dan]

Why can't a Snake just BE a Snake?

[@andreivaldez2929]

DBLoCK_ThE_KeyBlade Master Because J.K. Rowling is taking her writing ques from M. Night Shaymalan - when you can't write anything interesting just throw in an unnecessary twist.

[@anthonyvillanueva5226]

Apparently she had this planned for 20 years. Meaning that for 20 years she had planned that an Asian woman would be the beastly slave of a white man.

[@Evelina_412]

@@anthonyvillanueva5226 I don't get why are people so focused on the actress' race? I mean, there's nothing in her character that indicates her race, so I'm assuming that they just wrote the role and happened to cast an Asian woman, there was never any "submissive Asian woman" stereotype attached. Intent matters.

[@KeyBladeMaster-Dan]

WHAT A TWIST!!!

[@squidsquiddly5970]

Honestly it bothers me too. Does that mean that the old "non Asian" woman that the snake turns into in the Harry Potter films was just how this woman aged? Or was she a person that permanently tuned into a snake only to somehow be able to turn into a geriatric white woman on que? Is Voldemort aware of this? Is he in a sexual relationship with a snake? My brain hurts :(

[@deshtom]

My main issue with this movie is that half the time I didn’t understand what was going on. The editing, writing, and directing made some parts of the movie incomprehensible to me at times. From the very first action setpiece, I barely understood what was happening. It was clear that Grindlewald was winning, but I never understood how or what exactly he was doing. And that just kept up throughout the movie. From start to finish, it felt like every other scene was either convoluted or poorly done. I enjoyed the first movie, and I actually like the character work around Newt specifically, but when your movie makes no sense I just can’t get too invested into anything.

[@squidsquiddly5970]

I agree. I would have had to watch it at half speed and even then maybe I would still be lost. I honestly to this day do not understand the "black sheet art installation looking spell" that he uses to call followers. It seems so inefficient and obvious. Voldemort's was like a bat signal this was like...a Tide Ad..

[@HarryvandeSunweb]

Doesn't help that they literally seem to teleport everywhere wich makes it confusing as fuck for me because I never knew where they were. And so much of the movie is at night too so sometimes you cant see shit

[@squidsquiddly5970]

@@vedantpophale7216 Ya that does make more sense lol :D

[@squidsquiddly5970]

@@HarryvandeSunweb OH GOD THIS! Every time they poofed somewhere else I was literally lost. In Harry potter before they teleported they would say where they were going and what they were going to do there. The only times they teleported quickly they ended up where they had already been. making it easy to follow. But this!m ugh. Half the movie I didn't know where they were...Are they in the human world? Are they in the Wizard world? Is this even frickin Paris? I am not acquainted with the city well enough to know.. ;(

[@hryank33]

deshtom I totally get what you are coming from as there are many sub plots, which make it confusing to many people. To me on the other hand, I find that the stories in the second one was enough to sastify me as I did not find the first one good, cause not much was happening.

[@kidkunjer]

that queenie had roofied Jacob was not supposed to be played off as comedy. It was deliberately deeply creepy; she's a deeply creepy person. Jacob didn't call her out on it because he has low self esteem and puts her on a pedestal; its a dysfunctional and unhealthy relationship. Queenie is not right in the head, and that's why she joins grindelwald, this part of their relationship was building towards this. She's one step away from being full on belatrix crazy.

[@silverstarlight9395]

Wow! I didn't notice the parallel. Bellatrix was deeply devoted to voldemort, the same way that queenie is on her way to being deeply devoted to grindelwald.

[@drogadepc]

Still it's terrible on screen

[@19Rena96]

@@drogadepc no.

[@clown4635]

@@19Rena96 it was shit. The situation is dropped too fast

[@19Rena96]

@@clown4635 why? I don't think the scene should have been any longer or more detailed.

[@zeroskaterz92]

I don't know why they even called this Fantastic Beasts when it's hardly focus on the beasts to be honest. To me personally, they should've called this series as Witchcraft and Wizardry as an anthology set in that universe. Witchcraft and Wizardry: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them Witchcraft and Wizardry: The Crimes of Grindelwald It's a lil bit mouthful but at least it's a better representation of what the context of these movies will be.

[@theylied1776]

The scene when Mary Poppins showed up, just took me right out of the movie.

[@jackbudi]

I thought that was just Yondu yelling “I’m Mary Poppins y’all”

[@spencerfrankclayton4348]

theylied1776 What scene was that?

[@SnizelOfficial]

Fantastic Cash Grab: The Crimes of J.K Rowling

[@itsdonny950]

Fantastic cash grab the grimes of grindelwad

[@gellertgrindelwald5891]

Snizel stop moaning

[@thevoid99]

subtitled.... j.k. rowling goes george lucas on her creation.

[@yusufgazi7]

Gellert Grindelwald hot

[@Denebvega]

Harry potter focused on the bonds of friendship and trials of growing up. Fastastic beasts is just a bunch of adults with childhood issues we never really get to know them. Had they taken the characters at a younger age maybe it would have retained what made Harry potter authentic. And no some backlashes don't cut it.

[@browniancoffee779]

While I think the movie overall was really bad, I actually really liked Eddie's performance of Newt. It's kind of a breath of fresh air to see a male lead be nurtering, kind, and competent without having to be charming or clever. Idk, as a neuro-atypical person, I read Newt as being played that way and it's nice to see someone I can relate to in the lead role of a film

[@KZesty]

I agree! I thought similarly in the theater.

[@TheDragonHistorian]

3:50 To be fair, Jacob's the one who gets the reaction shot to Grindelwald showing a vision of World War II, so that trait of him being a WWI vet wasn't _completely_ thrown away. Theseus, on the other hand, who was mentioned to be a "war hero" in the first movie... that wasn't brought up again at all.

[@cianfarrell9992]

These movies would have been better as books instead. That's what I wanted. And I'm not talking about that textbook book

[@mayhaveproblems]

I agree! Because now it is way too much information crammed in a small space of time. I still like the movies, although I do see their problems. And I love Newt to death :) and Grindewald is a better bad guy than Voldemort, because Grindevald at least tries to be charming and inviting, he has better motivation than Voldemort, I believe. Voldemort did stuff he did because he did not feel special enough, in my opinion, Geralt on the other hand has this idealistic worldview he tries to make come true.

[@lukejosef1655]

they are its called the original screenplays

[@mayhaveproblems]

@@lukejosef1655 let me rephrase it - I would love this story as a novel(s) 😊

[@stephaneconstant1302]

since i became a boxxy software user and started to have access to all movies ever made for free i forgot about books...

[@JamesLawner]

Yeah and the book series could just simply be called, Newt Scamander. Newt Scamander and the Fantastic Beasts Newt Scamander and the Crimes of Grindelwald Y’get what I mean?

[@PanAndScanBuddy]

Fantastic Beasts 3: The Cursed Tax Forms of Grindelwald.

[@Micktrex]

Am I the only one who saw that small black cloud slither out of shot in the first film? You see Newt spot it so he knows Credence got away in some form but keeps quiet about it. Probably something the film should have made more clear, but I always expected him to come back.

[@unhelpfulrevelations7989]

same

[@mirhasanoddname]

Same!!!! We also got a scene in the first movie of Jabob clearly remembering things but the person who made this video says it's something that was completely changed...?

[@irrevenant3]

Yeah, it was obvious to the audience that Credence had survived and quietly snuck away. I think what Captain Midnight was criticising was that by the start of Film 2 everyone just knew that Credence had survived, making the whole "only Newt knows that he's still alive" ending a bit pointless.

[@Icepick614]

Creedence didn't die in the first movie there's a scene where newt specifically watches him leave the real oddity is the fact that his character seems to completely change between movies

[@Nora-dg1hx]

Its been like 9 months(?) though since the first movie, in which he went to Europe and shit, literally he spent 9 months trying to find himself, ofc he will change

[@jachariah4694]

The whole movie felt like the first act

[@musicprodigy3837]

It felt like There was no climax in this movie at all

[@gelpy27]

omg ya....

[@DMG380]

@@musicprodigy3837 Sorry dude, but did you see the movie. There is a huge climic scene and yet they had to end on a clifhanger.

[@musicprodigy3837]

@@DMG380 lol, sure...

[@turtleanton6539]

But also felt like it was 3hours long

[@kanucks9]

7:35 I said to the screen "he's a Matt Smith ripoff" Four seconds later Matt Smith is brought up.

[@tomlikespirates8500]

I was commenting "he's Matt Smith's doctor who" but then he mentioned this issue so I didn't comment it

[@mareksnopek9474]

The problem I had with this film...well, they were many. First of all, a wasted potential. Around the time of the Order of the Phoenix or a bit later I would be ecstatic if they included Nicolas Flamel in one of the movies. Now I didn't get the feeling he really mattered as a character, and nothing he did practically mattered for the rest of the story. The last "save the Paris" scene was the most terrible scene in the JK Rowling franchise and he as an old and wise alchemist became just a good old superhero type without an identity. Definitely a missed opportunity, but I don't think it even matters anymore with this franchise. Secondly, the movie was hurried and exhaustingly long at the same time. The BIGGEST problem I had was a hectic rush trough the scenes when they needed to slow down and visually show the viewer how the particular scene or a motif belonged to the story. It was either a mindless rush with a cliché substory made up as an explanation, or a weary lingering on nothing. Nothing was happening many times, the transition parts just didn't work. And I have to agree that Rowling has actually screwed up the whole Dumbledore's personal history just for the sake of sensationalism. I'm not talking only about a shady "blood relation" or whatever it was with Grindelwald (by all means, it was poorly executed), but also about the ending scene with Grindelwald revealing to Credence he was Dumbledore's brother. Even a five year old wouldn't believe such a twist and it was, in my opinion, very cheap. So all in all, J.K.Rowling would do the best thing to stop ruining the good things about Harry Potter franchise, because at some moments there are really things questioning the meaning, value and magic of the original works. Nothing is worse than denying your own work for the sake of an overambitious project.

[@Rubber_Monkey]

As someone who wasn't all that into the first Fantastic Beasts movie, this doesn't surprise me.

[@herofromthedark]

I actually did like the first one. It was weird at times, but never felt poorly put together. This one seemed like a grab bag of different ideas, and no one was gonna tell JK what should have been edited out in order to make a more coherent plot. Hell, it made sense why Newt, a zoologist, might've gotten mixed up in the events of the previous film, but why is he here now? Why is he necessary? The first film was decent. Good even, but this one felt like they just went with the first draft of the script without bothering to check anything else.

[@thibaldus3]

Yeah, I couldn't care less about the sequel after the first fantastic beasts.

[@gellertgrindelwald5891]

Annie moaning and negativity. Sick and tired of it

[@dannypalin9583]

Fantastic Beasts feels like Warner Bros is desperate to make a cinematic universe since the one they made with DC is a mess. I personally thought that the first movie was a poor man's Hobbit, but at least it felt like a spinoff. It took place in the same universe as Harry Potter but it could stand up as its own movie. I think the only reference to Hogwarts was a throwaway line that Scamander was expelled from it. The sequel on the other hand feels like they're trying to shoehorn the Harry Potter storyline into the spinoff. As a result, a lot of scenes felt more like fanservice that added nothing to the story. Professor McGonagall showing up when the story apparently takes place before she was born is the biggest offender.

[@brunolinares604]

Which is pretty ironic considering the 8 HP movies already were a successful "cinematic universe" :/

[@nicholasmaslennikov2128]

I wonder if Midnight's Edge will do a video on this

[@fourcatsandagarden]

.........shit. I never did the math on that one. The WB makes DC movies and these movies math I mean. Seriously how did I not think that one through. (Like....i know and have always known WB makes both but my brain didnt connect them somehow. Dear lord I must be beyond exhausted.) That explains so damn much.

[@adamlarus1]

Did McGonnagall maybe have much older sister or even a mother with the same name?

[@cosmicmcmoon5773]

I feel that the Wizarding World would work better as a cinematic universe overall if it were to focus on characters and historical Harry Potter events fans would actually want to focus on. Like I'm genuinely surprised there has been no consideration for a standalone Voldemort or Dumbledore prequel movie. Or hell, even a movie on the origins of Hogwarts. There is so many creative possibilities within the magical universe other than spending 5 movies on Fantastic Beasts. On a side note, in regards to Midnight's criticism of the name "Wizarding World"; I'd argue it's at the very least more inventive than just dubbing it something like the "Harry Potter Cinematic Universe" or "Potterverse."

[@ChrisParrishOutdoors]

I don't understand this direction for Queenie and Jacob, the ending of the movie implied she was going to now win him over or that she would trigger his memories or something. It wouldn't have been a hard thing to write that Queenie either triggered his memories again or used her magic/mind abilities to restore them. They could still move and the story could pick up where it did only have them running a bakery where she is helping make it efficient with magic like we saw her do in the first movie. How JKR didn't even consider this is beyond me. The explanation for his memories and how they got to where they were would take just a few lines of dialogue and maybe a shot of them running a magical bakery and be far more logical and believable within the rules of this movies universe.

[@ApprenticeNick]

My issue was that the main 4 characters (Newt/Kowalski/Queenie/Tina) were the least relevant to the plot. Newt is literally only helping because Dumbledore asked him to. Albus and Credence should have been the focal points, or maybe Lestrange. It felt like you could remove most of the "main" four characters and still have the same story. Their actions and relationships barely affected anything.

[@andreivaldez2929]

JK Rowling is officially in George Lucas' shoes now.

[@oldcowbb]

what we need is a jar jar binks equivalence

[@peterjoyfilms]

Andrei Valdez Nah these films don't matter enough for that to be the case.

[@HolybasilYT]

At least Lucas didn't make Jar Jar a genderfluid bisexual toadnymph or some other.

[@jarrodedson5441]

Yep it's pretty sad...

[@panickedhonk]

what's worse is that even the prequels got better reviews

[@Germania9]

The big question is: Is the Fantastic Beasts series even necessary?

[@KeyBladeMaster-Dan]

No it never was and personally I think it's actively ruining the magic of the original HP series with it's stupid retcons

[@kuvaytcev]

no, it's not

[@blyzer7373]

I always find this argument a dumb one.

[@feconisb.3067]

Is art ever necessary?

[@noorazraq2245]

Zedfinite I’m starting to doubt its canonicity especially after that flashback scene that took place probably in the 1910s and included Professor McGonagall even though she was born in 1935?Like,how did that happen?

[@c.b.5535]

I really liked the government stuff from the Harry Potter movies. Like when the ministry was interfering and the minister was in denial. How Voldemort took over the government was one of the more interesting part of the series to me.

[@yellowbears4103]

In my opinion this movies biggest flaw is that it introduces a couple characters without fleshing out the personalities of the main characters. But also how almost none of these characters have anything to do.

[@marcuskiller02]

Kowalski getting his memory back and Credence being alive were strongly hinted at in the 1st movie

[@K1NG900Plays]

marcuskiller02 exactly, they even say in the first movie that it would only erase bad memories, so the reasons link up from movie to movie.

[@marcuskiller02]

@@K1NG900Plays JKR planned it aaallll!!

[@squidsquiddly5970]

True.. I wish it didn't happen though. It would have been cuter seeing her stroll into the bakery every day and winning him over without the magic past stuff. Kind of proving that even though he doesn't remember he still has feelings for her. "But then again making her not be a manipulative insane dictator following traitor might have sufficed ;("

[@rosssapp6990]

Yea that never really bothered me.

[@jarrodedson5441]

@@rosssapp6990 can I tell u what stuff in this movie pissed me off

[@yy-hj4br]

Fantastic Cash and How to Grab It

[@gellertgrindelwald5891]

So what? Every movie wants money? Logic hello?

[@loreaver3882]

This movie was boring as hell. This movie franchise needs to make up its mind if it’s a spinoff adventure story about Fantastic beasts or a Dumbledore prequel

[@duolingo0552]

Fantastic beasts should have been a quirky, singular film

[@erzan]

They Star Wars prequeled it. I knew they would.

[@NickonPlanetRipple]

People can call this headcanon, but I think there is a VERY strong case to be made that Newt is an aspie. All the subtleties of Redmayne's performance, including physical acting, practically just scream of someone on the autism spectrum. Of course it's never brought up in the films because there wasn't a word for it back then, but speaking as an aspie, I deeply appreciate the character for his dignity and emotional depth. Not only for that, but how strongly he goes AGAINST the grain of more typical protags like Harry, against the typical hero's journey and... I think that's largely what's sunk the character for people. We've been raised and taught to expect heroes in movies to be "charismatic" and "engaging," (manly) so it feels weird and alien when a guy doesn't quite fit that adventurer role. We've been taught that we're not "supposed" to appreciate a character like Newt and that it's weird if we do, because he doesn't fit any clear convention, he just breaks rules. It feels different, so it's dismissed, and that really rubs me the wrong way. And going back to the autism aspect, when people call him downright annoying I just think... "Man, if someone can't stand to be around this guy for two hours, they must find people like us UNBEARABLE to be around IRL." Personally, I think we need far MORE characters like Newt. Such flawed, gentle souls.

[@Evelina_412]

Quirky characters are popular, though, have been for a long while. Tolkien's writing is based entirely around hobbits and they're unlikely heroes who do not fit the typical hero tropes and who don't really want to go on any adventures or pick sides in any wars. Characters like that are and have always been popular. I think the reason people dislike Newt is because he's not really fleshed out as much of a character. I know things about him, like that he likes animals, is a bit socially awkward and an outcast by choice, but I don't come out of the movie feeling like I really know him or care about him. After watching two of these movies, I feel more sympathetic towards Jacob Kowalski than Newt and that's a problem. I do believe that Eddie Redmayne himself mentioned Newt being on the autism spectrum? But if that's the case, they're not doing a great job with representation.

[@NickonPlanetRipple]

Donald Smith Except it doesn’t. Some autists do get along better with animals than people. That is a common thing.

[@NickonPlanetRipple]

@@Evelina_412 I... disagree about it not being good representation. I can't vouch for the sequel, but I think he was wonderful in the first film. Very faithful and endearing.

[@X3n0nLP]

Newt is one of the only Protaginists I can actually relate to for exactly those reasons. Sure I can like others but I never feel like I would act the way they do.

[@TheHalcyonTwilight]

Mate one of the UK's chief exports is Quirky Guys. It's the main way we siphon money out of the US via Tumblr. If we make a sufficiently Quirky Guy to get into the SuperWhoLock level of fangirl adoration, then we've got a ready-made captive audience who'll gush all over any merchandise we can sell to them.

[@jerQCote]

Hahaha! Forced marriages and borderline date rape is hilarious as long as it happens to a muggle!

[@SarSaraneth]

Borderline? Say rather, outright. It is, in fact, what happened to Voldemort's father, as it happens. Rather stupid of the writer to try and play it for laughs.

[@arraikcruor6407]

What if Queenie and the guy are Voldemorts parents!?!?!?!

[@jerQCote]

@@arraikcruor6407 What? We already know who's Voldemort's parents

[@pyroshayniac1090]

@@arraikcruor6407 They're names Tom Riddle Sr. and Merope Gaunt. Nice try though.

[@Carols989]

HP always had a weird thing about love spells and potions. Like, Voldermort's mom using it on his dad is stated as rapey and Bad. But then... the Weasleys sell the same potions on their prank shops, and the kids even learn to make it in class. Like roofing people is normal in the wizarding world

[@leahmarie112]

there’s a reason GRR Martin takes so long with his books and his additional expansion material: he cares that it all adds up and contributes to the world. Same with Tolkien and all his brilliant material. The problem is once people start to skip the caring part and go directly to making a new movie series just to make money (the hobbit, fantastic beasts, the last three seasons of GoT that went off book) and stay relevant that things get messy.

[@loafywolfy]

In the case of Tolkien, he wrote all three books at once, so its a very clear story, not so much when you write a single book then keep trying to shoehorn a saga out of it

[@tiaaaron3278]

GRRM is getting off too with butchered Dany chapters in ADWD and 90% of AFfC.

[@mr.voidout4739]

What I hate about Harry Potter: It can pull any plot device out of its ass and call it a "spell."

[@MidgetAbsol]

I loved the first movie and was so so eager for this film, as soon as I got in it had felt like I completely missed a movie between this and the last, a lot of the film was just boring, especially the climax, it didn't feel like the ending of a film, when the credits started rolling I was confused

[@patrickkelmer6290]

Though there is one thing I´ve been thinking for a long time ever since the first Fantastic Beasts came out - why didnt JKR write it as a novel before hand?

[@michaelramon2411]

I thought CoG was decent, if in need of another script draft or two. But here are two simple changes (as well as a smattering of more complicated possibilities) that I think would have helped the film a lot: 1) Have a more concrete antagonist. Yes, Grindelwald is there and has his name in the title, but he really doesn't do much of anything (and has no interaction with any main characters) until the very, very end. The film needed a threatening bad guy to keep things moving along. They seemed to be trying to do this with the guy the British Ministry sent after Credence (Grimmson or something), and were doing an okay job, but he just disappears halfway through the movie. Grindelwald desperately needs a visually/personality distinctive elite henchman he could send out, hunting Credence and menacing protagonists alike. Where is his Bellatrix Lestrange, Fenrir Greyback or even Lucius/Draco Malfoy? Grimmson seems to be competent, tough enough to tangle with an Obscuras, and is well-placed to manipulate all sides (drive Credence to Grindelwald in search of answers, use Newt's violation of his travel ban as a reason to try and eliminate him, keep the British/French ministries pointed in the wrong directions) but, again, the movie just forgets he exists. What the hell? 2) Play up the moral greys a bit more. Fantastic Beasts can't rely on the original series' "growing up from childhood to adulthood" thing for its emotional/thematic core, so it needs a replacement. Given the time period, a more "adult" world of moral greys seems logical, especially if contrasted with Newt (and Jacob's) relative innocence. The movie seemed to have a good start here (the British Ministry, while definitely "good guys", want Credence dead, not captured or befriended), but then undermines that, since the guy tasked with murdering Credence is a Grindelwald agent, and also not really trying to kill Credence. The Senegal guy was another well-done grey (he shifts from "suspicious" to "antagonist" to "anti-hero" to "ally" quite naturally, as the audience and protagonists learn more about him), but he's somewhat overtaken by everything else going on. The two obvious options to up the grey are to a) make Grindelwald's objective seem more understandable (have some scenes of Muggles doing bad things, or Grindelwald setting up situations so we see why the Pureblood wizards are afraid of them) or b) make Wizarding society more problematic. Already done a little bit with FB1's introduction of laws against Muggle-Wizard marriage, there are plenty of ways to show a less appealing side of the WW, from Ministry officials caring about Grindelwald because he threatens them, not because he might kill many Muggles, to, well, Queenie. Queenie, at least in this movie, could easily demonstrate a problematic type of wizard that we haven't really seen before. Yes, she loves a Muggle, but Jacob seems to be her possession, or her pet, not her boyfriend. From the love potion (which should have been played as "this is messed up, what the hell?", not for comedy) to joining Grindelwald so she can marry Jacob without any consideration for HIS feelings on the matter, Queenie could be shown, deconstructed and potentially redeemed as another less overt but nevertheless harmful form of anti-Muggle bigotry (in comparison to Grindelwald). A few other small things that wouldn't seem that hard to change: I like Newt, and to me, his two core elements are his empathy and his intelligence, which, combined with his awkwardness and dislike of people, make him stand out quite a lot from the average fantasy movie male protagonist. I think the movies would benefit if Newt solved problems and overcame challenges in interesting ways, rather than there just being a magic-off. For example, he could deduce and exploit the rules of Grindelwald's blue loyalty fire thing, which they really needed to put a hard limitation on, so the next three movies don't have the question "why didn't he use the blue fire spell to win instantly?" every time Grindelwald does something. In general, I think Grindelwald needs a little more explanation - what is the Skull Hookah, what does it do and where did he get it? How does blue fire work? I know Harry Potter books aren't big on explicit magic rules, but I could really use a baseline here. Is G-wald using ancient magic artifacts he found/stole? New stuff that he made himself because he's a magic genius? Is this kind of thing just lying around and no one ever uses it because wizards are, in general, idiots? Lastly, I think trying to fit Leta Lestrange's entire backstory and character arc into a single movie was a mistake, especially given how many characters there are. She should have either been introduced in FB1 or died in FB3. Or both.

[@AlexSmith-gr3el]

Just wanted to say, well written and I couldn't agree more!

[@diegom6053]

"Failed" is an understatement. Can't believe J.K wrote the screenplay.

[@bobmiller3627]

Before she this, I think she looked at Transformers and the Jurassic World movies and said, "Wow, these retards will buy ANYTHING! To the typewriter James! And don't spare the horses!!!"

[@yarection]

Tbh Jk while a good writer is very much overrated but most things in life are

[@princessthyemis]

YEAH. it's /atrocious/.

[@dunadanfer]

after reading the play she wrote, yes, I believe this could fail.

[@Liam-ok9lm]

Wish there had been more of Newt and Dumbledore, thought Jude Law was very good. Also thought the Scamander brothers were great together. They look like brothers.

[@rnrmunimula3756]

"It's Harry Potter with the soul sucked out." Agreed!

[@evan]

"If you took Matt Smith's doctor from Doctor Who, put him on sedatives and took away half of what made that character interesting, you'd have Newt Scamander." WOW. Startling analogy

[@alextrill5829]

Grindelwald was actually looking interesting for like 5 minutes - the way he looked before and during his escape was absolutely awesome. But then, with that silly haircut - it may be fine these days, but back then? It would be ridiculous in a non-cool way - and generic bad guys look, retinue and manners... eh. I guess its nice he isn't playing Captain Jack Sparrow in different costume, but it looked he wasn't acting at all. It was all so... dull.

[@drogadepc]

I liked his speech though. I agree his look in the beginning was interesting, they should've kept it.

[@jarrodedson5441]

@@drogadepc Grindelwald looked cool for the first 5 min of the movie after that we got Johnny Depp with horrendous mohwak

[@hannahdyson5603]

Shouldn't have made him a anemic pineapple . And what on earth is with the two tone eyes ?. As far as we were aware his appearance was that of a regular human and at least when he was younger he wasn't as serious as Depp potrayed him . He felt a bit longer much like Voldemort

[@adurrehmanwajid2877]

This was a really good review but nobody seems to understand how extremely charming Grindelwald was supposed to be. From early on you understand Grindelwald is extremely smart and manipulative. Take the speech scene at the end. He very cautiously makes sure not to attack the aurors as to seem good in the eyes of his supporters. He understands exactly how to influence people which was missed here. Aside from that, great review

[@andreivaldez2929]

Adurrehman Wajid He was boring and reaching to try to make him sound interesting is the real crime here.

[@adurrehmanwajid2877]

@@andreivaldez2929 Maybe but you've got to understand how Grindelwald appears to his supporters.

[@user-qv4ip5if9x]

I feel like his speech was so boring partly because of Depp's preformance. Don't get me wrong, I like Depp, but he seemed so uninterested and his delivery seemed so flat to me. Especially when the young witch was murdered. I feel like he should've acted upset, maybe yell a little, try and inspire anger. I don't know.

[@reedalbrecht6916]

Should’ve kept Grindelwald as Colin Farrell. I like Johnny Depp as an actor, but he’s not nearly as charming in this as he is in other films.

[@adurrehmanwajid2877]

@@user-qv4ip5if9x That's interesting because of how upset Grindelwald actually seems to act. It's a sharp contrast to the angerable Grindelwald presented in the books but still. It's also interesting how Dumbledore tells Thaddeus not to do anything which really made the movie interesting for me but I guess that's just me

[@ladydixon9651]

I mean, Credence never actually dies in the first Fantastic Beasts film, we actually see a bit of him float away after he had been "defeated". Still a garbage film series tho

[@whm_w8833]

This sound like problems that Star Wars prequels has faced. Weird.

[@BugsyFoga]

Yhis movie will probably end up like J.W: fallen kingdom , where it doesn't get that many positive reviews yet it will still make a crap ton of money in the box office.

[@gandalfthegrey2592]

r u talking about Jurassic Park 2, 4, or 5.

[@shinndig1293]

I've been a Jurassic Park fan for as long as I can remember but MY GOD did Fallen Kingdom just SUCK!!!

[@jarrodedson5441]

@@shinndig1293 agreed....I think Harry Potter is having the same problem as the star wars movies and the Lord of the rings movies...

[@Jack-ii6iv]

Nathaniel Foga that's cause critics and audiences completely disagree now so the audience doesn't trust critics

[@adamb4140]

I remember being so excited about fallen kingdom but man that movie was A S S

[@squidsquiddly5970]

For me it was: Too many plot lines. Too much movement with no real focus on sets or creative designs. Meshed vocals that were truly hard to understand and follow most of the time. Too many lore based characters casually mentioned for no reason to the plot. Poor CGI moments tossed in with really decent ones that stood out too much. Non flushed out characters with hard to grasp motives. Johnny Depp looks and sounds exactly like Johnny Depp in every film. For me it was distracting. Action scenes were dark and fast making scenes confusing and uninteresting to look at. Confusing backstory that did not line up with family trees. Odd out of character behavior for some of the main characters. Uneventful goose chase with little to offer in terms of progression. Not enough Hogwarts "just me?" ok. The beasts are useless most of the time and could be cut out completely with little difference to the story line. Not enough practical effects which makes it feel green screen-ish the whole time. "I would have rather had a movie about how Potters Parents grew up. A story featuring all of the young teachers lives and how they all got where they ended up ending with the death of the parents and baby harry scene re shown. Damn that would have been powerful. But nope.

[@Despina838]

How the hell were there too many plot lines? I don't get you guys complaining about this. Everybody's looking for Credence, Credence is trying to find out who he is, and Grindelwald's gathering followers. That's literally it. Not too confusing.

[@squidsquiddly5970]

@@Despina838 Not quite...We have the Credence love interest tension, Credence lost parents line, Credence baby swap line, Convoluted death squad to kill credence for some oath line, Queenie betrayal and villain line, Neuts brother is an asshole to him line that does not conclude correctly, woman in Neuts suitcase zoo love interest line that dwindles at best, Sudden Love interest with Neut and main character line, Grendlewald and Dumbledore line that confuses, Dumbledore and credence figuring out his past line, and the Nagini curse love issues story line, and the chancellor girls past bullying history/ baby swap line all twisted together with other characters that have their own conflicts we never see resolved. Plus the blood oath/ Credence/Dumbledore family stuff... Credence didn't give a hoot who he was in the first one and now that is all he can damn think about... Lots of shit happened in very little time.

[@irrevenant3]

@@squidsquiddly5970 I forgot the woman in Newt's suitcase. Yeah, that went absolutely nowhere. :/ . And yes, the whole Yusuf/Leta storyline felt weirdly underbaked. We barely got to know Leta before she was gone. . And I found Nagini probably the most potentially interesting character in the movie and they did *nothing* with her. "Here's Nagini. She's a Maledictus. She'll just be tagging along for the rest of the movie doing nothing, 'k?"

[@a5y749]

To be honest I enjoyed the movie yeah there were some problems with the movie but still enjoyed it

[@hryank33]

Chill Hop Same.

[@Douglas_Props]

Good for you. Just wish we could have.

[@Indrea13]

Same here

[@L3MONGamer]

it was a beautiful visual montage, it didnt fail in that category.

[@whodatninja439]

Newt is a better main character than Harry Potter. Harry Potter is a dull chosen one protagonist, who only succeeds because of his friends. He's really not that good himself or even that interesting. Newt on the other hand is a fascinating character. Flawed, shy, but ultimately kind, brave and smart. He's nothing like your average macho lead man and I love that. Newt's only flaw is that he's in these movies. He should be going on epic zoologist adventures, not these grim dark prequels no one asked for.

[@dudetheman3]

I completely agree with this! "He should be going on epic zoologist adventures," how awesome would that be!

[@Caine61]

For a movie called "Fantastic Beasts," they were more of a fantastic afterthought than anything. I get it, it's supposed to be a prequel series. But I feel after they introduced Grindelwald at the end of the first film they got caught up in that and lost track of the whole Newt Scamander aspect. In the 2nd film it was all about Grindy, and Newt happened to be the main character.

[@kyriee2762]

I agreee it's such such such a shame. Fantastic beasts was a delightful journal/catalog type fiction book and something that actually enrich the wizarding world. But Rowling really has to stretch it into meaningless series. Imagine following the quirky Newt on his journey to discover magical beasts :'( we'll never get to see it.

[@sugarysweet07]

Couldn't agree more. Newt is unique in so many ways, especially for a male protagonist. Not only does he flout typical macho or "chosen one" leads, but he's also one of the most respectful, well rounded portrayals of an autistic character I've ever seen. I would love to watch a movie with just him and Jacob's wacky misadventures with beasts. Hell, I'd love a series that details Newt's early ventures into dealing with beasts, his initial struggles with being isolated and friendless due to his awkward personality (which no doubt lead him to finding comfort with animals), him eventually finding friendship with Jacob, etc. I'm just baffled with all of JKR's decisions, if she wanted the story to be all about Grindelwald and shit, why not just make a different trilogy about that? She named it "Fantastic Beasts", why not let it be about the damn fantastic beasts? It hurts to think about how much potential this series could've had if helmed by a competent writer. We could've had a fun, contained romp that would help world build the HP universe without all this earth shattering war drama that relies heavily on "hey, remember THIS thing from the original HP series???"

[@whodatninja439]

Adrijana Radosevic i already said he shouldn't be in these movies, he should be going on his own adventures. Not forced into the Harry Potter lore where he doesn't belong. Fantastic beasts should've been a standalone movie with no Grindlewald

[@Adamnme01]

sounds like they really phantom menaced it.

[@Jack.Xin.]

Exactly

[@adamnfiddle8065]

More like they last jedi'd it

[@Robloxman226]

Seems like "The Cursed Child" would be a good parallel to The Last Jedi, saving that it's not a movie.

[@BrainySnacks]

Nooooo please don't get that impression. If you're into the lore of HP, this film was really enjoyable, but the critics poo-poo'd it cuz it isn't such a brilliant "film." This is one of the first times where I really disagree with Midnight. All the characters are fun and different. Johnny Depp is shockingly great as Grindelwald and really sells the performance of a non-one-dimensional villain. The story is awesome and you really feel like it's building somewhere. My only issue with it is that it doesn't feel like a totally complete story in-and-of-itself, much more like chapter 2 of a five part series. I consider it an 8/10 and a must-watch if you like the Potter books.

[@christopherrussell2926]

Actually, Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace is a full-length movie with an accompanying 330-page book to go with it. That's not so unusual. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them on the other hand is ONLY 44+ pages long... and yet it's being expanded into 5 full-length movies. A more literal and better comparison here would be if James Bond author Ian Fleming had lived long enough to insist that his short story, 007: Quantum of Solace, be made into a 5-film series instead of 1 film... with Fleming appointing himself as the Screenwriter for all 5 Quantum of Solace films.

[@cpt.walker6273]

You are incorrect about Jude Law as Dumbledore. I immediately saw and heard Richard Harris. Everything from the choice of words, his head movements, the cadence of his speech, and emphasis on certain words. Look at the scene in the parked bus for the best example.

[@taylorhaws6402]

I loved Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, mainly because it was not a Harry Potter film. many people like to call it a harry potter prequel, but I don't think that is accurate. it has completely different characters and is telling a completely different story, in a completely different series, on an entirely different continent. J.K. Rowling has created an entire world, so why shouldn't it have more than one story? The Crimes of Grindelwald however, it feels much more like a Harry Potter prequel. A good chunk of the story takes place at Hogwarts, and it had Characters like Nagini, Nicolas Flamel, and McGonagall. I wouldn't mind them being in the movie if they actually did anything to serve the plot of this story and perhaps subtly foreshadow their future in the Harry Potter series, but they were really just pointless fan service. that's not to say that I thought that FBAWTFT was an amazing movie. It does feel disconnected and vague at times. however, I simply figured that J.K. Rowling was primarily used to writing books, and I can understand how writing a movie would be very different. I still love it even if I know it isn't the most objectively good film. I expected that the second one would be a better film due to the fact that she would have had more experience and instruction on writing in movie format. Unfortunately, it just wasn't.

[@ReinBelmont]

A saga tainted by a prequel trilogy where an unnecessary origin story and politics replace the feeling of wonderment and adventure. Where have I seen this before?

[@ricohernandez9969]

Not even in a Harry Potter video can you excape anyone ranting about the Prequels of Star Wars.

[@Sara-rr9ss]

at least the sequels are good and the prequels aren't that bad either... if you watch them as a meme

[@ricohernandez9969]

@@Sara-rr9ss Clone wars are great though.

[@mnikhk]

Hint-In a galaxy far far away....................

[@SarahAndreaRoycesChannel]

@@mnikhk And also quite the opposite, Middle Earth (the movies at least)

[@DanJan09]

please stop with those transtions for the ads. they are not part of your argument. put an end to your argument and after that start a new one for the product you want to sell!

[@zacherytan2804]

Can't blame him. Many would tune out as soon as ads start :(

[@DanJan09]

@@zacherytan2804 everybody who wants to turn off does ist either way. but they are just more annoyed now.

[@korvo3427]

I think it's really easy to tell when he's starting to shift the subject over to the sponsor.

[@warrust]

the music is often an obvious giveaway

[@oof-rr5nf]

Bur I quite like that! Seems creative.

[@KP-kp1os]

"Tina have strong sense of right and wrong" is that why in 1st movie she take jacob to her house instead of hospital so he can be cured? LOL

[@Hellmantle]

On the note of the Queenie/Jacob relationship; I believe the problem is that it wasn't played as straight A's it needed to be. What I got out of those opening character scene is that Queenie is so emotionally broken somehow that she believes that, for all intents and purposes, drugging Jacob was the only correct move to achieve the life that *they* wanted. And by Jacob calling her crazy, he was in essence saying that their love isn't worth those kinds of measures. Queenie knows better than anyone that Jacob truly does love her (what with the mind reading and all). But being called out on her crazy plans makes her end up doubling down in the end. Which ends up leading her to side with Grindewald. If they had played that scene and more importantly the reactions of the other characters to it straight, it could have been a compelling arc. An arc that shows that the path to hell is truly paved by good intentions. Queenie is supposed to be a look at how people like Grindewald and people like him play on people's desires and turn them into what we perceive as evil.

[@pienkunicorn]

That's kind of what I took away from it. That the Queenie thing was supposed to show dangerous and manipulative Grindewalt is that he can get good, sincere people to join him by finding their desires and promising them what they wanted. But it didn't quite work in the film. Maybe if they spent less time on the stupid baby swapping thing and more time on Queenie and Jacob... Cause honestly, who cared about the Lestrange thing??? It was just, kinda dumb.

[@karolinakuc4783]

@@pienkunicorn Her death looked like a suicide

[@Jesperadoo]

Credence didn't die in the first one. A small part of the obscurus got away. And Jacob didn't lose his memory, he still vaguely remembered some stuff at the end of the first one, even recognizing Queenie.

[@drogadepc]

Yeah but how did Credence come back from a single part of the Obscurus? And Jacob was supposed to have forgotten almost everything. That scene was him having a déjà vu.

[@DeadInside-ct6dl]

You mentioned something about 'wonder'.....personally, I felt that the first movie HAD that, because it was all about 'Fantastic Beasts'. I even loved Newt. But the whole Grindewald thing is SO unnrcessary to drag out.

[@strawberrymilksamurai]

Thanks for bringing up the Doctor 11 resemblance. That drove me nuts. The thing about Newt that really annoyed me was his body language, specifically the way he talks to people while looking the other way, avoiding eye contact. While this is probably meant to show his lack of social skills and general shyness, to me it just looked like Newt trying to emulate the 11th Doctor a lot. Matt Smith employed the "look the other way while talking to other people" method of acting a lot too, but for some reason it worked with the Doctor, while it gets a bit too annoying with Newt... possibly because Newt overused this type of body language, and used it whenever he was talking to someone, while the Doctor only used it sparingly only in scenes that actually required it. So even though both Newt and the Doctor are eccentric and have their own quirks and ways of communication, when the Doctor looks away from the person he's talking to, it comes off as genuine and believable, but when Newt does it, or rather overdoes it, it just looks like an actor acting and not a character displaying his own quirks

[@karolinakuc4783]

He is shyer. Also it suits his character. Some animals don't like long eye contact. Most animals rely on other senses like hearing and smell that is very sensitive in autists.

[@Redwingsfan210]

The ending of the first movie suggests Jacob remembers and credence is still alive

[@RiderNexus]

The Attack of the Clones of the Potterverse

[@danielborges467]

The Last Jedi is even worse than the Crimes of Grindelwald......

[@anakinfan57]

Not even in a Harry Potter Video can Anyone escape people ranting about Last Jedi

[@peterjoyfilms]

AnakinFan57 Reviews It's the gold standard by which we judge everything now

[@RiderNexus]

@@danielborges467 No it's not Also, TLJ > > > > All the Prequels

[@RiderNexus]

@@peterjoyfilms In a decade where we had much worse films come out (Cough) Fallen Kingdom

[@jerQCote]

Jk Rowling is the new George Lucas. She created a beloved franchise and is now ruining it with prequels. But the worst part is how she blatantly lies and backtracks on her social media.

[@zahirsookoor2673]

How tho? explain

[@d3clan679]

Jeremy Cote she wrote a bad movie, so what, that doesn’t make her a bad person

[@jerQCote]

@@d3clan679 i never said she was. Just like George Lucas identifiant either. She's out of touch if anything

[@jerQCote]

@@zahirsookoor2673 well for one's it's public knowledge that jk had a big hand in casting the original movies . Which means she agreed to cast Emma Watson as Hermione. Yet, when the Cursed child came out, she said that Hermione had always been black in her head. Which means either she was lying when she said she had say on the casting or she lied about Hermione bring black. And if it's the former, then it makes Hermione's role as JK's self insert very strange. Then there's the time she said werewolves were an analogy for HIV, which if true is kind of horrible as there's only one good portrayal of wrecked across the series and all the others are portrayed as violent, dangerous, the worst of which infects kids on purpose.

[@panickedhonk]

she just can't be wronged

[@emmaesta9444]

My theory as to why Queenie had a sudden DRASTIC change of heart is because they can somehow dull her powers. See, in the scene right before she is greeted by one of Grindlewald's goonies, shes having a panic attack. She cant control her powers and she clutches her ears to make it all stop. We hear the bustle of the city and it is chaotic. But then when the goonie touches her shoulder, it all goes quiet. It would make sense as to why she would trust people so easily. She is used to hearing their true thoughts and without that, she could be extremely gullible. But now that i think about it, youd think someone whos wiser than a duck would think "hey maybe something is up. Maybe they are lying even if i cant hear it". Plus the twist at the end was like ...k.. um.. w h a t ? And whats this whole baby and water and angry sister or some shit prophecy?? I never heard the full thing and i got extremely confused. I hated it. I just wanna see new and fantastic beasts. Newt is one of my new favorite characters because i relate to him most. He prefers animals, is socially anxious and awkward, is brave but not Gryffindor brave, and hes a Hufflepuff. I adore Newt and I honestly just wanted to see him go on more adventures and discover new beaties and baddies. Maybe thats just me though

[@Thehotdogman]

Looking at what Rowling has put out since the original series, her detective fiction, that one adult book she tried to do, the cursed child, this thing, I'm basically sure she can't really write. Everyone has a book him em. This lady has a seven part series (even if it was starting to show cracks by book five ) , but it's what you do after your first stab that tells you if you've got chops or not.

[@doxazo5512]

“Waiting for a character moment to really work for me” NEWT AND TINA IN THE LIBRARY, NEWT AND LETA OUTSIDE

[@doxazo5512]

dragon stare24, they were though, we set up the tension between them quite thoroughly

[@brandonmccallum6750]

Is this nesscary? I mean do we need this?

[@peterjoyfilms]

Brandon McCallum No absolutely not. Its just about money.

[@panickedhonk]

the movie or the review?

[@ontos8534]

I mean do we need anything I always thought that argument was dumb

[@hryank33]

Yes. The only problems with the second one is because it raises questions but it does not answer them.

[@Benjy1]

This movie made back its $200,000,000 budget 3 times over

[@acecashman1237]

To be fair, Jacob getting his memory back was implied to end up happening with how the first movie ended so it wasn't shocking when it did happen in this movie