Jump to content
Goose

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

Recommended Posts

I posted this in the original FB thread but figured new movie = new topic. I didn't realise they were now doing 5 movies within this universe. 

 

Spoilers in the synopsis if you've not seen the first film.

 

Quote

 

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is the second of five all new adventures in J.K. Rowling’s Wizarding World. The film stars Eddie Redmayne as Newt Scamandar alognside returning stars Katherine Waterston, Dan Fogler, Alison Sudol, and Ezra Miller. They’re joined by Claudia Kim, Zoe Kravitz, Callum Turner,  with Jude Law as Dumbledore and Johnny Depp as the titular Grindelwald.

 

At the end of the first film, the powerful Dark wizard Gellert Grindelwald (Depp) was captured by MACUSA (Magical Congress of the United States of America), with the help of Newt Scamander (Redmayne). But, making good on his threat, Grindelwald escaped custody and has set about gathering followers, most unsuspecting of his true agenda: to raise pure-blood wizards up to rule over all non-magical beings.

 

In an effort to thwart Grindelwald’s plans, Albus Dumbledore (Law) enlists his former student Newt Scamander, who agrees to help, unaware of the dangers that lie ahead. Lines are drawn as love and loyalty are tested, even among the truest friends and family, in an increasingly divided wizarding world.

 

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is being directed by David Yates, from a screenplay by J.K. Rowling, and produced by David Heyman, J.K. Rowling, Steve Kloves and Lionel Wigram. The film will debut in theaters November 16, 2018.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, GMass said:

Utterly nonplussed about this. The first was pretty poor and can't imagine it getting any better. 

Swings and roundabouts. I thought it was fantastic family fun.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trailer looks fantastic.

 

I was all set to not enjoy the first one but for me it was a perfect balance between old and new in the Harry Potter universe.  More of the same please :wub:

 

Glad that Depp looks a little more haggard though, bit more believable in the role I think... 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Harry Potter so I'm sure I'll watch this but I really didn't like the first one.  'Potter USA' didn't work for me.  They can fuck off with that 'no-maj' shite for a start.

  • Empathy 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Boothjan said:

I like Harry Potter so I'm sure I'll watch this but I really didn't like the first one.  'Potter USA' didn't work for me.  They can fuck off with that 'no-maj' shite for a start.

 

Oh yeah, that grated.  But Dumbledore!  Paris!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They are definitely leaning more heavily into the Harry Potter books (boggards, Nicolas Flamel) than they did previously. It's.a shame because it makes the Wizarding World they are trying to create feel a lot smaller despite parts of this being set in the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just in case this is a spoiler about what is in the trailer

 



The big reveal of Nagini in the trailer is being labelled as problematic 

 

http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/fantastic-beasts/news/a867052/fantastic-beasts-2-nagini-casting-racially-insensitive/

 

I’m not a big fan of Fantastic Beasts because prequels are generally bad and only harm the source material through retconning or by making the world feel small which Nagini appearing does here. I’ll sitll watch it of course but I wish she’d done a sequel instead.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first one should just have been a fun Jumanji with mythical beasties type of family film. All this cinematic universe bollocks and half arsed attempts at building connections to Harry Potter's story is Star Wars prequels 'No, you see Yoda was actually Chewbacca's mate...' levels of bad. Also fucking lol at Rowling claiming that Voldemort's pet snake actually being a hot woman was some carefully planned decade long reveal.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely loved the original series of films with their innocent charm, this series though seems like a grey, charmless dirge.

As someone said earlier I'd orginally imagined a magical Jumanji.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was pretty slow and far more invested in world building than plot. It just about held my attention, but can't imagine a child wouldn't get bored. 

 

The start gets 20 minutes added on because they seemingly didn't plan the end of the last one to match up. It's baffling. The end has seemingly a giant recon, and I wish they didn't do that in prequels. 

 

Interested enough in the next one, but not deparately exciting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about it, the more I'm unsure. They want Depp to be Magic Hitler, but that's an awful lot of weight for Harry Potter, and I'm not sure it can bear it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, kensei said:

The more I think about it, the more I'm unsure. They want Depp to be Magic Hitler, but that's an awful lot of weight for Harry Potter, and I'm not sure it can bear it. 

 

Have you read the books. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Illyria said:

 

Have you read the books. 

 

Of course, and seen the films. But this is a much more direct comparison, and a much adult tone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone in the poster is just ridiculously beautiful and then you have Depp looking like the biggest gimp ever. He’ll have to have some epic charisma in his performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Naieve said:

Everyone in the poster is just ridiculously beautiful and then you have Depp looking like the biggest gimp ever. He’ll have to have some epic charisma in his performance.

 

Narrator: He didn't.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, kensei said:

 

Of course, and seen the films. But this is a much more direct comparison, and a much adult tone. 

 

But that comparison has always been obvious, even in the books!

 

Spoiler

The evil wizard that was defeated in 1945, combined with the general theme of fascism prevalent throughout all the books... 

 

Either way, I'm seeing it tomorrow and can form a proper opinion then :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got back from seeing it with my ten year old daughter.

 

Her verdict was that it wasn't as good as the first one, and it wasn't as fun (definitely not as much fun), but for what has obviously become at least a trilogy it was definitely Empire Strikes Back in tone.

 

19 hours ago, kensei said:

The end has seemingly a giant recon, and I wish they didn't do that in prequels. 

 

I missed this, what was it?

 

I really enjoyed it, thought Depp's Grindelwald was pretty good, liked young Dumbledore (just how old is he supposed to be in Harry Potter though? The setting looks like the twenties, but perhaps is supposed to be the thirties - Dumbledore looks at least forty in this, making him what 100, when he is headmaster) and still love Newt as a character, superb. Need to think about it some more and suspect it needs a second viewing to see the holes - if there are any.

 

Anyway, yes young kids are liable to be bored, although having said that the two young lads sat in front of us seemed to be engrossed throughout the two and bit hour running time. There are some neat action sequences and the setting was lush. Some nasty killings (

 

Spoiler

Did we really need two baby/child deaths in one family film?

 

) and some underlying commentary about facism, cult and how good people can fall for the wrong groups. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was worried this was going to be mired in overarching plot, and it totally was. It lost all the magic of the first for me.

 

The story was needlessly convoluted, and characters change their motivations on a whim. It was also badly edited- there’s a scene where one character just disappears, only to appear at the end with no-one commenting on it.

 

EDIT:

Just a couple of other things, on reflection.

 

It totally wastes the Paris setting, with hardly anything memorable- it could have taken place anywhere, instead of giving us what could have been an interesting take on that time period, with added magic. 

 

Humour is absent from almost the whole movie, which is a shame since the first had some lovely humourous touches. The whole thing is dark for little reason.

 

There’s also very little action. The movie manages to get bogged down in plot whilst actually achieving very little, and feels like a bridging movie rather than anything of individual merit. Loads of characters are introduced, yet do very little- I’m sure they’ll have a big part to play in the further movies to come, but they do very little in this one, and just take up screen time which could have been given to the characters you actually want to see.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.