On Friday, November 16, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald was released in theatres after a two-year long wait, and I, for one, was very excited. Here is my personal, mostly spoiler-free take on the new movie and what it may mean for the next three to come. The only spoilers here are the ones shown in the trailer.
Let’s start with the positives, shall we? The Crimes of Grindelwald must first be appreciated for its wonderful characters and effects. Commended by fans for his performance as Newt Scamander in the first movie, Eddie Redmayne continues to knock it out of the park. His portrayal of the awkward magizoologist still remains a key highlight of the newest movie, from his developing relationships with other characters to his interactions with magical beasts. He was almost flawless throughout. I love the idea that he is a sensitive male character in a leading role, helping to advance the notion that not all heroes are considered heroic for the same reasons. Newt encompasses the idea of being caring and compassionate as a way to make a difference in the world, instead of a battle-hardened warrior who must fight with weapons alone.
Additionally, new fantastic beasts were revealed, appearing well-designed and original and capturing the hearts of fans. Most notable was the Zouwu, a giant cat-like creature of Chinese origins, which had many humorous and sweet moments on screen. The adorable nifflers also played a role in the movie, much to the delight of many, including me. Furthermore, the movie featured many great acting moments, and not just from Eddie Redmayne. The reveal that Jude Law would be playing a younger Albus Dumbledore was wrought with heavy expectations for a much-beloved character. However, I found his performance to be wonderful, and I felt that he managed to capture the wise, strange, and sometimes mischievous professor in a way that was not only entertaining, but insightful. We were also introduced to many new characters that have a lot of potential in movies to come.
Sadly, The Crimes of Grindelwald was not all happiness and rainbows. In fact, its ratings ended up making it the least liked Harry Potter movie out of the previous nine. Before I saw it, I wondered extensively on why this might be, as I thought the first film showed much promise for an entertaining and beloved franchise despite the controversy that surrounded it. I got my answer much sooner than I expected.
The Crimes of Grindelwald suffered from the plot-points of its own story. It felt as if countless details and background stories were being compressed together to make a rather confusing and disjointed experience. This made it hard to follow the storyline and to understand what characters were doing (or why they were even there in the first place). The movie also featured many plot-twists and major reveals that should have made everybody gasp in astonishment, but instead seemed to fall short. This was either because the plot was too scattered to have a significant and meaningful change, or because the reveals did not seem to relate in any way to the other. One particular reveal at the end could have been really impactful, but came across as abrupt, and inspired more of a “so what?” reaction. In addition, some newly added characters had a lot of potential for fascinating story-arcs and real interest from fans. Despite this, many of the new, or even main characters, took a step back and had so few lines in the movie that little attachment could be felt for them. Overall, the movie was trying too hard to set things up for the next one. Most of the plot felt as though it was introducing characters or future storylines without actually resolving or building upon them, leaving the audience disappointed or confused. This left me wondering how about the effects of this plot on the third movie in the franchise, given the fact that fans’ expectations will be higher than ever.
Furthermore, the decision to cast Johnny Depp as Gellert Grindelwald may have not been the best choice. Originally, it was discouraged by the fan community due to emerging details of his actions within his personal life. Many were also convinced that Colin Farrell, the actor who played Percival Graves in the first movie, would do a much better and original performance as the lead villain. While I found Depp’s performance to be good in The Crimes of Grindelwald, I would have to agree mostly with this statement. Depp managed to add flair to his character and performed well, but I feel that another actor could have played the role much better. I think that giving a lesser known and much less wealthy actor a chance to shine would have created a more open and unique atmosphere to the series, much like the case of Eddie Redmayne or Ezra Miller (who plays Credence).
So, before you go and see The Crimes of Grindelwald in theatres, prepare yourself for the fact that it is not perfect. It has flaws and plot-holes, along with some confusion on the way, but then, what movie doesn’t? Don’t put down your wands or broomsticks and give up hope yet, because who knows what magic could happen in the future. The movie still has a lot to offer in terms of familiar characters and their stories, as well as entertaining moments, special effects, and wonderfully made creatures. Anyways, many franchises have a movie or an episode where there is a lot of introduction to work with so that the next one can be even better. Perhaps we should forgive J.K. Rowling for doing the same.