Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald Review - The Good, the Bad, and All Those Questions
November 26, 2018 |
| Image via Warner Bros |
As a huge Harry Potter fan, I think it's only normal that I'm one of those people extremely excited and looking forward to Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald. Since it came out this November 16 though, the second installment of five films in JK Rowling's expanded Wizarding World prequel series has gotten quite the backlash. So I will try to even out the playing field and point out both good and bad points from the movie (not all films are perfect) and will try to breakdown the questions that left fans bewildered and shook at the end of the film.
Fair warning: this isn't a spoiler-free review, so do not proceed reading if you haven't seen the film yet. Also, most of the points I'll mention in this post may have already been pointed out by others so just bear with me on my own perspective.
The Bad Points
(I want to start off with the bad points of the movie, just so we will end on a positive note. :D)
Like I said, not all movies are perfect and each one will always have their flaws, whether or not people agree to it. First flaw for me was that the timing of each scene. I felt like many of the scenes were rushed and were cut too short that it leaves a lot of "wait, what?" moments. Classic example of this was Leta's flashback at Hogwarts. It was just so random that she was in a separate classroom reminiscing when all the other aurors were interrogating Dumbledore. The flashback itself was pretty short for me - it did show Newt and Leta's relationship, but there could have been more, you know what I mean? I liked that scene actually because it showed us a different kind of Hogwarts. It also broke the stereotype of Gryffindors being the good guys and Slytherins being the bullies. I just felt that we could have had more of that. And then it cuts to Leta talking to Dumbledore about their siblings. Leta asks him, "Was I a bad student?" Then proceeds to say, "Don't bother answering," as if they had a bad relationship, but they didn't really show that in the flashbacks. So, wait, what?
I mean, I honestly don't mind if the movie was five hours long to be honest haha that could have added more details that were missed out. Another scene that felt short but important was the circus scene. It was such a big thing in the trailers but then it when it appeared in the actual film, that was it. I don't know if I'm making sense but I hope I am lol. I'm just saying it could have been something more.
Speaking of the circus, this leads me to another point of frustration - Nagini. Okay first off, when I first found out Nagini aka Voldemort's pet snake will be appearing in Crimes of Grindelwald I was almost certain that I'll be closing my eyes half of the film. The reveal of Nagini being a woman in her past life in the trailers was such a big thing that people even made a big fuss about it because the actress who plays her is Asian. But guess what, I wasn't going to close my eyes after all - well, I did for like 2 minutes. The snake came out for just that period of time like in the trailer and that was it. And as a human, Nagini was pretty much a side character, merely supporting Credence on his mission. I expected more, I guess. I just hope that she would have a bigger role in the coming films; it would also be interesting to find out how she permanently stays a snake (even if the thought of it sends chills down my spine huhu).
I also felt the same way for Leta Lestrange. She deserved better!!! Though I think killing her off was necessary, I'd like to think there could have been more to her character. Leta is such a complex character that I wanted to know more about her character. I felt like her backstory shouldn't have ended there, there could have been more to her. But again, I think it was necessary because it will contribute to Newt and Theseus' character development in the next films. There's also a part of me thinking that Leta may not be dead but that's a reach and probably just how I am everytime a complex character dies post-Infinity War.
Last flaw I want to point out, which has already been pointed out about a thousand times on the internet that it has caused PR controversies for JKR and her team, is the inconsistency with the canon. I assume you're all tired of hearing this, but yes, I also have yet to wrap my head around the whole McGonagall issue. For those who have been living under a rock, Professor McGonagall appears in Crimes of Grindelwald, which is supposedly set in 1927. In the canon universe (aka Pottermore), McGonagall wasn't born until 1935. Fans are questioning this because it would be impossible to have her there at that period. Others said that maybe it wasn't Minerva, the McGonagall we know from the original series, but it was stated in the Original Screenplay that Dumbledore mentioned her name. That also disregards any fact that it could be her mother, her sister, cousin or whatever. (Even if it was a cousin, what was the point?) I don't want to attack JKR or anything but of course as a fan, I just want to question why? What was the whole point of it? I just hope they have a reasonable explanation for it because someone said on Twitter that McGonagall's birthdate on Pottermore has been erased.
The Good Points
(I may or may not be biased as a huge HP fan but here we go)
One of the things I loved the most about this film is the cast. I absolutely love their friendship. Search any of the cast interviews on Youtube and you will see how much they have bonded over the film and the press tours. From the last film, the cast has grown almost double as Eddie Redmayne, Katherine Waterston, Alison Sudol, Dan Folger and Ezra Miller are joined by Zoë Kravitz, Callum Turner, Claudia Kim, Jude Law and Johnny Depp, as part of the main billed cast. And they are absolutely amazing altogether. Their chemistry together is just great and they play each of their characters so well.
I want to highlight Eddie and Katherine's relationship though. Their chemistry as Newt and Tina is really something else. The friendship they share off screen is also as charismatic and lovable. I guess that's also the reason why Newt and Tina are so lovable as a couple and as individual characters because the two actors are incredibly talented in their own way and they work so well together. Don't even get me started on Newt and Tina as a couple. That scene inside the French Ministry where Tina confronts Newt about his "engagement" and Newt explains that he's not in Paris to win Leta back but to actually express his feelings for Tina. The guy literally left England illegally to look for Tina in Paris, even if Dumbledore already sent him to do so earlier on. And when Newt tries to compare Tina's eyes to a salamander, though trying not to say it, Tina completes the sentence for him - this scene was so pure and basically explains their whole relationship. Here comes Newt, an awkward fellow who has no idea how to express his feelings for the girl he likes except compare her eyes to a salamander, and then Tina, who whole-heartedly accepts who he is by the simple act of completing his sentence because she knows how much Newt's beasts mean to him, and being compared to something he loves and cares for dearly is already a compliment to her. Ugh I love them so much please !!!
Another one of the good points in this film is, believe it or not, Grindelwald himself. Now I know Johnny Depp has his own controversies as an actor, and even when he was cast, there was a whole angry mob on the internet, but I won't dwell into that here. I want to focus on Grindelwald as a character. Anyway, whenever I see him on screen, I simply see Grindelwald and not a bleached Johnny Depp. Sorry Voldemort, but Grindy is the big deal. The guy is a downright evil mastermind, truly the wizarding version of Hitler. The way he was portrayed, especially his speeches, was really overwhelming. I love how they highlighted his persuasiveness as something dangerous that they had to cut his tongue for it lol. For me it's also clever that they portrayed him as a "hero" in front of his followers during the rally scene, but when they've all disapparated, only then he shows his true colors by madly killing all the aurors and Newt & co. in the arena. I also loved how he showed the vision of World War II. That scene legit gave me goosebumps the first time, the second time and the third time I watched it. The guy is an evil genius and is not crazy violent like Voldemort who just kills whenever he pleases, but more of a dangerous violent because Grindelwald's weapon is his way with words. I'm excited to see more of him in the next films and I'm so looking forward to his duel with Dumbledore in the last film.
I also loved how the beasts still played a role in this film. Others are skeptical about it saying that the beasts were no longer the focus in this film, but I think otherwise. They actually played major roles in helping Newt and the gang - the Zhouwu helped Newt, Tina and Leta escape from the French Ministry, Pickett the Bowtruckle helped Newt, Tina and Jacob escape from the sewage hideout of Yusuf Kama, and the Niffler was able to steal the bloodpact from Grindelwald. I mean, let's be real, it's quite a stretch for JKR & co. to make five films out of a fictional book set in an already fictional world/book. I'm still happy that they still made Newt the protagonist/hero of the series because that's what still connects him to the whole idea of "Fantastic Beasts". Some say he was sidelined in this one, I don't think so either; we were just introduced to more characters that will help the plot. It's not entitled Newt Scamander and the Crimes of Grindelwald, you guys, so stop comparing it to the Harry Potter series because that one was literally, guess what, about Harry's life. It's an expanded universe, so stop comparing it to the originals. There will always be elements of the original series but this will always be different from it in many ways.
All Those Questions
(Say it with me: WHAT. JUST. HAPPENED)
So after pointing out every good and bad point, all that's left are the questions. More importantly, THAT ENDING. Okay before anything else, I've watched and read a lot of reviews and theories at this point and it's been really interesting. Is Credence really Aurelius Dumbledore, brother of Albus Dumbledore? We obviously can't answer this until the next films but based on the information fans can gather, bottomline is I don't think JKR and co. will just drop such a big reveal like that at the end of the film just for it to be a shallow issue.
After watching it a third time yesterday, I realized a small detail at the beginning of the film. We actually learn that Dumbledore was the one who sent Newt to New York, and my best bet is he was also the one who asked Newt to study the obscurus. And then again, Dumbledore sends Newt to Paris because "Credence could be in danger" and he's "possibly the last in the line of the Lestrange family tree". Why would this matter to him?
Dumbledore knows something that no one else knows, and this isn't a new Dumbledore trait. We're used to him keeping secrets from his protégées! But the question is why? Oh and I also want to point out that Grindelwald may also know this information Dumbledore knows, however the latter might be unaware that the former has knowledge. My hunch is that all of this has something to do with Ariana and the three-way duel that took place between Albus, Aberforth and Grindelwald, ultimately resulting in Ariana's death. There's hearsay that Ariana herself is an obscurus, but this is yet to be official/canon. I have a feeling this is how JKR will play Credence aka Aurelius Dumbledore's role in the coming films. I guess we fans will just have to be patient and wait, and trust the woman.
I also want to know what will happen to Queenie :( Honestly that scene broke my heart ("WALK WITH ME!") and Jacob's devastated face ruined me. I'm still in denial that Queenie has turned to the dark side. She's a legilimens and a powerful witch, I bet there's still something else. I'm hoping that she's spying on Grindelwald (could be possible, could be a reach) or she was brainwashed by whatever was in that tea Vinda Rosier served her. Queenie looked possessed in that "Walk with me!" scene so yeah, it could be possible. Again, we will never know until the next films.
Anyway, I've seen the film three times already yet I still want more. That explains my love-hate relationship with franchise films. You're so hyped for this particular one and you love it, but you have to wait for two years until the next one comes out and you get your answers (or more questions). For me, Crimes of Grindelwald gave off an Empire Strikes Back feeling: it was darker than its predecessor, it dropped off a huge plot bomb, and it just leaves you craving for the next installment.
To all the critics and haters, I'll say this: be patient. I bet most of the haters aren't even Harry Potter fans, and even if you are, again, be patient. I'm sure there will be an explanation to everything, because otherwise if everything is explained in this film, what's the point of a whole franchise? Just enjoy the film if you can, and if you can't, you're entitled to your own opinion but also trust in the franchise.
♥, Murgaloo
Images via Warner Bros. and Entertainment Weekly
Images via Warner Bros. and Entertainment Weekly
0 comments