Skip to main content

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindelwald Review (Non-Spoilers)

In 2016 the Harry Potter franchise was brought back to the big screen with Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them (2016, David Yates) which built on the franchise, gave audiences a new look at the Wizarding World and introduced everyone to Newt Scamander, played by the talented Eddie Redmayne (Theory Of Everything, The Danish Girl). And now its sequel hopes to continue that story. Now focusing on the war between the Ministry and Gellert Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) a dark wizard who is crucial to the character development of everyone's favourite future headmaster, Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law). Boasting a stellar cast and incredible Visuals, how well does it live up to previous Wizarding World movies?

First Thoughts

Overall, I liked this film. It’s really good to step back into the Wizarding World and the film does a good job of building on it. And not just the world, but the characters as well are developed more in this film. However, the film does feel a little empty. The film doesn’t really have a lot going for it in terms of plot and feels a little more like a set up for a bigger sequel.

Eddie Redmayne/Newt Scamander

Eddie Redmayne does a really good job as Newt Scamander. I enjoyed him a lot in the first Fantastic Beasts and I enjoyed him in this film. He has a charm and wit about him that makes audiences love him. Although, whilst he is an enjoyable character to watch, I keep questioning why he’s necessary to the story. The first film was a fitting narrative for Newt’s character, but this story isn’t. This story is about the Ministry’s struggle with Grindelwald, so why is Newt there? Why does Dumbledore insist that Newt take part? He’s not a fighter. And the excuse given for why Dumbledore chooses him is non-sensical. If the writers wanted Newt to be the main character than the narrative should be more suited to his character.

Katherine Waterston/Tina Goldstein

I enjoyed Tina Goldstein in the first film and I like her even more in this film. Especially her new look with the black trench coat. She looks so cool! Also, she seems to be the most practical one out of the new group of main characters. Out of the new characters, she’s the one who is best suited to this narrative. She’s strong, intelligent and can handle herself in a situation, but still has this sweet and innocent side to her. And I did really enjoy her scenes with Newt, although that relationship is given some unnecessary friction that doesn’t benefit anyone except drag out a will-they/won’t-they dynamic. But Overall Tina is arguably my favourite character in this film.

Jude Law/Albus Dumbledore

Jude Law (Sherlock Holmes, King Arthur) is now the third actor to play Albus Dumbledore in Live-Action. And he definitely lives up to previous incarnations. Jude Law so good as Dumbledore! He’s quite charismatic and lovable. So much so that it’s a wonder why some of the characters in this film don’t like him! He’s just so charming. However, like most characters in this film, Albus is given little screen time, which is kind of disappointing. Hopefully, in the sequel, he’ll be given more to do.

Johnny Depp/Gellert Grindelwald

I really enjoyed Grindelwald in this film. And Depp delivers a really engaging performance, even if his screen time is limited. But anytime he’s on screen he steals the show. He’s a very different villain from Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) from the original Harry Potter films. He’s not as menacing as Voldemort was, but he was quite sinister. Especially in the opening scene where his power and menace are completely on display in all its glory. The only problem is that the film doesn’t really focus that much on Grindelwald, which is due to the abundance of characters that the film tries to serve. But the man’s name is in the title! He should have had more screen time or more character development. But we don’t know that much about him.

Dan Fogler & Alison Sudol/Queenie and Jacob

These two had a pretty good storyline in this film. With the issue of their romance being frowned upon.  And both are brilliant in their own rights. Jacob is the lovable, down-to-earth guy and Queenie being the adorkable weirdo. But their relationship is really interesting to watch and it’s good to see the different ways in which both try to handle their forbidden love. I’m really interested to see where the sequel takes these two as they’re left on such an emotional cliff-hanger in the end.

Too many supporting characters

The main problem with this film is that there are so many characters that the story keeps trying to shift between. And because of this, no character gets to have any development or arc and the narrative feels splintered and empty. I believe if several characters were taken out and left for future films or just had their sub-plots toned down then the plot would have been much more coherent.

World-Building

What this film does an exceptional job at building on the Wizarding World. Visiting the magical community in Paris, which was beautiful and unique compared to London and New York. and introducing all-new magical creatures that look incredible. So if you just love the world of Harry Potter then you will really like this film in that regard.

The Franchise-Trap

This is something that happens to most films that are part of a franchise. The writers are so concerned with setting up a sequel, or spin-off movies, that the film in question feels half-baked at best. We’ve seen it happen with The Mummy (2017, Alex Kurtzman), Assassin’s Creed (2017, Justin Kurzel) and several others. Which is annoying. Audiences paid to see a movie. Not a set-up for a bigger movie! Which is what The Crimes Of Grindelwald is. It’s still an enjoyable movie. But it just feels like filler until the next instalment.

Conclusion

Overall, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindelwald is an enjoyable, fun film that will service any Harry Potter fan looking for their Potter fix. But as a film its story is a mess, the characters are under-developed and it's more focused on setting up a better sequel rather than just being a good movie.

So that's my review of Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindelwald. What did you think of the film? Do you agree or disagree with anything I've said? Leave a comment down below. And, if you like what you've read then please follow this blog for more content. Thank you for reading!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Auteurship: David Fincher

The Auteur theory is that a director's film reflects the director's personal creative vision.  I am going to use  David Fincher as an example, because he usually has similar aspects throughout all of his films such as bleakness of a setting; several single frames that flash, low-key lighting and characters that are in the shadows so you can’t see their faces. All of these styles can be found in Fight Club (1999). In most of Fincher’s films the settings seem to have a bleak and uninteresting look to them. In Fight Club this is shown in places like the office of where Jack works, the cancer support group hall, Jack’s apartment. All of these places are just different shades of the same colour (mainly green, grey or dark orange). This is to convey a sense of misery and darkness within the storyline, which the characters are just drifting through their lives. Something that Fincher portrays beautifully in Fight Club. This is a good example of David Fincher’s position as an Au...

Oz: The great and Powerful Review

When I first heard that this film was being made I was very skeptical. The Original film with Dorothy and the wicked witch was an important part of many people's childhood that it seemed that this prequel couldn't live up to it. But after seeing it at the cinema my skepticism was laid to rest. This film is AWESOME!!!    The film follows a similar structure narrative-wise to that of the Wizard of Oz. You start off with in Kansas where everything is in black-and-white, keeping to continuity, then you have the twister that takes the character to the land of Oz. The audience is then introduced important characters like Theodora and Evanora, we even get the journey down the yellow-brick road. The writers have brilliantly taken all these elements from the previous film and used them to create a contemporary origin to the Oz that children were introduced too in 1939.    James Franco was well cast in this role as a rude and selfish magician who w...

Star Wars: The Last Jedi: Trailer Highlights

Star Wars: The Last Jedi New Poster So Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017) comes out in December and we're only now getting the second trailer, just two months away from the release date. Either Disney has seriously dropped the ball on the promotional campaign or they're just so confident in this film that they feel it doesn't require a lot of publicity for fans to get excited about. My guess would be the latter. Since the past two Disney-Produced Star Wars films have both raked in a combined total of $3,124,280,897, It'd be safe to say that Disney would think that. However, right before the trailer was released last night, director Rian Johnson (Looper, Brick) suggested to fans that they should avoid this trailer. WHAT?! What kind of a marketing tactic is that?! Perhaps if you wish for fans to avoid spoilers then you should urge the marketing campaign to avoid them at all costs. Initial Thoughts Yeah! This trailer has me more intrigued about the story than ever, ...