Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

He's good-looking. To a not insignificant portion of the target audience, that's enough to like him.

I would think that the Tumblr side is in that "would like him just for being good looking" group, though.

Granted, Tumblr isn't a monolithic hivemind, but squeeing at hot characters tends to rise to the top there.

Just saw the movie last night. I liked it, though there’s a lot of it valiantly fighting against its own merits.

The biggest gripe I had was that everything to do with the Lestrange subplot was pointless, yet takes up an enormous portion of the movie. Both the love bow tie that goes nowhere, or the “is Credence this guy’s brother?” where the answer is unequivocally not, none of the characters are really changed by going through all of that (except Leta, but more on that in a sec), and the plot moves on immediately after with it never being mentioned again, even though we had spent up to like a third of the movie at that point on it. The flashback sequence is particularly glaring, as Leta is barely important to the rest of the movie, but gets large swaths that are solely about her: as if she was intended to have a larger role than she did, but they left the “main character” stuff in anyway.

This movie does that quite a bit, and there are many things that decent amounts of screen time but don’t go anywhere, and in some cases it feels like the movie outright forgot to do something about them. I mentioned the love bow tie, but Newt’s brother in general doesn’t really do much beyond be there. Mustafa’s son supposedly being about to die if he doesn’t kill Credence, forgotten. Tina’s boyfriend, forgotten. Etc.

Ultimately I was left with the impression that instead of being a story, this movie was instead more just a vehicle to get the characters where they needed to be for the next movie. Which... ehh...

But I do ultimately still like the movie. The characters are endearing, and the actually followed through and significant character arcs are really engaging to follow. I liked And it’s fun, too: when it’s being madcap, letting Newt and his unique perspective drive the story, showing us strange and new corners of its world, then it shines. Also, I know some people didn’t, but I really liked Grindelwald as the Big Bad in this one, even though as with the rest of the film little progress is made and he only really just does the thing he wasn’t quite able to last time. If this movie doesn’t tank, I’m all the way here for Dumbledore vs Grindelwald.

Considering that one who said that is a married man in his 40s, I kind of doubt that this was the reason.

Yeah, that was kind of what happened to me, too. Maybe it was the audience surrounding me, but I know that everything about the movie is just wrong, the whole story structure is totally off, and I will never like Yates Direction, but I still really enjoyed it. To be precise I enjoyed the Humor, the Fantastic Beasts (can't we just spend the next movie in Newt's home?) and the better written interactions between the characters.

But I can totally see why everyone else is up in arms about it.

Edited by Swanpride on Nov 20th 2018 at 12:54:57 PM

TBH I haven't seen the new film, but the whole franchise kind of feels like a "good ideas not handled well" thing. I actually like most of the characters, but the plot always felt a bit off to me, and COG sounds like a bit of a mess.

90% of the Eddie Redmayne in Jupiter Ascending thing is the "I CREATE LIFE!!!" scene (and it's still not as good as Channing Tatum as a rollerskating werewolf angel or Sean Bean talking about how bees can smell royalty). Nothing Redmayne does now is ever going to top the pure cheesy ridiculousness of it.

I actually love Jupiter Ascending a lot. It's a hot mess that knows it's a hot mess.

Was watching The Dom's recap of the movie

Wait, there's a HALF HOUSE-ELF Character?!?!

A) Ewwww

B) Try really hard not to think about how House Elves are compelled to obey to wizards and how that factors into a half house elf. TRY REALLY HARD

> B) Try really hard not to think about how House Elves are compelled to obey to wizards and how that factors into a half house elf. TRY REALLY HARD

I can't my mind is too dirty.

Jesus Christ the unfortunate implications are gonna give me nightmares.

It's slightly amusing that for a movie called "The Crimes of Grindelwald" the character himself barely does anything. And I imagine he'll barely be in the next few movies as well, considering how Voldemort doesn't have much screen time in the potter movies when you really think about it.

I heard half elf, and I imagine she is half elf that is not house elf. There are other types of elves right?

Nope. None mentioned so far in the books or movies that I know of.

She was only half elf? She looked like a full elf to me. Unless I'm thinking of the wrong person.

Unrelated, but I actually quite liked Nagini's character (and hope she and Jacob get to bond a bit over their shared loss next time).

I don't get what was point was to making her the actual Nagini, though. Unless this is another one of those things they're banking on being a thing in the next movie, her being the woman who will one day be Voldemort's pet snake adds nothing to anything. It just looks like one of those cliche prequel "you know this random character? Let's shoehorn them a connection with a random original series character" writing decisions.

She could be a woman with an entirely different name cursed to turn into an entirely different beast, and absolutely nothing would change - in fact, the character would've had more potential for it, since now they have to shoehorn a point where she ends up with Voldemort. Which, given that she staunchly doesn't join the dark side in this one, is going to be iffy.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Nov 20th 2018 at 8:23:30 AM

What did you LIKE about her? I'm not criticizing people liking something, but I didn't feel like there was much to like/dislike about her as she didn't do much and had little personality.

BTW, here's The Dom's review. Be warned, his plot summary is... even more convoluted than the actual movie plot.

I am neutral on Nagini...I feel that she is a likable character, but she isn't enough of a character yet to really tell.

I'm very conflicted over this film. One the one hand, it's got some nice production values, the performances are solid, and it's got some cool moments.

But on the other hand, it does feel like a film that's more concerned with setting things up for future ones than it is with telling a good story for itself, and there are some really, iffy, choices made here.

Edited by Punisher286 on Nov 21st 2018 at 3:27:44 AM

So I just saw this movie unexpectedly (I basically let my family pick the film while I went to the restroom, completely forgetting this film was in theaters).

I would say it's a passably enjoyable film, but it's plagued by a number of problematic, insensitive decisions.

Ignoring the casting of Depp and the failure to address Dumbledore's sexuality (which we already knew about and still are problems)...

- Nagini's inclusion is pointless. She makes like what, one meaningful choice in the movie (running away with Credence) and then barely gets any lines or does anything. She spends the whole movie following Credence around as a massively underdeveloped love interest looking scared/sad. I pointed this out to my mother and she said "well maybe they'll do something with her in the next movie", to which I responded "Ok, but we're not talking about the sequel. I'm talking about THIS movie, and in this movie, she does nothing".

- Leta's backstory is...uh, it's something, but beyond that she dies. I suppose you could argue that it's not a fridging per se in that Leta sacrifices herself willingly, but introducing arguably the most fleshed out and plot relevant black female character in the series to then just kill her is kind of a disappointing decision.)

- I don't know why Rowling thinks she can write WW 2 and the Holocaust into her narrative so casually. Not only is it an insensitive decision but the movie barely explores the ramifications of it, and maybe I wasn't paying attention but what Grindenwald uses to show the "vision of the future", how he obtained it, etc are not really elaborated on.

- I wasn't really a fan of Queenie basically abducting her boyfriend and teaming up with a wizard fascist either. Way to ruin a great character.

It's a shame too, because there are aspects of the film I enjoy, such as the creature designs, the overall aesthetic, and Grindenwald might have been a decent villain if Depp wasn't playing him. It feels like Rowling is trying to be politically relevant but doesn't really have the kind of understanding, sensitivity and nuanced perspective necessary to do it properly.

Edited by Draghinazzo on Nov 24th 2018 at 8:52:57 AM

There's something about the final reveal in the film that really bugged me, and I'm hoping you can help me wrap my mind around it. Maybe I misunderstood or misremembered details from the last film. It seems like a massive Contrived Coincidence otherwise.

So according to Grindelwald, Credence is actually Dumbledore's brother named Aurelius. Okay. Only this doesn't make any sense considering Credence's role in the last movie. In that movie, Grindelwald was seemingly only interested in Credence because of him being an obscurial. He was clearly not seeking out Credence because of Credence's family background, because if he were he wouldn't have come to the conclusion that his adopted sister was the real obscurial and dismissed him the way that he did. If Credence is a Dumbledore, it means that Grindelwald just so happened to seek him out for totally unrelated reasons and by staggering coincidence this kid just turned out to be his archenemy's long-lost brother.

Am I missing something? This is such a massively contrived plot point, it's difficult for me to believe it was planned out during the writing of the last movie.

In addition to this, I might just be forgetting, but I don't think it was ever hinted at or implied that Dumbledore had a dead brother prior to this movie. It really does feel like an extremely contrived plot twist.

Seeing that in both movies Grindelwald is trying to manipulate Credence, I think this is just more of the same.

Even in the last movie he was insistent that Credence was someone very special. He then abandoned that line when he thought someone else was the Obscurial.

It seems pretty clearly to be another manipulation on Grindelwald's part.

It probably wasn't.

The only solution is that Grindlewald had to have figured it out between movies... At the same time, somehow the entire magical world is up in rumors over Credence, a guy Newt and everyone else thought dead, and... I don't know how these rumors even start. Credence isn't exactly Harry Potter here. Why are there these rumors in the first place?

I get rumors are kind of one of those things that just happen... but there's no logical impitus for them at this point besides "Plot demands it and it sets up the foreshadowing I guess".

Though, some people point out that Credence SHOULD NOT trust Grindlewald since he betrayed him in the first movie. This, actually, ISN'T a plot hole. Credence was gone by the time the Graves-Grindlewald reveal happened. Convenient? Yes. Contrived? Technically no.

Edited by InkDagger on Nov 24th 2018 at 5:44:03 AM

It's clear that matter what the truth is, Grindelwald is using Credence as the perfect weapon against Dumbledore. We all know that Albus Dumbledore feared that he may have killed his sister in the crossfire and that Grindelwald is going to tell him that in front of his face. So what better weapon to use against his former friend than to have an alleged Dumbledore fight old Albus with hatred, almost like the ghost of his sister coming back for vengeance?

Well, that and there are all those justified fan theories that Arianna was an Obscural.... Whatever those are at this point.

BTW, I noticed there's a Missing Trailer Scene of Leta at some fancy party and dancing in a clearing of people on a marble floor. What the heck was that scene? My first guess is a Yule Ball Flashback for Leta, but I can't imagine when it would come up and why? Newt and Leta's break up?

Edited by InkDagger on Nov 24th 2018 at 6:01:35 AM

Is Credence aware that Grindelwald was masquerading as Graves in the first movie? I don't believe he knows that as of yet. I could see Credence betraying Grindelwald at some point in a later movie, either due to a miscalculation on Grindelwalds part or somebody on team Dumbledore convincing him to switch sides. So I guess now Credence will become a full fledged dark wizard, since he's got a wand now and all.