Curious about something in particular..?

Wednesday 21 November 2018

'Fantastic Beasts The Crimes of Grindelwald' Spoiler Review


I love Harry Potter. From the moment I watched the first film I fell deeply in love with the insanely-rich, ingeniously-crafted world and the incredible characters that occupy it. If you’re familiar with my blog, you’ll know that I’m a huge Ghostbusters fan, but given the choice between a proton pack and a wand, well, just call me a traitor already. Hell, Jurassic Park is my favourite film of all time, but I’d swap my ticket to Isla Nublar for an enrolment letter to Hogwarts in a heartbeat. Have I made my point clear? I. Love. Harry. Potter. So please bear that in mind as this review of Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald unfolds…

It would be easy and reasonable for one to have described 2016’s Harry Potter spin-off Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them as a prequel, but perhaps the term “spin-off” was a more fitting description. Yes, was. Bar a couple of nods and winks to the Wizarding World wonderfully established in the previous eight instalments, the film was its own beast (again, was). After all, not only is it set some seventy years before Harry even sets foot inside the Great Hall, it takes place in New York – an entirely new part of the magical world we’ve long since come to know and love.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them kept the magic alive

But no longer is any of this the case. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is indeed, it seems, very much a prequel. Perhaps that wasn’t the case while the film was being conjured up, but lest we forget that not long after its release a further four instalments in this new franchise were promised. And we should have known Warner Bros. and J.K. Rowling were up to no good, because just two years later we already have Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, which stars Jude Law as a young Albus Dumbledore.

The second entry in the new Beasts franchise reunites Newt Scamander (Redmayne), the once-obliviated Jacob Kowalski (Fogler) - whose memories have miraculously returned with no explanation - Queenie (Sudol) and Tina Goldstein (Waterston) as they attempt to thwart the maniacal Grindelwald (Depp) who plans to truly distance the magical world from the Nomaj (aka Muggles). We exchange the sunlit Manhattan setting for a gloomy Parisian one a year after the first instalment as our characters desperately try to locate Credence (Miller) – yes, the one who completely died at the end of the first film - before Grindelwald does.

Contrivance - sorry, Credence

The 2016 blockbuster turned out to be just as magical as the best Harry Potter entries and offered a fresh perspective on a world heavily-established in eight films and nearly a dozen books (including spin-offs such as Quidditch Through the Ages and, of course, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them). But the prospect of a sequel was a thrilling one only of sorts, as Fantastic Beasts felt far more "anthology" than it did "stepping stone" for the most part. Now, The Crimes of Grindelwald whisks us back into the whimsical Wizarding World. Unfortunately, though, while there's plenty of magic throughout, like Filch, this film is more Squib than spellbinding.

Thirty minutes in, buckets of unnecessary exposition and countless references to the lore already weigh the film down. Beyond that there's no sense of structure, with the lines between the film’s beginning, middle and the end virtually non-existent. And the plot, a babbling and bubbling cauldron of convoluted and incoherent nonsense. But perhaps the worst thing of all is the film’s total lack of identity. Is this a sequel to Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them? Not in its entirety, no. Is it directly a prequel to the Harry Potter franchise? Not while another three planned films currently stand in the way.

Yes, you'll need a Remembrall... 

Echoes of Star Wars: The Last Jedi flooded my mind while watching this film, for many reasons besides ret-conning and dreadful character motivations. Much like that film, The Crimes of Grindelwald inexplicably damages some well-established canon, throwing many things into question such as backstories, dates of birth, and worst of all, in-universe logic. But to draw a far more accurate Star Wars parallel, this film is better compared to the prequel trilogy in that it’s terribly-contrived, with no real goal of its own other than to form as much connective tissue with the wider franchise as possible. The sad thing is it fails to do even that properly.

It’s tragic to say that there are no redeeming qualities here. There's also a lack of visual appeal and wonder, only made worse by the film's excruciating pacing issues and infuriatingly-uneventful scenes. And then there are the characters – the previously-beloved Jacob and Queenie are reduced to shoehorned cameos-of-sorts whose presence in the film is both ineffective and inconsequential, while Scamander himself has no real purpose, either, besides being a poor attempt to justify the film’s main title. Meanwhile, Depp does offer some delicious wickedness as Grindelwald, but much like Jude Law's charismatic Dumbledore, is barely onscreen.

It's as bleak as it looks...

Verdict: With underwhelming box office openings and a wave of negative reviews from critics and even the most hardcore Potter fans, this ugly beast is the criminal of the franchise. Perhaps, though, like magic, the damage is reversible. But for that to happen the mischief seriously needs to be managed, because the team behind this film were clearly up to no good. In the meantime someone had better pass J.K. a Time-Turner...

Curious Rookie Rating: F

Not all hope is lost. We'll always have the Harry Potter films. In fact, here's my ranking of all the films (including both Fantastic Beasts entries) from best to worst:

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

4 comments: