Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bilbo

Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them 5-film series (Crimes of Grindelwald Spoilers Allowed)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Alex said:

Too many plots going on at the same time, pacing issues, underdeveloped characters were my main issues.

 

I actually liked that part. The story was ambitious and not fan fiction. 

 

She definitely packed a lot into the first film. I will call I novelistic. A novel written directly for the screen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

—-

 

So Grindlewald - yeah this is a really bad movie. I slept. For real.

 

There are so many characters and yet no story. Nothing happens except for the beginning and end. Nothing!

 

It is just constant exposition and backstories that nobody gives a fuck about. If Dickens wrote a really bad fantasy novel, this would be it. Because it both very Dickensian and not very good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I've given precisely no fucks at all, about anything to do with Harry Potter, since POA.

Thankfully, I'm going to a place which doesn't have a cinema.

 

 

 

 

 

On 11/9/2018 at 6:42 AM, Lord Zimmer said:

Just wait until we find out FB3 will be black&white. 

...and directed by John Badham :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s definitely the film’s biggest problem. It’s trying to be a novel in the form of a 2 and a half hour movie (it’s actually less) but it’s not really as bad as the reviews make out. If you enjoyed the first film, are invested in the characters, and aren’t too stupid to appreciate the fact that it’s part 2 of a 5 film series it’s fine. 

 

It isnt DC or Marvel levels of bad. It just doesn’t really feel like a standalone film the way the first one did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully this is the catalyst WB need to kick Yates out once and for all. Surely his colourless, joyless, lifeless direction has passed its expiry date. A director with more competent storytelling nous would never have allowed this script to reach production.

 

Can you imagine Cuaron shooting this? He would've sent it straight back to Rowling for another draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, crumbs said:

Hopefully this is the catalyst WB need to kick Yates out once and for all. Surely his colourless, joyless, lifeless direction has passed its expiry date. A director with more competent storytelling nous would never have allowed this script to reach production.

 

Can you imagine Cuaron shooting this? He would've sent it straight back to Rowling for another draft.

I think CoG is where Yates' style works best, especially in Paris.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thoughts (Minor spoilers)

 

• It's fun to read reactions here, as I share many of your thoughts. The first thing I told my girlfriend after the movie ended was "I feel like I've just watched a book". The inner story seems well thought out, I loved some character developments even though it means some were left behind… This movie should have been longer. Yes, longer. With a bit more twists. It tries to hard to pack everything in a 2h15mn movie : I'm not sure all the best events have made it through the editing room.

 

• Where are the Crimes of Grindelwald ? I mean, it's the bad guy we get it. But I don't know, I guess I expected more of a "why is he like that", what wrongdoing has he done throughout the years…

 

My favorite moments are when newt take care of his beasts. It realy is a magical world where you can see all JK Rowling's creativity. Besides, the main actor is truly perfect for this role as I love the way he plays newt. During the 2h15 of the movie, I was more interested in Newt's life rather than grindelwald wrongdoing.

 

For some people it's boring to think like that, but I can't separate a story from the way it's told so I also looked at the technical aspects of the movie. I had this weird feeling that, even though everything was going on well before Harry potter, everything looked more polished, too flat, too clean. I mean, look at Hogwarts. Everythings is perfectly aligned, no ornaments, no mess inside classrooms, etc. It looks like it's hapenning a hundred years after harry potter. And I had the same feeling with the way a guy puts Dumbledore some strap on his wrist to know the spellls he uses. It's like the "death" room in the first movie. It's too "modern" for something happening so before Harry potter.

 

• Finally some colors and magic on this movie ! Even though, alas, nearly every action pieces are in the dark. I want to see a magic fight in plain day !

 

Jacob is still great as the comic relief. I just love this character and I can see where his story is heading !

 

• I don't think the twist at the end is real. I feel like it's more a Grindelwald scam.

 

• I saw in Jude laws' acting a young Dumbledore. It was convincing and it reminded me both actors of the harry potter franchise.

 

• I did not like the way the movie was shot with some REALLY weird close ups and more cuts in the edit. I can see why the music is what it is. It still has room to shine but in very rare occasions. 80% of the movie's music is JNH in "hunger games" action mode which I dislike. But I hope we can have another director for the next movie to see how the picture could evolve stylistically. I've nothing against Yates, but I feel like we've seen everything from him regarding the wizarding world.

 

 

It's easy to focus on what was wrong (in my opinion) with this movie. But despite all this, I liked what I saw it was a fun and entertaining movie. And I love the wizarding world. Even more so, I trust JK rowling that she knows where she is heading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ehh, me and the two friends I saw it with thought it was pretty dreadful - honestly prequels level of bad. Just a really messy, badly paced, incoherent sprawl. Whereas I quite liked the first film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like it’s didn’t have a great opening at the box office either https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-fantastic-beasts-crimes-grindelwald-earns-magical-9m-previews-1161944

 

1 hour ago, bollemanneke said:

Would they care about critics, though? Fans seem to love it.

 

Perhaps not, but this is quite a dramatic dip considering all the films have been over 70%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TheUlyssesian said:

No. It's not hard to follow. It's just pointless. There are all these subplots. But so what? The movie never makes you give a fuck.

 

I really hope the 49% on Rotten Tomatoes kills the box office momentum for Grindelwald.

 

The dense plot is one big problem here, but Depp is another one. He doesn't even make an effort to be intimidating, he's just playing dress-up at this point. Why Yates and Rowling picked him, of all actors, to play a crucial villain in the HP series makes no sense (they could've picked a better character actor with zero baggage). He doesn't have the creepy charisma and malevolence Ralph Fiennes imbued Voldemort with.

 

Jude Law and Zoe Kravitz were the only highlights of this movie, as are the Hogwarts scenes. Like I said earlier, Eddie Redmayne doesn't even bother going deeper with Newt, he's the EXACT same character from beginning to end here. Not that he was endearing to begin with.

 

It's a waste of money, time, and fine character actors. The big revelation about Ezra Miller's Credence had me going WTF? and not in a good way.

 

2 hours ago, bollemanneke said:

Would they care about critics, though? Fans seem to love it.

 

I'm a Potter fan, but I was meh on the first one and didn't like Grindelwald.

 

I hope that Rowling needs to get a co-writer or simplify the script for the third film (which is planned for a summer 2019 shoot). Because if she, Yates, and co. continue with their plans for FB, then they can kiss a planned full five-film franchise goodbye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Holko said:

I read from some fans that Rowling should've wrote these as novels, giving herself space to flesh everything out however she wants instead of trying to shoehorn everything into short screenplays.

 

This is true. She's trying to write novels and it doesn't work. Screenplays are a completely different medium. She needs a co-writer.

 

 

 

8 hours ago, crumbs said:

Hopefully this is the catalyst WB need to kick Yates out once and for all. Surely his colourless, joyless, lifeless direction has passed its expiry date. A director with more competent storytelling nous would never have allowed this script to reach production.

 

Can you imagine Cuaron shooting this? He would've sent it straight back to Rowling for another draft.

 

Rowling owns this thing. You can't send her script back. She's a producer here. So her first draft gets filmed - no questions asked.

39 minutes ago, Matt C said:

The dense plot

 

I will take a scemamtic exception to this. The plot isn't dense. Infact the plot is very thin. The set-up and back story is dense.

 

Plot is what happens. Actually - very very very little happens.

 

I can summarize in one single sentence how the plot advanced over the last film. But the ridiculously convoluted backstories kill the film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, TheUlyssesian said:

 

 

I will take a scemamtic exception to this. The plot isn't dense. Infact the plot is very thin. The set-up and back story is dense.

 

Plot is what happens. Actually - very very very little happens.

 

I can summarize in one single sentence how the plot advanced over the last film. But the ridiculously convoluted backstories kill the film.

4

 

You know what, you are right.

 

And one key producer on FB is Steven Kloves, the man who adapted six of the HP books. There's no reason he can't work with JKR to co-write and streamline the third film since they have a working relationship before. 

 

I really hope the weakening domestic box office for Grindelwald will 'encourage' the producers to wind things down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand why casual Potter fans, or non Potter initiates would find this film problematic because it is so dependant upon exposition and callbacks to Deathly Hallows (the book especially) that the film feels over-stuffed and convoluted if you aren't invested in every little detail.

 

As a self-professed Potter devotee, I loved this film, moreso than the first, I think they did a great job of building from the strong foundations of the first film whilst being respectful to the wider universe. The acting, the effects and score are all superb.

 

Yates hasn't been my favourite director of the any of the Potter films though, all of the Potter films and these Beasts films are grey, dull, drained looking things that feel like all the magic has been sapped out of the world.

I think people need to be patient and wait to see how this story plays out, because, more than anything this series is a vehicle for Rowling to broaden the backstory of Potter, and perhaps the development of Newt, Tina and the gang can occur best over a series of films...

 

@Matt C Who's to say Kloves etc. didn't give Rowling a few pointers? The screenplay wasn't weak and all props to Rowling for pulling off two films this far that have screenplays more competent than the most recent bout of Marvel films.

7 hours ago, Matt C said:

 

 if she, Yates, and co. continue with their plans for FB, then they can kiss a planned full five-film franchise goodbye.

 

The film's box office has already assured the continuation of the series. I think you're being a bit over dramatic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed all the throwbacks to the Deathly Hallows, as well as

Nicolas Flamel

. But even those don’t save the film, they’re cumbersome cinematically.

 

And it’s not just Rowling’s busy plotting, but the characters are not that endearing (apart from Dumbledore and Leta). It’s hard to root for a hero like Newt when he doesn’t engage with me on any level. 

 

You like the movie, that’s fine. But Rowling needs to end it before even the fans get tired of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Matt C said:

I noticed all the throwbacks to the Deathly Hallows, as well as

  Hide contents

Nicolas Flamel

. But even those don’t save the film, they’re cumbersome cinematically.

 

And it’s not just Rowling’s busy plotting, but the characters are not that endearing (apart from Dumbledore and Leta). It’s hard to root for a hero like Newt when he doesn’t engage with me on any level. 

 

You like the movie, that’s fine. But Rowling needs to end it before even the fans get tired of it.

You ought to start the 'Harry Potter/Fantastic Beasts Disenchantment Thread'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I see it @Matt C J.K. can do whatever she wants and 'fans' can choose whether they want to see these films. It should never be the case that filmmakers take demands from disappointed audience members. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw both films this week for the first time, with similar reactions to each: beyond the inherent fun of returning to some familiar locations from the Potter stories, I didn't find much to enjoy. I spent much of each film in a state of faint confusion, never 100% tracking everything that was going on. Many of the characters somehow felt like bit parts that accidentally stuck around for the whole film.

 

I will say that I was pleasantly surprised by my reaction to Jude Law's Dumbledore, though. I've always had a tough time imagining a young version of this character, but I was digging this film's approach. In terms of writing, dialect, and appearance, I totally bought (and enjoyed) it. There were moments when Law stepped outside the quiescence I associate with the character, but then again, part of what we learn toward the end of the Potter series is that this guy has changed over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Arpy said:

The way I see it @Matt C J.K. can do whatever she wants and 'fans' can choose whether they want to see these films. It should never be the case that filmmakers take demands from disappointed audience members. 

 

A third film is inevitable, but WB is holding the purse strings. The first film eked out a $164 million profit due to the worldwide earnings, but the sequel cost more and is coming off a poor RT score and less enthusiastic audience ratings.

 

If the movie's opening weekend gross here in America ends up being less than the $61-65 million projected, WB is going to be doing some trimming. They're either going to have JKR work with an experienced screenwriter to shape the script for the third film, ditch David Yates for a new director (my preference), or trim the budget back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the loophole is the FB movies could technically only need to relate to the canon of the Potter movies. But seems weird considering how meticulous (anal) she is about everything.

 

I haven’t seen it yet but Dumbledore seeing Grindelwald doesn’t necessarily contradict him seeing his family as an old man, since it is established the mirror’s visions can change. Harry saw his parents but also saw himself getting the stone. And Ron probably outgrew seeing himself as Quidditch captain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still, the blood pact is his heart's truest and most secret desire? Wouldn't it show them not making it or the results of them not making it if that's really the most important thing to him at the time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×