Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them 5-film series

[mstrox 6,647]

I want Rowling's The Last Jedi.

[crumbs 14,301]

Ironically that's exactly what this series needs right now to inject some energy into proceedings. A TLJ-esque sequel that throws out the tired direction they're heading and heads in a fresh direction.

 

The convoluted mess they've painfully established thus far is, frankly, atrocious. Only the most diehard Potter fans would care about this series after COG; a franchise killing sequel, so far as interest from the general audience is concerned.

[Chen G. 3,943]

I think it’s important for a film series to stick its act, as set-up by the first film, through to the end. You can have variations, surely, and certain tweaks; but the traejectory has to be the one set-up by the establishing film.

[Holko 9,499]

4 minutes ago, crumbs said:

Only the most diehard Potter fans would care about this series after COG;

I'm a diehard Potter book fan! I shut the first of these FBs off halfway through.

[bollemanneke 3,337]

I considered myself a book fan too and really enjoyed FB1.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

The Wizarding World needs Rian Johnson!

[crumbs 14,301]

Rian Johnson would direct a far more dynamic movie than anything David Yates can achieve.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

1 minute ago, crumbs said:

Rian Johnson would direct a far more dynamic movie than anything David Yates can achieve.

 

He'd have the main guy drink milk from the boobs of a fantastic breast.

[crumbs 14,301]

At least the main character would actually do something memorable, rather than spend yet another film aimlessly walking around stuttering all their lines. 

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/05/entertainment/emma-watson-self-partnered-scli-intl/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

 

Thelf-partnered

[mstrox 6,647]

I am a passing Potter fan (saw the movies once or twice, read the books once or twice) but not a megafan - with the exception of the kinda dumb twist at the very end of Beasts 2, I've been enjoying these movies so far.

[Chen G. 3,943]

38 minutes ago, crumbs said:

Rian Johnson would direct a far more dynamic movie than anything David Yates can achieve.

 

Well, Johnson’s style is more dynamic - which isn’t necessarily to say its better.

[mstrox 6,647]

Rian's style is faster, more intense

[Fabulin 3,510]

.

[mstrox 6,647]

Some people do it two, three times a day!

[Arpy 4,145]

Ehhhh...

Perhaps as a Pottermore article,  but a movie or book? That's overkill. How compelling are the founders anyway?

 

It's like these Game of Thrones prequels, it's all superficial lore without any substance.

8 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

If we're taking it as a given that she will do more stuff in the Potter universe, I'd be interested in a series (either books, movies, whatever) that told the story of the four founders of Hogwarts.  I guess it's like the Potter equivalent of Star Wars doing the Old Republic era.

 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Well in the version I’m imagining there would be some real meat to the story of course

[Arpy 4,145]

1 hour ago, Disco Stu said:

Well in the version I’m imagining there would be some real meat to the story of course

Turns out the four founders were actually five! The fifth founder was killed by Godric Gryffindor in a love tryst with Rowena Ravenclaw. Slytherin built the Chamber of Secrets so he could secretly meet with Godric where he too was in a sordid affair.

 

Gryffindor didn't die, he transformed into an animagus - Fawkes the Phoenix.

[crumbs 14,301]

“Fantastic Beasts 3” To Course Correct Series

 

Quote

Variety has more on that, indicating that the new film will serve as something of a course correction – taking the series back to more familiar Potter routes. As a result, Jude Law’s Albus Dumbledore will take on more of a lead role and more of the film’s action will be set at Hogwarts.

 

Because nothing says "course correction" like returning to the same location you already spent 9 movies!

 

Who the heck is the lead character in these movies? What's their purpose/objective? This is turning into The Hobbit 2.0 (also WB) where everyone lost sight of the actual story because they were so busy bloating the runtime with unnecessary fluff to justify countless sequels (though at least Bilbo was an empathetic, relatable protagonist, albeit shamefully underused).

[Matt C 452]

Let's face it, anyone who saw Crimes of Grindelwald knows that the Hogwarts-set scenes were the highlight of that movie. No one wanted to see Newt Scamander fuck around London and Paris for half the movie, they want more Dumbledore and Hogwarts.

[Arpy 4,145]

No more Hogwarts, c'mon, it's now go to lose all it's charm.

17 minutes ago, Matt C said:

Let's face it, anyone who saw Crimes of Grindelwald knows that the Hogwarts-set scenes were the highlight of that movie. No one wanted to see Newt Scamander fuck around London and Paris for half the movie, they want more Dumbledore and Hogwarts.

No they weren't, they were a distraction! We were in Paris and then whoops, back to Hogwarts for a little diversion, isn't Hogwarts so magical and cool!! AGREE OR DIE.

 

 

 

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

A minor course correction. Where's the ribbon now?

[Matt C 452]

12 minutes ago, Gruesome Son of a Bitch said:

A minor course correction. Where's the ribbon now?

 

Wait till November 2021.

 

Rowling, Yates, and Heyman have to earn it.

[Holko 9,499]

32 minutes ago, Matt C said:

Let's face it, anyone who saw Crimes of Grindelwald knows that the Hogwarts-set scenes were the highlight of that movie. 

Like Dumbledore the Transfiguration teacher teaching DADA with a Boggart because callback, member Azkaban? Gg Rowling.

[Arpy 4,145]

It will give Rowling some time to develop the McGonagall/Dumbledore relationship.

[Chen G. 3,943]

5 hours ago, crumbs said:

This is turning into The Hobbit 2.0 (also WB) where everyone lost sight of the actual story because they were so busy bloating the runtime with unnecessary fluff to justify countless sequels.

 

That’s untrue of The Hobbit (where the decision to go to three films was the filmmakers’, and came after most of the additions to the story had been made).

 

I think the same is true here. I don’t think the idea came from Warner Brothers.

[Arpy 4,145]

Crumbs is specifically talking about Bilbo's role being greatly reduced to the point the films lost focus of who the main character was.

[Chen G. 3,943]

No, he’s not.

 

Besides, I don’t think Fantastic Beasts ever lost its own idea of who it’s protagonist is. I think the second movie kind of lost its story altogether, instead.

 

And as you know some of us like Bilbo as a supporting character.

[Arpy 4,145]

He's not meant to be a supporting character, he's the protagonist through whom we are meant to see the story. 

 

I don't think the same thing has happened with Newt, but I can see the beginnings of it starting to creep in.

[crumbs 14,301]

13 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

No, he’s not.

 

Uh yes, that's exactly what I was referring to, which @Arpy understood.

 

It's an apt comparison, how Jackson relegated Bilbo Baggins to the side in a bloated Hobbit adaptation that wasted all its energy focusing on everything except the titular character. Now this series appears determined to follow the same path. Isn't Newt Scarmander meant to be the protagonist of these films? If not him, then who? Because the focus is all over the place.

 

But considering he's such a poorly drawn and uninteresting lead, well, maybe it's part of their "course correction" to just start over and try again with a more dimensional character.

 

13 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

And as you know some of us like Bilbo as a supporting character. 

 

Well, that's fine if you prefer Bilbo as a supporting character but last I checked that trilogy was called "THE HOBBIT" and was based on a book called "THE HOBBIT" and the Hobbit in question was Bilbo Baggins. So if you're going to relegate him to the status of supporting character, and populate the story with invented characters that didn't even exist in the source material, at least give them a compelling reason to exist.

 

 

 

 

 

[Chen G. 3,943]

How many times do I have to say this? THE TITLES OF MOVIES DON’T MEAN SHIT. Their only intention is to get you to tune-in.

 

Its the film itself that’s to tell you what it’s going to be about. Fantastic Beasts isn’t about the Zoology of the Wizarding World anymore than The Hobbit trilogy is about Bilbo Baggins, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with either choice.

[Fabulin 3,510]

.

 

[Chen G. 3,943]

Same if this series would have been called The Crimes of Grindelwald rather than Fantastic Beasts, but than, that would spoil the reveal in the first film.

 

It seems quite clear to me that that’s why that title was selected.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

39 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

How many times do I have to say this? THE TITLES OF MOVIES DON’T MEAN SHIT. Their only intention is to get you to tune-in.

 

Its the film itself that’s to tell you what it’s going to be about. Fantastic Beasts isn’t about the Zoology of the magical world anymore than The Hobbit trilogy is about Bilbo Baggins, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with either choice.

 

I'd be pissed off if Taxi Driver wasn't about a taxi driver.

[crumbs 14,301]

E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial should really be a film about a group of elderly women going out for morning tea.

 

Film titles are irrelevant!

[Chen G. 3,943]

They are!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Like that movie Tyrannosaur. What a scam that was!

[Arpy 4,145]

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

How many times do I have to say this? THE TITLES OF MOVIES DON’T MEAN SHIT. Their only intention is to get you to tune-in.

 

Its the film itself that’s to tell you what it’s going to be about. Fantastic Beasts isn’t about the Zoology of the Wizarding World anymore than The Hobbit trilogy is about Bilbo Baggins, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with either choice.

So Peter Jackson was trying to make The Dwarf, but the studios wanted The Hobbit?

 

 

 

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

On 11/5/2019 at 9:36 AM, Pieter_Boelen said:

Top bad Rowling didn't quite succeed in the script writing business.

Sometimes authors CAN write good scripts.

C.S. Forester's "Captain Horatio Hornblower R.N." seemed like a pretty darn great adaption of his books.

And he did that himself.

 

Modern Movie Syndrome.

Really, it sucks. It isn't even realistic, like people claim is the reason for it.

I believe instead it makes it easier for CGI to blend in.

Convincing CGI in bright locations is more difficult to do than in the dark.

 

There is also the assumption that if a movie is brightly colored, it is for younger audiences. I find that BS, but that is a prevelant feeling. Some of the serious Oscar type grave movies at the end of the year are desaturated to the point of being almost black and white.

 

15 hours ago, Arpy said:

It will give Rowling some time to develop the McGonagall/Dumbledore relationship.

 

I think some softcore sex scenes might spice things up.

 

12 hours ago, Chen G. said:

Besides, I don’t think Fantastic Beasts ever lost its own idea of who it’s protagonist is. I think the second movie kind of lost its story altogether, instead.

 

That preposterous paternity plot, and kids being switched at birth and the dwarf care-taker and Leta LeStrange and that African American wizard chasing through something and love triangle between Newt's brother, Leta and Newt and Nicholas Flammel being there for no reason at all.

 

I was like what the fuck is even going on? How about we focus on the characters you established in film 1 - Newt, Tina, Queenie, Jacob and Grindlewald. They were present but flung to the sidelines with all this garbage stuff taking center stage.

 

It's if imagine after the first Harry potter film, the movies shifted to Neville's paternity, and Padma Patil's brother and Vincent Crabbe's love triangle.

 

She truly lost it I feel. To the extent you wonder - what the heck was she trying to even write. It is incomprehensible.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,498]

9 hours ago, Thekthithm said:

Like that movie Tyrannosaur. What a scam that was!

It was a good movie, though. Peter Mullan is fantastic...as always.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Just now, Naïve Old Fart said:

It was a good movie, though. Peter Mullan is fantastic...as always.

 

Peter Mullan of course, but Olivia Colman was the revelation for me in that one.  I had seen in her Peep Show but that's the movie that really opened my eyes to her acting ability.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,498]

She's very good in Rev.

...and she's Prisoner Zero.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

5 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

She's very good in Rev.

...and she's Prisoner Zero.

I did enjoy her in Rev, although it’s not an especially showy part for her.  Simon McBurney stole every scene he was in.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

51 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

It was a good movie, though. Peter Mullan is fantastic...as always.

 

I wanted a movie about a goddamn dinosaur like the title promised!!

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

See, the Tyrannosaur doesn't obey set patterns or park schedules. The essence, uh, of chaos.

 

Drums on legs

[Pieter Boelen 740]

On 11/6/2019 at 10:25 PM, TheUlyssesian said:

There is also the assumption that if a movie is brightly colored, it is for younger audiences. I find that BS, but that is a prevelant feeling. Some of the serious Oscar type grave movies at the end of the year are desaturated to the point of being almost black and white.

Which translates as: "any movie that looks like it was filmed in the real world is for kids".

That... is completely... NUTTY!

 

I remember reading an ancient review of the 1962 version of Mutiny on the Bounty. It complained that the movie looked too 'picture perfect'.

Except I've been in that sort of areas of the world and it pretty much looks on reality how it looks in the film.

So this isn't even a truly new development. Though it did get ridiculously more pronounced.

 

I also believe there is something dangerous about it.

It makes people who don't get out much believe that the world is a depressing place.

At the same time people who do get out much might start believing that the drama from those dark films is only a film reality but doesn't really occur in that brighter-looking real world.

And in both cases, people get a skewed vision of reality.

 

I originally thought the original Adventures of Robin Hood would be quite the happy-go-lucky movie.

Yet when I watched it, I was quite surprised by how much true darkness they did actually still mentioned or even showed.

It's still on the whole an upbeat adventure; but I wouldn't say it's a kid's movie.

Not at all!

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

It is misguided and a Hollywood trope.

 

You still have filmmakers from Europe like Almodovar making brightly colored movies that are still dramatic and involving.

 

His latest film in fact, pain and Glory, is out now and one of the best films of the year.

[crumbs 14,301]

Aster's use of colour in Midsommar is visually scrumptious too. Some directors still understand how using colour and saturation can support their storytelling.

 

Desaturation has become the lazy way out for filmmakers who can't be bothered thinking creatively about how colour can compliment their storytelling. Yates is seemingly incapable of branching out from this cliched approach. Reminds me of PJ's excessive reliance on bloom in the Hobbit films, presumably to help blend live action elements with increasingly cartoonish CGI.

[Arpy 4,145]

Just to go back to HBP, the colour grading on that film isn't as bad as some believe it to be, I really think the choice there aided in giving the film a timeless quality.

Where it doesn't work is in the bland, sick, dark 'English Weather' type of day shots during the Quidditch practice, which is meant to be a comparatively lighter scene. The problem is, when you need true warmth and joy, you can't achieve it without it sticking out like a sore thumb, and for moments in all of Yates' films (for Potter and FB) the magic of the scene is bathed in these sepia tones or greys which literally suck the life out of everything in the shot.

 

I found this from a blog called 'Movies in Colour' for which the blogger has done for other films in sampling colours from each film and presenting them alongside an image. I don't think they've done it for other films in the Potter series, but here you can see the gaudy colour palette for HBP:

 

Just a point of comparison, here's POA with a similar mood, but there's a little bit more light and life returned to the shot unlike HBP's tones.

[Chen G. 3,943]

There’s no doubt the colour grading on The Half Blood Prince is a bit too excessive. It’s what I call the “filmed on parchment” look.

 

Still a damn fine film, I think.