Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them 5-film series

[mrbellamy 6,288]

I think they say that at the beginning that Graves had just returned from Eastern Europe, right? So I think one could presume Grindelwald kidnapped and/or killed him while he was there.

[Alex 2,835]

Can you still make polyjuice potion with the hair of a dead person? I imagine the real Graves is locked away somewhere.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[bollemanneke 3,349]

Don't forget we're talking about David Yates here. This wouldn't be his film if he didn't give a perfect screenplay some plotholes.

[mrbellamy 6,288]

1 hour ago, alextrombone94 said:

Can you still make polyjuice potion with the hair of a dead person? I imagine the real Graves is locked away somewhere.

 

I dunno, hair is hair whether the person is dead or not, right? 

 

Like...if I were to pluck one of your hairs....and then I killed you....that hair wouldn't be any different than if you were alive....

 

But I've said too much!

 

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Arpy 4,145]

2 hours ago, BloodBoal said:

I wish the whole thing had been made clearer in the film, instead of the cheap and lazy writing they came up with: "OK, so let's have Newt use a Revelio spell or whatever to reveal Graves is actually Grindelwald. Why would Newt do that? How would he know Graves isn't Graves? How did Grindelwald turn into Graves? Polyjuice potion? Something else? Is Graves still alive? Bah. The audience won't care. They'll all just want to go home after the climax anyway. Just roll the credits after that and we're good to go!"

How did Newt realise something was up with Graves? Maybe it would've made more sense if he noticed earlier something was up with him ala Barty Crouch Jr's tongue tick... 

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

So at what film do we think Gia will take over the scoring duties?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[bollemanneke 3,349]

Don't say that, JNH can't be replaced!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

They replaced Williams, didnt they?

[bollemanneke 3,349]

Yes but Doyle wasn't dull.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

He kind of was.

 

Big, loud music that didn't go anywhere.

[bollemanneke 3,349]

Sounds like a John Carter reference. Dawn of the Planet of the Apes didn't go anywhere either, worst finale ever.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[bollemanneke 3,349]

I meant that Doyle made an impression on me. The few Giacchino scores I know so far are either dull or unlistenable or both.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Doyle is a better composer.

 

His Potter score doesnt represent his best work though. Much like the film itself it's over the top and a bit too hollow.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,551]

I've got a soft-spot for

FRANKENSTEIN. Oops, sorry;

MARY SHELLY'S FRANKENSTEIN. No!

KENNETH BRANNAH'S MARY SHELLY'S FRANKENSTEIN.

Oh, what the hell; whoever's FRANKENfuckingSTEIN it is...I like it.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It's excellent!

 

As are Henry V and Dead Again.

[bollemanneke 3,349]

That's a side that never appealed to me. I prefer his lush, romantic, grand scores.

[Bilbo 3,709]

50 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

Oh my, that was awful.

 

The only thing that could make him think something is up with Graves is during the interrogation scene, when he says the Obscurus in his case is useless. And of course, when he tried to kill Seraphina. I guess that was a pretty big clue. But even then, how would he come to the conclusion: "Oh, this is Grindelwald/somebody pretending to be Graves, and I'm gonna use a Revelio spell to prove that?" For all we known, Graves could have simply been a douchy guy, or one of Grindelwald's followers, or under the Imperio curse. It just feels like a convenient and clumsy way to reveal Grindelwald.

 

Those thing plus the fact that Grindlewald was known to be missing and Graves was  spouting some suspiciously Grindlewald ideas.

 

Plus I'm fairly certain in the next one it'll turn out that Newt was in New York on Dumbledore's orders because of Grindlewald stuff. Obviously I can't prove that but  it'd be unDumbledore like if he didn't have someone doing these sorts of jobs for him. Newt is the new Harry after all. 

[Naïve Old Fart 9,551]

2 hours ago, Stefancos said:

It's excellent!

 

As are Henry V and Dead Again.

 

 

Oh, yes. DEAD AGAIN is great.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Bilbo 3,709]

4 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

 

Oh, BS... You Rowling apologist! You should change your username to Harry Skywalker or Bilbo Potter!

 

If Newt was indeed asked to go to New-York by Dumbledore (does this guy always send others do his dirty work, and collect all the glory afterwards?), couldn't they have at least told us/hinted at that in the first film, in order for it to make more sense, instead of coming up with a cheap "It'll all make sense when you'll watch the next film!" solution?

Plus, Newt tells Jacob he's in America because of the Thunderbird. Why would he tell him that if it wasn't the truth? I mean, he has no reason to lie to him. Revealing his true mission to Jacob wouldn't be a problem, since Jacob, being a Muggle, wouldn't even understand who or how important Grindelwald is anyway. And if it's supposed to be a secret mission, then fine, but Newt still wouldn't have to come up with some random excuse to explain to Jacob his presence in America. Jacob didn't ask him and Newt isn't obliged to tell him anything. I call BS.

 

 

Im just repeating the hints JK Rowling has given on Twitter. 

 

She says there's a reason Newt didn't just apparate as soon as he reached New York. 

 

I'm not saying it's the best story telling convention but you can't call plot hole without knowing where the whole thing goes.

 

I realise we've been here before with the Hobbit but Rowling is better at this stuff than Jackson so I'm at least willing to give her chance to fuck it up. 

 

I suppose it's better than a post credits scene where Dumbledore shows up to induct Newt into the Order of the Phoenix or have Newt reporting to him or something. Now that would be BS ?

And yes, Dumbledore does always get someone to do his dirty work for him. 

[Alex 2,835]

Not sure why Dumbledore would have had so much influence/power back then anyway, apart from having been the most talented wizard to have attended Hogwarts. He wasn't even headmaster at the time. But it would make sense that he would send Newt, I guess.

[bollemanneke 3,349]

What kind of deal did they make? We'll expel you from Hogwars but you get to go the to the US?

[Disco Stu 15,495]

4 minutes ago, bollemanneke said:

What kind of deal did they make? We'll expel you from Hogwars but you get to go the to the US?

 

The Hogwarts expulsion was clearly from at least 10+ years prior, and it explicitly stated that Dumbledore opposed the expulsion.  So no.

 

5 minutes ago, alextrombone94 said:

Not sure why Dumbledore would have had so much influence/power back then anyway, apart from having been the most talented wizard to have attended Hogwarts. He wasn't even headmaster at the time. But it would make sense that he would send Newt, I guess.

 

Considering Dumbledore's personal connection to Grindelwald and what we know of his character, it would make sense for him to take a behind-the-scenes, "not Ministry approved" leadership role in opposing him.

[bollemanneke 3,349]

But he could have double-crossed him like he did with Harry at the end, in a way.

[Will 2,215]

6 hours ago, bollemanneke said:

But he could have double-crossed him like he did with Harry at the end, in a way.

 

Dumbledore double-crossed Harry? I might know what you're referring to but I'm not sure...

 

----------------------------------

 

@RPurton, @BloodBoal, and @Bilbo Skywalker, you've been discussing how Newt would have known to do a reveal spell on Graves.

 

I think the answer is perfectly plausible and not out of line. Although I do think Graves should have been hinted at as a bad guy a little more (you always knew there was some darkness around him but it wasn't until the final moments that things really came into any sort of focus; was he possibly just a really "tough-love" but ultimately altruistic MACUSA employee? I thought). 

 

After all, Graves had been saying some very Grindelwald-like things, seemed pretty powerful, and had said the "useless" Obscurus comment. And, of course, Newt may not have known this (?), but Tina had witnessed Graves cheering on the Obscurus, and had gotten in a short duel with him. 

 

Clearly, at the very least, something was up with Graves, and it's only appropriate for the precaution of the revealing spell to be taken. 

 

 

[Arpy 4,145]

There was certainly enough for the audience to suspect Graves, but Newt squints at him for a few moments and voilà! he recognizes that there's something hidden. Graves' wandless magic and taking on all those Aurors, whilst impressive, wouldn't be enough to raise suspicion that it was an imposter. 

[Jay 37,372]

It's been a while since I read the books or saw the movies, but is wandless magic really supposed to be something only for the elite?  Don't the Hogwarts students start doing that by the end of their education?

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Yes it was definitely something they were practicing in book 6 I believe?

[bollemanneke 3,349]

No, that was about non-verbal spells, with wands.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Ahhhh, you're right.  Casting spells without saying the words out loud.

[Bilbo 3,709]

All wizards can perform magic without wands. Wands are more for chanelling magic and controlling it. 

[mrbellamy 6,288]

Technically it's implied that all magical people would have the ability since kids do it unintentionally but I think it's supposed to be volatile and uncontrollable and therefore rare as an actual performable skill. I think Dumbledore and Grindelwald were the only ones who she mentioned being able to do wandless magic like it was anything else...I don't think she even had Voldemort doing it, unless the flying counts? 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

3 minutes ago, mrbellamy said:

Technically it's implied that all magical people would have the ability since kids do it unintentionally but I think it's supposed to be volatile and uncontrollable and therefore rare as an actual performable skill. I think Dumbledore and Grindelwald were the only ones who she mentioned being able to do wandless magic like it was anything else...I don't think she even had Voldemort doing it, unless the flying counts? 

 

All that flying around in the movies was complete invention of Yates and/or Kloves wasn't it? Rowling never had Death Eaters flying around as black smoke clouds in my memory.  Voldemort maybe, I can't remember.

[Bilbo 3,709]

19 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

 

All that flying around in the movies was complete invention of Yates and/or Kloves wasn't it? Rowling never had Death Eaters flying around as black smoke clouds in my memory.  Voldemort maybe, I can't remember.

 

Fairly certain his ability to fly is mentioned in Deathly Hallows. 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

And I seem to remember the image in my head from the book was a lot cooler than what was in the movie.  No black smoke BS.  In the movie he was just doing something all the other Death Eaters were.

[Bilbo 3,709]

The Death Eaters were on brooms in the movie. 

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Disco Stu 15,495]

9 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

Yeah, if you don't count the Death Eaters' arrival at the graveyard in GOF or the Ministry fight in OOTP...

 

Yeah I guess I was mixing up those scenes with the Sky Battle scene too.  Either way it's something I always hated in the movies.

[Bilbo 3,709]

10 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

Yeah, if you don't count the Death Eaters' arrival at the graveyard in GOF or the Ministry fight in OOTP...

 

Ah I know what you mean now. I always took that to be apparition! I know apparating is instaneous but it's Yates we're talking about! 

[BloodBoal 7,538]

GOF wasn't Yates!

[Disco Stu 15,495]

This just doesn't gibe with my imagination from the books at all.

 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It's Yates as he should have been!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

2 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

This just doesn't gibe with my imagination from the books at all.

 

Ah, yes. That's also how they destroy the Burrow in HBP.

[Bilbo 3,709]

10 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

GOF wasn't Yates!

 

Do you see any movement in GoF or do they just appear in the smoke on the ground?

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I certainly don't remember flying and swirling all around for extended periods as clouds of smoke in the graveyard scene like they do in later movies.