Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

For a series titled Fantastic Beasts, the fun creatures stay on the sidelines in the fight. This film is the first sequel to Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, but with a heavier focus towards the surprise villain “Grindelwald,” who gains dramatic flair by the end of his speeches, but without any motive or personal engagement.

The returning characters are fully realized with rich additions to their relationships. They are the greatest aspect of this film. Ezra Miller’s appearance is surprisingly brief, but he shows his character’s inner struggle to find his identity enough to pull my interest. Eddie Redmayne and Katherine Waterston play off each other perfectly, and Dan Folger nails his joyful exclamations towards the wizarding world. The newest character to this team that blew me away was Jude Law’s Dumbledore. His presence is massive, the camera is placed at an angle to give him the most space and dwarf the people surrounding him. He was complex, engaging, inspiring, subtle, and a brilliant study of Harry Potter’s mentor at a younger age.

The best (complete) story arc of this film is the haunting past of Leta Lestrange. Zoë Kravitz’s execution is one of the quieter and simpler performances, letting the arc’s development sneak up on the audience until it is bursting out of the seams right in front of our eyes. The visual expression of Leta’s struggle pulls the camera into another story entirely, and its importance slams into every character in one scene. It is the reason I became invested into this film’s story, and it stands alone with its depth and sudden development.

J.K. Rowling received an accurate criticism from her last film: she knows how to write a novel, not a screenplay. It sounds harsh, but what it is aimed at is her reluctance to cut out the fat of her wizarding world and just focus on the main conflict. There is a scene of a circus packing up its tents, wands and house elves, that lasts fifteen seconds; it does not seem that long until you sit through it, and the urgency of the film grinds to a screeching halt. Now, enjoyed other detours from the main conflict, specifically anything to do with the creatures in Newt’s briefcase… but the fact that these creatures are detours from the story, the only reason I enjoy this series, is a heavy let down. I went from smiling about a scene involving a giant, Chinese dragon entranced by a jingly cat toy, to grinding my teeth at the black and white “evilness” of the antagonists that were supposed to awe me.

The Harry Potter films flourished with its manipulation of the audience’s ideas towards who was on what side, but this new spin-off series makes it obvious and cartoonish. Every character with a sly grin or pointy hair is on Grindelwald’s side. His speech of the consequences of muggles is dramatic and hooked me into the main story, but that was after one-and-a-half-hours of cliché “I’m evil so I’m going to kill a baby for the fun of it.” Its lack of subtlety almost drags it down into the rules of satirical comedy, and the buildup chokes under the weight of countless subplots. Jude Law’s performance is wonderfully fantastic, and Eddy Redmayne excels as the awkward anti-hero that loves strange creatures, yet J.K. Rowling only puts her strengths outside of where we are supposed to care as an audience: the central conflict.

Story Rating: 6/10

Character Rating: 6/10