The Official ''Fantastic Beasts 2: The Crimes of Grindelwald” Thread

[flickchick85]

I have to say, in this installment, the "Fantastic Beasts" element of this franchise already feels SO superfluous. Telling a story about the Grindelwald saga of the wizarding world sounds fine and intriguing on paper, but why oh why did Newt Scamander need to be the protagonist?! He's dull as dishwater and only barely tangentially relevant, and his beasts only make shoehorned appearances every now and then as if JK's going, "oh yeah, we called this Fantastic Beasts! Better throw one in!"

 

[Spider-Fan]

I think it would have been best to drop the Fantastic Beasts moniker and just called it The Crimes of Grindelwald. Or if they needed Potterverse branding Wizarding World: The Crimes of Grindelwald.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I have to say, in this installment, the "Fantastic Beasts" element of this franchise already feels SO superfluous. Telling a story about the Grindelwald saga of the wizarding world sounds fine and intriguing on paper, but why oh why did Newt Scamander need to be the protagonist?! He's dull as dishwater and only barely tangentially relevant, and his beasts only make shoehorned appearances every now and then as if JK's going, "oh yeah, we called this Fantastic Beasts! Better throw one in!"

There is someone on BoxOfficeTheory and a reviewer I read, that swear up and down he is the most interesting protagonist going. It's just... no.

This entire series feels like some bizarre backdoor pilot situation and I don't know why they did it that way. There was no reason at all to do it. Everyone and their mother would have lost their mind to watch the story of Young Dumbledore. Why even intent this Newt situation? What was the purpose?

I think it would have been best to drop the Fantastic Beasts moniker and just called it The Crimes of Grindelwald. Or if they needed Potterverse branding Wizarding World: The Crimes of Grindelwald.

This is exactly why I find this attempt to brand this and Harry Potter all under some mythical banner so funny. They somehow still felt the need to name this one Fantastic Beasts, though in the tiniest font possible. Why?

 

[terry78]

I'm not sure why she never decided to go with the creation of Hogwarts featuring the four founders. That would probably make a better tv show in the vein of something like GoT or Vikings probably.

 

[TheVileOne]

Warner Bros. TV could still do that on SyFy at some point

 

[Iceman]

I'm not sure why she never decided to go with the creation of Hogwarts featuring the four founders. That would probably make a better tv show in the vein of something like GoT or Vikings probably.

Good point, I would have liked to see that.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I'm not sure why she never decided to go with the creation of Hogwarts featuring the four founders. That would probably make a better tv show in the vein of something like GoT or Vikings probably.

That has so much potential. Unlike say... a Fantastic Beasts 5 movie series.

 

[Iceman]

I have to say, in this installment, the "Fantastic Beasts" element of this franchise already feels SO superfluous. Telling a story about the Grindelwald saga of the wizarding world sounds fine and intriguing on paper, but why oh why did Newt Scamander need to be the protagonist?! He's dull as dishwater and only barely tangentially relevant, and his beasts only make shoehorned appearances every now and then as if JK's going, "oh yeah, we called this Fantastic Beasts! Better throw one in!"

This is so right. I don’t think this whole series should be called Fantastic Beasts given the likely direction they are going to go. A name linked to the Grindelwald saga would have been much more appropriate.

 

[Lily Adler]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks the Fantastic Beasts title is tacked on. I wouldn't have minded these films being an anthology series of sorts that link into each other with twist endings showing major events in the Wizarding World and a major twist that continues into the next event.

 

[moonlitdays]

I have to say, in this installment, the "Fantastic Beasts" element of this franchise already feels SO superfluous. Telling a story about the Grindelwald saga of the wizarding world sounds fine and intriguing on paper, but why oh why did Newt Scamander need to be the protagonist?! He's dull as dishwater and only barely tangentially relevant, and his beasts only make shoehorned appearances every now and then as if JK's going, "oh yeah, we called this Fantastic Beasts! Better throw one in!"

I find the divide on Newt to be very interesting. People either think he and his beasts are the best part of the series and that the movies should focus more on that angle or that he's dull and boring and that they should focus more on Grindelwald. Personally I am the latter but I know a lot of people who think that the Fantastic Beasts series should have just been a fluffy series of movies about Newt finding and taming fantastic beasts. I would have found that very boring but to each his own.

I'm not sure why she never decided to go with the creation of Hogwarts featuring the four founders. That would probably make a better tv show in the vein of something like GoT or Vikings probably.

People have literally been dying for a Marauders series but at this point I'm not sure if I trust JK Rowling to be able to execute it well. I would definitely be worried about Snape being romanticized.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

This is the first Harry Potter flick to not get at least an A- on Cinemascore. It got a B+.

 

[Iceman]

This is the first Harry Potter flick to not get at least an A- on Cinemascore. It got a B+.

Do you know what FB1 got?

 

[moonlitdays]

Do you know what FB1 got?

A

 

[The Chris]

I guess I'm a weird one who thinks there should be more Dumbledore and Grindelwald in the next one but also finds Newt to be a really likeable character and a very nice presence to be around.

 

[harlequinade]

I have to say, in this installment, the "Fantastic Beasts" element of this franchise already feels SO superfluous. Telling a story about the Grindelwald saga of the wizarding world sounds fine and intriguing on paper, but why oh why did Newt Scamander need to be the protagonist?! He's dull as dishwater and only barely tangentially relevant, and his beasts only make shoehorned appearances every now and then as if JK's going, "oh yeah, we called this Fantastic Beasts! Better throw one in!"

Rowling seems to have put less thought into all of this than I do deciding what to make myself for dinner

What the hell does this woman do other than coming up with new an exciting ways to screw over the fans lol

 

[Primal Slayer]

I have to say, in this installment, the "Fantastic Beasts" element of this franchise already feels SO superfluous. Telling a story about the Grindelwald saga of the wizarding world sounds fine and intriguing on paper, but why oh why did Newt Scamander need to be the protagonist?! He's dull as dishwater and only barely tangentially relevant, and his beasts only make shoehorned appearances every now and then as if JK's going, "oh yeah, we called this Fantastic Beasts! Better throw one in!"

Agree 100%. Newt is one of those characters that would be so much better as a supporting character then the main character. Instead of like 30 mins of Dumbledore, the whole film should've centered around him and Grindelwald.

Spoiler

Adding Credence as a long lost Dumbledore is the dumbest most unoriginal thing she's done

Leta Lestrange could've been much more interesting but she just had to deal with being depressed the entire film

Spoiler

only to be killed off at the end

I still dont understand why JK is dead against a HP tv series.

 

[moonlitdays]

I feel like this may be one of those movies where the fans enjoy it more than others, I was just hoping this franchise would be above that and transcend between the fans and general audiences.

I’ve actually seen that a lot of Potterheads are really annoyed because of all the continuity issues this movie creates.

 

[moonlitdays]

Leta Lestrange could've been much more interesting but she just had to deal with being depressed the entire film

Spoiler

only to be killed off at the end

.

She was the best part of the movie for me. So impressed with Zoe Kravitz’s performance. I wasn’t sure about her as an actor before but she was excellent!

 

[terry78]

Yeah, Kravitz has some talent. Also, dat rolling stone cover tho.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Officially below 40% on RT. Holy hell.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

 

[marty mcfly]

I still just love being in this world. The magic, the creatures, the design, the tone, the characters... I just love everything about it.

That said, I can still see why this isn't a great movie. Rowling is as brilliant as they come at building worlds and coming up with creative new ideas, but she's a novelist. She's not a screenwriter and that is very apparent in these last two films. Hopefully FB3 learns a lesson and brings on a seasoned screenwriter to help craft a good story.

 

[scarlet-witch]

I’ve actually seen that a lot of Potterheads are really annoyed because of all the continuity issues this movie creates.

It's the hardcore fans that seem to be giving this the hardest time, it seems. All we want is continuity and for JK Rowling to not go full George Lucas on this, which it looks like she already has.

 

[terry78]

They threw a ****load of cash at her.

 

[Loki882]

Watching this movie made me realize something, Tina should really be the main protagonist here. I like Newt, and he probably would work as the lead in a different story. But here, it feels out if place. Tina is the one with the true emotional and professional investment in all of this, and she's the proactive one.

 

[Octoberist]

I guess I'm a weird one who thinks there should be more Dumbledore and Grindelwald in the next one but also finds Newt to be a really likeable character and a very nice presence to be around.

My issue with Newt in the first film was not because he’s an introvert or a wallflower; but it’s how JK plays it all up because he’s a Hufflepuff.

He internalizes almost everything to the point where it seems he almost does not care about what’s going on. He often reacts instead of taking action. It get him being neurotic but here, it’s almost obnoxious.

A better archetype they should’ve drawn from was Det. Loki from Prisoners played by Jake Gyhallhall, whose character also has signs of autism.