Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald (2018) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
107 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Stunning movie, but where was the plot..?
Tom061014 November 2018
Let me start off by saying that I am a big Harry Potter fan; I loved all 8 HP movies, and really liked the 1st installment of Newt's adventures as well. This movie just didn't really do the trick for me. There was absolutely nothing to complain about visually; the movie was even more stunning than the first one, with even more beautifully designed 'Beasts'. And as many other people have mentioned, as a Harry Potter fan, you just can't hate this movie. Where Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them only contained a handful amount of references to the Harry Potter series, The Crimes of Grindelwald has tonnes. Enough to hype up any Harry Potter fan.

The problem this movie had for me was its plot, or rather, its almost nonexisting plot. This movie just seemed to serve as background information or something for the upcoming movies in this series (for which we'll undoubtedly have to wait another 2 years or more..), more of like a setup for things to come. It introduced many new characters and revealed certain things about already known characters. But yet, some of these things just felt unnatural, as if JK Rowling just kept writing more and more to squeeze into 1 movie. This basically leads to a movie where the biggest plot is to find Credence's 'true identity' - not really much of a plot at all. Some of the reveals about characters also seemed a bit strange, but that could be just me. All in all, all this dialogue about characters made it extra confusing to know what the movie was about, in addition to it lacking much of a plot to begin with.

This movie is definitely not a waste of money or anything, you could just buy a ticket for the stunning scenes and you'd be satisfied. It's just that this movie was quite a disappointment compared to many people's expectations I think, seeing as it basically is just a setup for the upcoming movies, which lacks a good plot.
78 out of 94 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A fantastic thrill ride through the magical wizarding world laid by J.K.Rowling.
brat_of_eee8 November 2018
How i decided my rating:

Jude Law - 0.9 Eddie Redmayne - 0.8 Katherine Waterston - 0.8 Dan Fogler and Alison Sudol - 0.7 Ezra Miller and Johnny Depp - 0.8 Other cast(Zoe Kravitz, Claudia Kim, Callum Turner) - 0.7 Action and adventure - 0.8 Graphics - 0.8 Story and Screenplay - 0.9 Plot twist - 0.8 Comedy - 0.4 Total - 8.4

(Spoiler free review so not giving away anything except my opinion)

Another thrilling adventure with exotic creatures with extraordinary features. Jude, Eddie and Johnny gave an exceptional performance and so did the rest of the cast. A few scenes could have been shortened or written differently but overall this movie sets up an epic story that I'm sure WB will build on.

The beasts did not disappoint either. The niffler stole the spotlight everytime it came on screen while there were also a few new amazing beasts. Although most of the focus was on Grindelwald the audience had a fair share of beasts on screen.

The on screen romances were a little forced but they didn't linger on it too long. I expected more from Nagini but maybe this movie is not for her and the next night be. Did not like Zoe's character arc and either a lot of wasted potential on a few other characters or just left open for the next 3 movies to come.

The young and charismatic Dumbledore played by Jude Law was my favourite and he added so much more depth to the character while staying true to the Dumbledore portrayed in Harry Potter .

A healthy dose of magical spells and a dash of misunderstood beasts kept me hooked to this incredible little universe that I'll re-live in my imagination forever.
115 out of 173 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
They just tried too hard
jennyms-9179614 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Let me start by saying, this cast is absolutely amazing. Brilliant acting, from Redmayne's beautiful Newt to Law's convincing Dumbledore, I am very impressed with all of the Performances in this movie.

The writing not so much. No story profits from having 10 subplots st the same time. Theres so much unnecessary drama that you forget about the main plot. Its incredibly distracting.

It also seems like Fantastic Beasts like so many other franchises tries way too hard to make everything as forcefully dramatic and tangled as possible. Credence being a Dumbledore makes no sense, timeline-wise and feels like a forced telenovela twist. His character is already interesting, there is no need for this. Leta dying had nearly no impact, we bately got to know her, her main role was making Tina jealous and having a brother who turned out to be completely irrelevant to the story.

This could've been a great movie if only they had taken their time to explore the story and these characters over the course of 5 movies instead of cramming it all into one.
28 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Entirely capitivating and leaves us begging for more
ujjwaluniyal-6981811 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
The second installment of Fantastic Beasts, titled Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald picks up shortly after the first where Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) has been captured and is being taken transferred back to the British Ministry of Magic when he manages to escape and take over the carriage in which he is being transported. As the opening scene, this sets the visual standards for the film extremely high. As they are hurdling in the sky on a carriage in a thunderstorm, the tension and excitement build setting the stage for a fantastic film.

Newt (Eddie Redmayne) is back at his home, tending to his collection of beasts when he is approached by Dumbledore (Jude Law) to help track down Credence (Ezra Miller). Credence, after the first film, has spent time searching for his mother and who his real family is. He is lost, and alongside Nagini (Claudia Kim), he's searching for a place to belong. With Grindelwald on the loose, Credence is surely his next target for recruitment into his following which seeks to take the superior status over no mags/ muggles and restore pure blood to the wizarding world. Racing against Grindelwald to find Credence, auror, Tina (Katherine Waterston) manages to track down a lead. As Grindelwald works his magic and charisma to convince the wizarding world of his beliefs and goals, friend turns against friend, lines are drawn, and sides are chosen, changing the wizarding world forever.

Tackling the infamous wizarding world is no small challenge, but the visuals in this film are nothing short of magical. They work so well to create the perfect atmosphere for our story. From the opening scene to the very end, the visuals bring about an enchanting experience for the audience. I can't get into details without spoiling the ending, but man is it intense. Newt continues to his love and protection of magical creatures in this film, and each one is so spectacularly crafted. The scenes where he is home and taking care of the various creatures is incredible.

In this installment, we get a bit more of the backstory of a lot of characters including Dumbledore, Grindelwald, Newt, Leta, and Newt's brother, Theseus Scamander (Callum Turner). The way in which it is handled is exciting; as the film unfolds, we learn more secrets of the families of the wizarding world and gives us more perspective on the origins of our beloved characters of the Harry Potter series.

The performances in the film are pitch perfect. Eddie Redmayne continues to stun as Newt Scamander. His gentle, awkward, kind, and loyal nature continue to shine through his character, making you fall in love with his character more each minute. Katherine Waterston, while a decent performance, tends to fall a little flat for me. Jude Law as Dumbledore sounded like a strange casting choice, but after seeing the film, it works so well. Ezra Miller gets better and better every time I see him on screen. No matter what he is doing, he wholly dedicates to a role to bring us the best possible version. As Credence, you feel both empathy and fear for him as he tries to navigate what his life has become at no fault of his own. Zoë Kravitz as Leta is pretty fantastic, and I love where they go with her character in the film.

The big question on everyone's mind is how is Johnny Depp? Despite anyone's personal feelings towards him as an actor, it can't be denied that he dives into and disappears in every role he tackles. Grindelwald is no different. He becomes a terrifying, intoxicating, and charismatic leader, hell-bent on manipulating the world to his liking. There are scenes where he will enchant you into almost believing him and the next, he will terrify and appall you.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald takes the first installment and improves upon it tenfold. In the film, we see a strict division in the wizarding world that is sure to shape the characters in a new way come the next installment. This film is darker, more magical, and more thrilling than the first. It starts big and ends with a bang, sure to delight Harry Potter fans the world over. It is all that we loved about Harry Potter and more, bringing the excitement back to the wizarding world once again. There are tons of little nods to the fans of the original Harry Potter that are hidden in the film, solidifying that this story is indeed what will shape the world we know and love. Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is entirely captivating and leaves us begging for more.
50 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
More focused on franchise building than telling a good story!
maiajay1315 November 2018
As both a lover of the Harry Potter Universe and a lover of movie going, I was thoroughly disappointed, even angry with this movie. While the visuals are as magical as ever, it's clear that the filmmakers are so distracted by trying to build a franchise that they're forgetting to actually tell a good story! The chemistry between our main four heroes was diluted by so many new characters being introduced. With so many new people and also so many questions for our old heroes, there wasn't enough time for any kind of (explainable) character development or for the viewers to connect with anyone on the screen. The only "character development" with one of our main heroes felt random and out of character and we aren't given much reason or warning for this change. I was also very disappointed with the writing behind Tina's character as her role was demoted from a strong willed Auror and woman to merely a side kick and love interest. Huge and important elements of the story were left for us only to assume what had happened when discussing the one year time jump between the two films (like the Jacob/Queenie relationship, Jacobs memory, etc.). As a whole, the film screamed "money hungry" and "franchise building" rather than letting us really connect with the characters. It also seemed as if they were only adding in twists that would surely get a reaction from viewers despite the fact that they not only discredited the original Harry Potter films, but just felt like unrealistic and a little too convenient! In short, as a huge fan of the Harry Potter Universe, I was disappointed, upset and felt really let down, and as a film goer, I was confused with the plot and frustrated with the lack of character connection and development! The only reason I have given a 4/10 instead of a 1 is for Eddie Redmayne's perfect execution of the shy, socially awkward but loveable and charming Newt Scamander and for the alluring performances from Jude Law's Dumbledore and Johnny Depp's Grindelwald who leave us wanting to know more of their history! But in the end, it was a huge disappointment as a stand-alone movie.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Perfect...
ponasdivergentas7 November 2018
Amazing movie! Just like I was expecting! I really liked Leta Lestrange and Grindelwald
84 out of 150 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Just a part of the whole series
jannematiaskomsi13 November 2018
I just saw the first fantastic beasts movie and the second one back to back and the differences really caught my eye here, while not being exactly bad, the sequel feels like just a part of the whole 5-part franchise yet to come, there are so many sub-plots introduced that it just gets confusing, and where the first movie was great by having the simple plot of gathering all the lost beasts, this one just suddenly ends and you will just have to wait and see what it will lead up to, as a huge Potterverse fan I have to say that there are some really good references hidden in this movie that fans will surely appreciate and all of the actors from the first movie were amazing.
19 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Bloated beyond repair
rcaesar-8235915 November 2018
Basically everything wrong with the movie can be summed up with its title. Fantastic Beasts. The Crimes of Grindelwald. These two things have nothing to do with each other.

In my opinion the faults of this movie date back to the first film, where we had the compelling story of a young wizard named David Attenborough whose animals escaped in New York and he had to find them. Great. Sold. Unfortunately they had to make the film much worse by adding in unnecessary and convoluted subplots about a repressed boy named Credence who could change into a dangerous obscuris. Or something. The filmmakers obviously didn't learn from their mistakes.

Anyway, the second movie stars off pretty decent. Eddie Redmayne and Dan Fogler give two great performances, I really bought into their chemistry even more than in the first one. Jude Law is also great as always, though underused. The comedy scenes are also pretty consistently good, adding some much needed levity to this total mess. The visual effects looked great except for the times they looked awful, especially in the Hogwarts scenes which was where the film took a nose dive, never to recover.

The rest of the (far too numerous) supporting cast range from average to terrible. When Johnny Depp was revealed as Grindelwald in the first movie it was clear to me that he was totally miscast, and my suspicions were quickly confirmed. Colin Farrell was way better, you hacks. A lot of characters are introduced and have nothing to do, so just stand around waiting for an arc in future instalments.

What is this movie about? I couldn't tell you. It's not really about Newt Scamander. It's kind of about Grindelwald, but not completely. The plot is incomprehensible, and there are numerous exposition dumps so dense and laughable I wanted to burst out laughing, and did several times much to the chagrin of my friends. There's also way too much unnecessary fan service. I won't go in to details, I'll let you be offended by it.

There's two or three movies going on, and they all have different tones. One is a Fantastic Beasts movie, and it's funny and emotional, one is a dark fantasy movie about Grindelwald, and it's awful. They're all B plots, and for all the stuff in the screen, very little appears to be really happening. Why is Credence a character?? His story was lacklustre in the first one and is even worse here. Add to that an awful climax, and this movie is easily the worst Wizard movie. I don't know why David Yates is still attached to direct future instalments as in my opinion he peaked with Deathly Hallows Part 1.

Overall, if you're invested in the wizarding world go see it, you'll probably get a kick out of it. If not, give it a miss. No idea why it's called the Crimes of Grindelwald, because he doesn't really commit many crimes, nor are there enough fantastic beasts in the movie. Honestly it's more like a 4/10 but I feel bad giving a HP movie a negative rating.
12 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Good differences whether or not you're a Potterhead.
philipfalzer14 November 2018
If you are a Potterhead, you will leave the cinema dazzled by both the revelations and references of Wizarding World. Something nice to see.

The film is a good continuation of the first, but with some medium defects of franchise. Too much open, no closed arcs, and an information bomb.

So if you're not a Potterhead, expect to be confused during the movie.

The cast is spectacular, especially Jude Law, Eddie Redmayne, Dan Fogler, and my future husband Callum Turner. Of course, I wanted to say the same thing about Ezra Miller, who had incredible potential but almost disappears in what the script proposes.

The animals keep showing up for a future Newt book, and that makes me happy to see that the name of the franchise remains consistent with the story, even if it's in the background.

The CGI and 3D are impeccable, it pays to spend a little more and go in an IMAX 3D session.

Thinking of Fantastic Animals as a franchise in small episodes, it's great. Like a continuation movie, it has its flaws and does not close any arches that open in the beginning.

By the proposal, we know that the film does better than the first and opens a range of possibilities for the future of the franchise. Congratulations J. K. Rowling!
36 out of 61 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
J. K. Rowling she's still surprising? Always!
marciodastrain114 November 2018
I was a little afraid to be disappointed with the plot because of the critics BUT like always, the critics love to hate sequels and prequels. But this one was more than incredible, the all the Harry Potter references, the surprises in the movie! The costumes magnifficent, amazing visual effects and the cast are more than incredible, special Johnny Depp and Dan Fogler. Waiting for the next one!
36 out of 61 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
What a money making MESS
ethanjpemberton15 November 2018
Bad story writing and story telling, what a shambles that strays from the foundations that FB1 set up and completely disregards points from Harry Potter canon. Too many characters randomly introduced that you don't care about, and don't hold significance to the HP story. This movies intent was solely to set up a bigger money making franchise and forgets to tell a story on its own.
13 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
An Overstuffed Sequel Loses Some of Its Magic
nsharath00911 November 2018
The second sequel in the fledgling spinoff follows a familiar pattern, but too many characters and too many storylines rob it of its most enduring charms

Even magic takes a little bit of planning, and in David Yates' "Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald," both are in short supply. In it second outing, the cracks are starting to show in J.K. Rowling's much-hyped followup series to "Harry Potter," a franchise that is at the mercy of slapdash planning (these films are cobbled together from various pieces of "Wizarding World" material, not single novels) and the kind of higher-up decree that promised five films (five!) before the first one hit theaters. It's a lot of time to fill, and while the second film in the franchise nudges its narrative forward, it's at the expense of a bloated, unfocused screenplay.

Mostly, "The Crimes of Grindelwald" is hampered by the unwieldy meshing together of disparate plots that could service their own films (some of them surely better than others). At the center (when he's not been shunted aside by all those competing narratives), there's ostensible franchise star Eddie Redmayne as nervous magizoologist Newt Scamander. Newt's ditzy charm grounded the first film; and when he's allowed to lead this second story, it's as whimsical and good-hearted as any in the franchise.

It's all the other subplots that damage that notion, from a charisma-free Johnny Depp taking over the role of evil Wizard Gellert Grindelwald to a convoluted section all about the family tree of Credence Barebone (Ezra Miller). Portions involving a young Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law) can't reach their full potential; they're consistently cut short to zing back to yet another plotline (and that's without diving into all the subplots about Newt's brother, his ex-girlfriend, his beloved New York friends, and Credence's companion Nagini). All this convolution promises to converge during Grindelwald's coming-out party, a fear-filled rally that is as timely as it is unsettling. Before that, Yates and Rowling must bring together a motley crew of wizards and muggles both good and bad.
51 out of 92 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Where's the magic?
carolynpickering14 November 2018
A dark and confusing story filled with exposition and hampered by terrible editing makes this a dull affair. While Newt was able to be understood in this one, most of the other characters are so superficial that it's very difficult to care about their story. There's no magic - just lots of bangs and whistles from the FX department.
23 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
I absolutely love the HP universe
otto-lennestal14 November 2018
With that said I am disappointed in CoG. The movie itself is quite good, a bit convoluted with to many subplots, but structured better than the first film. The problem is if you love Harry Potter's world you will see all the glaring errors done and all continuity faults.
19 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Boring
thevaliant7421015 November 2018
Boring, 2+ hours that can be summarized in 1... Stretching the plot to its limit is good for the box office but it's very bad for the movie quality. It's sad watching a potential good story ruined by the necessity of making endless amount of movie from a story that (until now) looks like could fit on a single one... Or less
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
What a DISGRACE to the magical world of JK Rowling..
bagelisa14 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
If I were to describe this movie with one word , I would say it was a "Filler" It was only after the movie that i was informed that the Fantastic Beasts "franchise" is going to be a 5 movie one . After I learned that , this movie's purpose became so clear to me . I just watched a 2-hour movie in which the main characters had NOTHING to do with the plot AT ALL . This movie was all about Grindelwald finding Credence and convincing him to join his army so Credence would kill Dumbledore in the future . Newt , Tina , Jacob and Quennie did nothing in this movie but couple-fighting and catching maybe 1 or 2 magical creatures. We got to follow a story about Newt's childhood love , which led to absolutely nothing . The main characters just made it to the right place at the right time to spectate the end of the movie in which Grindelwald finds Credence , convinces him to join his army and boom , that is the movie . The only thing that Newt did is stealing the "blood-bond" between Grindelwald and Dumbledore by using the Niffler. All in all , it was a really poor movie , the plot was shallow and it was totally a filler . It just gave us a little bit of magic but that's it . I give it a 4 only because i am a huge Harry Potter fan . This movie made me really unhappy by seeing my favorite magical world being milked for money . We don't really need 5 movies with the 2 being fillers , all we needed was 3 magical rides to the Harry Potter world . Thanks for reading this . 4/10
22 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
It was epic!
eemelilounela13 November 2018
An epic movie! Vastly improves on the first one. Go see it!
27 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Grindelwald on the move
Antti_Luutonen15 November 2018
I'm a fan of the Potter-books so I had been keenly anticipating The Crimes of Grindelwald. For me, the first two Potter-films were the ones that caught the atmosphere of the novels the best, and I really appreciate Cuaron's the Prisoner of Azkaban too. After that it was a bit of a downhill with the films, although they all were solid entries. The first film of the Fantastic Beasts -series was a big surprise: Rowling's first movie-screenplay was an original, fun and sweet outing that really took it's time with everything, I felt it was a very novel-like script but at the same time with great understanding of what makes a movie work. But on to the Crimes of Grindelwald...

The Fantastic Beasts -series follows Newt Scamander, an expert of magical creatures, who was mentioned in the Harry Potter novels as the author of a Hogwarts' school book "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them". The series takes place in Rowling's wizarding world, way before Harry Potter's time, in a time where Gellert Grindelwald, a dark wizard who was also mentioned in the Potter-novels, is causing havoc. The Crimes of Grindelwald immediately puts pedal to the metal with an ultra-fast escape-scene. The film is altogether faster paced and more straightforward than the first film, and it's even more clearly a part of a series (three more films incoming). Involvement of a prophecy is also a very familiar element in the world we're exploring. I enjoyed the film and had a great time watching it with a fellow fan. Having said that, the first film is, to me, considerably better as an individual film, and I can see many who don't have deeper knowledge of the story seeing the Crimes of Grindelwald only as another fantasy-actioner. The screenplay is also a tad hard to fully understand, I'm still trying to put all the pieces together. Complicated plans are not unfamiliar in the books either.

Some pros for me:

-The prologue -Deeper look into the Lestrange family -Jude Law's young Dumbledore -The Niffler and it's involvement in the third act
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A filler for better things to come.
jeetubhat30-233-64693414 November 2018
Although a lot was promised in the trailers, it falls short of those promises in the movie. Having said that, this movie is much like Deathly Hallows Part 1 in the sense that it does not stand out when watched in isolation but understandable in the greater scheme of things, as it sets up the future movies perfectly without offering much on its own. The acting did a good job although the script doesn't allow for anyone to standout apart from Johnny Depp, who seems to make audiences aware of the fact that he's Johnny Depp every once in a while. Overall, I feel this movie will be better received when its sequels come out, but mediocre as it stands.
18 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Disappointing
miralaunonen13 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
  • Too many characters that have no back story or screentime
  • I can't believe they made up a new character to the Dumbledore family and a second obscirial
  • Johnny Depp was not a good choice for Grindelwald
  • Jude Law was an excellent and convincing Dumbledore!!
  • All in all, love the wizarding franchise but this movie was a disappointment, still want to see the next one though
33 out of 64 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Darker doesn't automatically mean better
ruben_helmersen13 November 2018
I love the Harry Potter franchise, but unfortunately this particular branch is not to my liking. Although we get to see Dan Fogler play Jacob Kowalski yet again, it is not enough to hide the many weak points of this movie. First of all, you feel that JK. Rowling has already embellished in her memoirs a little too often concerning her beloved characters, but this movie basically steps on several aspects that we have come to know as canon from the Harry Potter universe. Second, this movie creates a hostility towards the viewer by being dark and dramatic - much like the emo Harry Potter from the fifth movie who hated everyone around him. Now, I don't mind a little darkness, but I feel as if the director wanted to really introduce the dark side of Grindelwald in this movie. And I did not like it. On a positive note, I think Jude Law made a convincing role as a young Albus Dumbledore, although I do not believe for a second that the Mirror of Erised would show that particular desire of Dumbledore, when a much more obvious one comes to mind.
24 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Too Much to Swallow at Once
kjproulx15 November 2018
Being a fan of the Harry Potter film franchise for as long as I can remember, I've been looking forward to this expansion of this Wizarding World that has been created by J.K. Rowling. I enjoyed the first film, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, but I was looking for a little more material to latch onto. It felt a little too light on the story the first time around. Sadly, I have to say that Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald does the exact opposite of that, overstuffing storylines that will definitely confuse many average viewers. I understood most of the references throughout the movie, but I believe this an example of an extremely talented writer who's trying to expand her world while also trying to stick to her roots, which may hurt this new franchise as a whole.

Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) is hunting for followers, a young Dumbledore (Jude Law) confides in Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne), Credence (Ezra Miller) searches for his belonging in this world, Jacob (Dan Fogler) struggles to fit in, and countless additional storylines all clash together to form the plot of this film. It almost feels like an episode of Game of Thrones, as the movie constantly jumps from location to location, focussing on each of these characters, which didn't really work as a feature film. This movie tries very hard to be a faithful sequel to Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, while also trying to introduce new elements, but also getting caught up in tying into the Harry Potter franchise. It's almost as if J.K. Rowling was worried about not pleasing enough of the fans, so she kept returning to her script and adding more elements for future instalments. This brings me to my biggest complaint.

Rowling clearly knows where she wants this story to go, but the fact that this movie is a series of loose ends that are all still left unanswered by the time the credits began to roll was quite frustrating. The worst movies in a series of films are the ones that solely feel like a set-up for future instalments and that's honestly all I felt this film was. We got to know a little more about each of the important characters and then the film ended. Revelations conclude this film and leave you wanting more of certain story arcs, and even though I'll be in the theatre for the next film, based solely on my curiosity, this particular film didn't work very well for me. The story going in so many directions made it a pretty boring experience in my opinion.

Eddie Redmayne, Dan Fogler, Katherine Waterston, Alison Sudol, and Ezra Miller all return and work very well in their respective roles, but it truly was the additions of Jude Law and Johnny Depp that stood out to me. Although Depp isn't as revered as he used to be by fans, I thought his performance was very enjoyable. I thoroughly enjoyed Law's portrayal of Albus Dumbledore as well, but there wasn't enough of him. For how much this story ties into his backstory, I figured his screen presence would be much larger. This film advertises itself as an instalment with the majority of it taking place back at Hogwarts, but that's simply not the case. Only when the story demanded it was it to be shown, which was a letdown in my opinion.

In the end, the ambitions of J.K. Rowling still leap off the screen and will dazzle many audiences around the world, the score stood out as a highlight to me, and the promising future for this franchise is definitely felt throughout the final moments of this film. That being said, there are too many plot lines to fully enjoy this experience and too many new characters that take away from the story that was set up in the first film. As a standalone movie, it doesn't work at all, but it's a fine watch if your knowledge of every previous film is the first thing on your mind throughout your entire viewing experience. Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is a film that promises a lot in the future, but doesn't quite work as its own film. I walked out pretty disappointed, but also hopeful.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Perfect.
vkastriota14 November 2018
This is the best movie i have seen in a few years. The story is complex, mature and very different from anything else. The visuals are stunning and the interplay between characters is incredible. Stand out characters are definitely Grindelwald and Newt. I think Johnny Depp played Grindelwald perfectly, as people actually want to join him i think he just might be more dangerous than Voldemort.
23 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
One of the BEST Harry Potter films
filipealbertino14 November 2018
Every single potterhead will fall in love with it! It's a masterpiece. The soundtrack, incredible performances, striking plot twists and the stunning visual effects deliver a must-see and totally incredible film.
20 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Frees itself from the "Fantastic" genre to a very good movie in all
jmariano9915 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I am a big Harry Potter fan and therefore I like the movies in general. But I have always liked them partly because of the own nature of the movies, because they were in the HP world. This one is the first one I can say it completely freed itself from that category: it is a GREAT movie, in almost every aspect. Starting with the actors: Eddie Redmayne continues not disappointing and has his acting just on point with his character: the naivety, the "being apart from the trouble", all of it; Dan Fogler was a great satisfaction: if in the first movie, although he was amazing, his role was a bit easier because of the repetition of the amazement towards everything that met his eyes, in this movie this was not so much the case: he was already "included" in the magic world but he didn't truly belong there also, and he was amazing; now, Johnny Depp: there was a lot of talk around this choice and I do think he responded very well: he captures incredibly well the essence of Grindelwald, the evilness, the lies, the power of persuasion, the subtlety of the character. Plus, his last scene, when he casts his spell after the speech, that maestro-type movement of his: that´s excellent acting, and if anyone gets there still with doubts about him, that scene will for sure end them; lastly, Jude Law: I don't have much to say about him per say: he did as he was told, and he did it very well, although he didn't really have a great part in the movie. What is worth mentioning tho, is the merit of JK Rowling in writing his lines and movements: there was a lot of expectation to see how this "young" Dumbledore was going to fit in with our well known Dumbledore (moreover, with us being aware of his relationship with Grindelwald), and she dealt with it very well: you can see the old Dumbledore in Jude Law. Secondly, the script: a lot of merit there: I have already talked about Jude Law, but the whole script in general, without having any big fight (the first movie had more of a big fight than this one) manages to combine very well the action (and the type of action) with the pure story telling, with the absurd talks between Newt and Jacob: it's very entertaining, and it's writing at its best. As a consequence of the script, comes the directing, which managed to deal very well with all those constant changes of types of scene that the script provides and it managed to create amazement in the spectator when it was due (presenting Hogwarts, showing the place where Newt and Jacob take the portkey, etc etc etc), as well as tenderness (the boggart classes with Newt and Leta), and even gave a pretty decent portrait of Paris' life style and art. Last but not least, the special effects: simply phenomenal. The last scene, of the counterspells against Grindelwald spells is one of the best scenes I have ever scene, if not the best, in what comes to special effects: you can really see those effects as just right, and that's very rare. 10/10 out of 10 for me, and I find it very difficult for me to understand this 7.9 (and it will go further down for sure) in Imdb right now. It is a "serious" movie, and it is an excellent movie.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed