Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald (2018) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
1,311 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.
1,176 out of 1,381 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 performance from Jude Law's Dumbledore who leaves us wanting to know more of his history! But in the end, it was a huge disappointment as a stand-alone movie.
1,031 out of 1,238 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Great cast, stunning visuals and cinematography and totall boring
ButtStuffWerewolf1 March 2019
Watching this gives you the sense that nobody really knew where to go after the first film ended... and it shows. Beautiful film with a great cast, but an ultimately pointless story that sort of flops around like a dead fish not quite aware yet that its dead. This film is disappointing and forgettable.
182 out of 213 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Utterly confusing
carmelarcher_0131 December 2018
Almost impossible to keep up with what was going on! Just jumped from one thing to the next with no development, such a shame
152 out of 183 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
The magic has gone
iliasalk21 December 2018
A totally dysfunctional and unrelated cast, an incomprehensible story and tons and tons of computer graphics. The result is a confusing and totally boring movie. A waste of money.
238 out of 300 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
No More Johnny Depp?
majerletheresa9 November 2020
This series is really magical and fun to watch, but the upcoming movie will not have Johnny Depp in it, and that is a real downer. Pretty sad how you are guys are treating that man, he is a great actor and he makes movies even more magical when he stars in them. I know I'm only one person, but for that reason I'm not going to see the upcoming movie.
102 out of 125 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Boring
yifeigong16 November 2018
Where are the fantastic beasts? What are the crimes of Grindelwald? This is not magic, it's CGI. It lost that essential taste of friendship and bond between characters within magical context of the original HP series.
842 out of 1,156 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
So bad
jobwijnhoff21 November 2018
This film hurts. It is so bad that I am confused. What did I just see? What happend? There is so much going on with so many forgettable characters... who are they? Why should I care? This movie wants to blow your mind so bad that they come up with the most random stuff. To be honest, the opening was trult spectaculair. But after that it went downhill really fast. I LOVE Harry Potter, but man, I hate this movie so much.
411 out of 575 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
When I first saw the trailers for this movie, I thought it was going to suck. But, once I sat down and watched the movie, much to my surprise...I was right.
ajzeg15 September 2019
This is probably my least favourite movie of the year. There are way too many characters with way too many subplots going on all at once, the villain was horribly miscast, everything was confusing and didn't make sense, the story was unfocused and pointless, there was way too much pointless fanservice, everything looked grey, it was BORING, and the whole thing only exists to set up sequels! So, yeah, this one's pretty bad. It's a new low for Warner Brothers and this franchise, and....hold on, wait a minute, there must be a mistake. I'm listing off all the reasons that I hated Batman v Superman, not Fantastic Beasts 2. Oh? They both have the exact same problems? Okay then! Screw this movie! I sure as hell am not seeing the next one until it comes out on demand! They have officially lost my interest!
8 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
No plot just effects!!!
androdelov25 November 2018
It been a long time since I've watched such a boring movie. There was literally no plot at all. The "plot" was forced by some completely random happening stuff. The movie was CGI effects only and nothing more.

1. Crimes of Grindelwald? Where were they, because I haven't seen one. 2. What was the point of the Fantastic Beasts other than pure CGI appearances? 3. Everything was so dumbed down I felt insulted while watching it. Literally! 4. No good soundtrack.

Overall 1/10 - even this is much.
143 out of 193 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Just a filler to plot for next movies
xaviorcool11 December 2018
Very big disappointment.Its just a filler for the next movies to come.Boring as hell. Not enough magic and not enough fantadtic beasts. The title should have been the rise of grindlewald.
89 out of 123 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
weak entry to the wizarding world
studioAT20 August 2019
You can't blame JK Rowling for wanting to keep the 'Harry Potter' saga going, especially on film, but this sequel falls a bit flat.

The first 'Fantastic Beasts' film, while not being great in any shape or form, at least told a good story, one that could have stood alone, and there were some good performances.

This one however tries to do way too much - set up future instalments (do we really need 5 of these films as is anticipated??) introduce us to all the key players who may or may not be useful in these future films, while also providing enough links back to 'Harry Potter' to please the fans.

In the end it does none of these convincingly, and ends up being an odd, quite dark film that doesn't live up to its billing.
16 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
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 in 2007.

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 really hurts to give HP movie a negative rating but it's very hard to ignore the flaws of this cinematic Hindenburg.
370 out of 557 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
COnfusing and boring
yoshi-whitby31 March 2019
Not really sure how I can elaborate more on what other people have said, but yeah, very boring, long winded and confusing. If I hadn't watched the movie with someone who already saw it, I would have been lost. I had to keep pausing it and having them explain the plot to me. I was worried I was being a moron, but looking at other reviews, it seems I'm not the only one who was completely lost. Characters seemed to turn up out of completely nowhere, and some of the time, they're characters who have already been in previous scenes but since they weren't very well introduced or explained, I just kind of forgot they'd been in the film before. It's called "crimes of grindalwald", but he doesn't really do much of anything except walk around, all the film does is establish lore for the next movie.

The reason I hated the first Fantastic Beasts was because it felt like one long trailer for the next movie. This movie just felt like a world building info dump for the third movie in what I presume will be a trilogy. I'm still waiting for the movie I went to watch 2 years ago and they keep holding it off. The characters aren't nice or lovable, or memorable, so when they turn evil or die, I simply don't care about it.

The main character, whatever his name was, (just had to google it, Newt Scaramadger) is entirely unlikable and didn't really need to be in the film. Like, leave him as just a character for exclusively the first movie, and put all the content of the third movie into this one. all the grindlewald world building would only take like 15 minutes with him gone. And have grindlewald actually commit a ton of evil acts. His henchman does one or two bad things, but the man himself is legend for being a dark wizard and general menace, in this he just seems to be an extreme politician. I get the social commentary and all, but for a film called "crimes of grindalwald", i wanted to see him commit some. This film should have covered the period it skipped over. Why was grindalwald in jail? lets see him be friends with dumbledore. how did he become a dark wizard? all the stuff I'm actually interested in is skipped over, in favor of having some weird kid who turns into a floating black cloud who I don't care about be tracked down by everyone and treated like he has some important destiny that we aren't privvy to.

But yeah, the plot was very messy and didn't make much sense. You shouldn't need a 300 IQ to piece together the plot of a Harry Potter film. I also felt myself questioning holes in logic in the wizarding world I never even had before, because this film didn't portray the universe very well. none of the charm of harry potter, just a bunch of special effects and a drab, predictable fantasy world that didn't make me excited one bit. Overall, will only watch the next one out of obligation, and will definitely wait until a friend or family member gets a DVD so I don't have to pay to see it.
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
CGI fest
christophkatzer16 December 2018
I think you gotta be a die hard Harry Potter fan otherwise you just can't follow and will be bored (like me) after five minutes. It's just one more movie completely out of the computer.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A horrible butchering of everything I know and love
christinamurphy9620 November 2018
The editing was horrible, the shot choices were jarring and confusing, the dialogue was all clunky and expository, the characters don't progress at all, the story is awkward and disjointed. If you haven't read all the books and Pottermore you won't understand anything. If you have, you might understand a third or so.
82 out of 118 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.
269 out of 417 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Disappointed - Crimes of Grindlewald?
jmikamclean17 November 2018
I love Harry Potter, I have been reading and watching HP since the first book was released. I went to the theatre with an open mind. I saw negative reviews and a lot of positive ones. It pains me to give this movie a bad review. The reason I gave this movie 3 stars was due to the chinese cat dragon monster which was quite hilarious.

Positives 1. Special effects were good 2. Jude Law as Dumbledore works well 3. Newt is still an awesome character

Negatives 1. Absolutely No Storyline 2. There were No actual crimes commited by Grindlewald 3. Johnny Depp should never have been cast as Grindlewald 4. Too many irrelevant characters 5. Disregards all of the known information about the wizarding world

Anyone that has read or watched Harry Potter would immediately notice that things do not add up. I enjoyed the first movie in the Fantastic Beast series because it was different. If they are going to bring in characters from Harry Potter at least make it historically correct. If this movie did not have the Harry Potter fans it would have been a complete flop. I am very disappointed in J.K. Rowling, this is well below her standards for writting. I think David Yates should have been canned after the the Half Blood Prince movie was released. He managed to butcher one of the best books in the series, this is a repeat of that debacle. The extended trailor was better than the 2 hour long movie.
223 out of 346 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
9 stars for the effects, 2 stars for the plot.
tinktinkk15 November 2018
Hence the 4 stars. Just read any review with the tag "spoiler", and you're all set for the next movie. It's just that unimportant. What a shame of a good IP.
313 out of 499 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Bland, Confusing, and Convoluted
ThomasDrufke8 December 2018
I generally hate writing a review about a movie/tv episode that I hate. It feels like a waste of energy, especially knowing that there are plenty of people out there who genuinely enjoy this film series, but I'm just not one of them. I LOVE the Harry Potter movies and grew up with those 8 films, but I've never felt the connection to the Fantastic Beasts series that I did to Potter. It's not necessarily fair to make that comparison but alas, there's virtually nothing good about the Crimes of Grindelwald. Confusing, convoluted, and at times way too convenient for its own good, the film has nothing to grapple onto emotionally. In fact, the one decent thing about the first film (Queenie and Jacob) is entirely ruined in this film's third act. Disappointingly, the film has almost pushed aside the beasts side of the series completely, in exchange for a cliched villain with Grindelwald, who severely lacks in originality. Admittedly, I found myself lost for most of the runtime. Until they inevitably put out "Cursed Child" in 15 years, this may be it for me with this universe.

2.3/10
28 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
At least the seats were comfortable
mikewp-8681424 November 2018
Wow, how bad can a movie get. Over 60 minutes of meaningless CGI. Spent the whole movie trying to find the story, oh wait, there wasn't one.
125 out of 195 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I don't understand the story
Gordon-115 December 2018
The visuals are great, but there is no story. The film is just a collage of scenes with strange creatures appearing for no reason at all. The vast number of characters don't help to make the plot any easier to decipher. The only scenes that I enjoyed are the ones in Hogwarts. That's because at least I know what they are about.
15 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
What a letdown!
Hayden-8605523 November 2020
An overly confusing film, the plot flies from one moment to another and we're introduced to characters that contribute absolutely nothing to the plot. Furthermore, a lot of the characters we were introduced to in the previous film are all muddled up. Queenie allies herself with Grindelwald; a child murdering genocidal maniac. Are we meant to be relating to her?

The acting was ok but I felt it was worse than the previous film, Johnny Depp is definitely the best thing about this and I felt his character wasn't used enough, the character of Credence is the most confusing thing I've ever seen! I read up on it afterwards and his big plot reveal doesn't even make sense. The new characters weren't developed either like Nagini and Newt's brother, both rather bland.

Additionally there just wasn't enough action or excitement as well, which is an unusual critique of a fantasy film, with the Harry Potter films some didn't have a huge amount of action but at least the plots were good and likewise the characters but here there's neither.

4/10: Very confusing and just not exciting, a disappointment to be sure
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
2 stars for the effects
benhume197227 March 2019
Thats all this movie gets, and then after the 3rd effects show piece its just becomes meh .. Soulless and empty movie with nothing at its heart .. Avoid at all costs ..
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Incomprehensible
jwcstorage17 December 2018
I dont even know where to go with this movie. The entire script, every single thing, it was all a mess. Things just "happen". Magic is now whatever you want it to be. Want to create a town? Sure! Want to become the wall and walk in the wall? Why the hell not! Want people who are used to dealing with magical things be "awed" by a cute girl who, for some reason, turns into a snake at night and then gets her head cut off at the end of Harry Potter for being a snake that used to be a hot chick. Random facts area thrown in out of the blue, unconnected to really anything, to provide backstory for the sake of providing backstory. If you wanna see a CGI fest mess of a movie that will probably be HUGE in China because the story doesnt matter, only the CGI does. If you're a die-hard you've already seen this, if not I'd skip it. MAYBE revisit it if the next movie is good and relies on this one a lot? Maybe not....
5 out of 5 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