Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,783
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 23:39:06 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Nov 17, 2016 14:20:12 GMT -5
Of the five people who post at ComingSoon! on a regular basis, I'm the biggest Harry Potter hater. Those movies are terrible. In contrast, Fantastic Beasts is actually pretty good. It's more adult, our so-called hero isn't worthless and the 1920's setting is very appealing. The only major issue is the uneventful story. This is also a problem with the Harry Potter films. There's no sense of urgency. The bad guys take a backseat to the shenanigans of the main characters. Here, the villain (played by you-know-who) wants to destroy the wall between wizards and muggles and takes a dangerous approach to do so. The script, however, focuses on an awkward Brit, his chubby friend, an awkward girl and her slutty sister searching for escaped creatures. The two plots cross paths, but not in a satisfying way. Fantastic Beasts is fun to watch, but it probably won't get the unconverted excited for another franchise. It's just not engaging enough. For fans, it's more of the same but just in a different time and place and that's all it needs to be.
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,529
Likes: 3,133
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:56:23 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Nov 19, 2016 22:22:03 GMT -5
NeverendingIn a word: wonderful. This had been probably my most anticipated movie for the year, and it delivered. And I don't just say that because I'm a massive Harry Potter fan; Fantastic Beasts is legitimately a really good movie, and a strong start to a new franchise. Admittedly, when I first heard they were turning the textbook Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them into not just one movie, but a franchise, even I was a little skeptical. But then JK Rowling writing the script and David Yates returning to direct, followed by all the trailers, got me back on the hopeful side. And now having seen the film, I'm genuinely excited to see more. The film deals with some of the mythology fans already know of and establishes the beginnings of a story I can see having different "phases", so to speak. Rowling immediately establishes herself a more than competent screenwriter. She paces the story very well and keeps it entertaining and exciting. This isn't just a story about getting a bunch of creatures back into a suitcase. There's a subplot dealing with certain dark magic, a certain dark wizard whom fans will know and a new piece of mythology that's very intriguing. But most importantly, Fantastic Beasts keeps that sense of wonder and whimsy that's become synonymous with a lot of the franchise, but retaining the more mature feeling as well that developed in the later Potter films. Also present again is that big-but-small tone David Yates has, which I've become a fan of as well. This movie never feels aggressive in its bombastity; like his four Harry Potter films, it feels intimate yet big at the same time. And never boring. Eddie Redmayne is charmingly quirky as Newt Scamander and a really likable protagonist. He, Katherine Waterston and Dan Fogler make for a strong new trio of characters, but I think Fogler kind of steals the show here. The rest of the cast is good, but I have to wonder if Jon Voight REALLY needed to be in this. Oh, and good score by James Newton Howard as well. Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them is a welcome addition to the Harry Potter universe, a must-see for any fan and hands down one of my favorites of the year so far. ***1/2 /****
|
|
|
Post by RedVader on Nov 20, 2016 7:29:39 GMT -5
She can say all the spoilers she wants for the books can J.K Rawling but Im pretty sure Dumbledore Sex preference is not something WB cares about exploring . They just want to explore the two better wizards before Voldemort and we will likely get a true wizard battle.
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,783
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 23:39:06 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Nov 20, 2016 12:41:57 GMT -5
Grindelwald was totally gay for that twink.
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,529
Likes: 3,133
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:56:23 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Nov 20, 2016 23:44:31 GMT -5
Grindelwald was totally gay for that twink. JK Rowling said in an interview once that Dumbledore did indeed have feelings for Grindelwald at one point, but they were never reciprocated.
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,783
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 23:39:06 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Nov 21, 2016 0:06:20 GMT -5
Grindelwald was totally gay for that twink. JK Rowling said in an interview once that Dumbledore did indeed have feelings for Grindelwald at one point, but they were never reciprocated. George Lucas said a lot of shit too. The second movie takes place in France, I think. I expect a full gay love triangle.
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,529
Likes: 3,133
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:56:23 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Nov 21, 2016 0:20:04 GMT -5
The question is, who are they going to get to play Dumbledore?
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,783
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 23:39:06 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Nov 21, 2016 0:43:08 GMT -5
The question is, who are they going to get to play Dumbledore? That's like asking who should play a young Gandolf.
|
|
|
Post by RedVader on Nov 21, 2016 4:37:27 GMT -5
I think Id Depp Id Grindlwald for Movie 2 Then Dumbeldore has too be Benedict Cumberbatch. But that might make Dumbledore Too Young Looking. I dont think this will make 5 Film series. Opening weekend is at 75 Million and will be a monster over seas. 3 movies is the best they can hope for and really if JK was going for story in that world why not just do a Dumbledore Movie In Two Parts and do a Movies about Younger James , Lilly, Sirius, and Snape.
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,529
Likes: 3,133
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:56:23 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Nov 21, 2016 17:14:23 GMT -5
The question is, who are they going to get to play Dumbledore? That's like asking who should play a young Gandolf. And yet, it must be done. But I really have no idea at this point.
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,649
Likes: 4,066
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:10:25 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Nov 21, 2016 17:39:42 GMT -5
The question is, who are they going to get to play Dumbledore? The question is, who are they going to get to play Dumbledore? That's like asking who should play a young Gandolf. That's like asking who should play a young Gandolf. And yet, it must be done. But I really have no idea at this point. Ed Helms.
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,529
Likes: 3,133
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:56:23 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Nov 21, 2016 17:50:35 GMT -5
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,783
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 23:39:06 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Nov 21, 2016 18:08:36 GMT -5
I was gonna suggest kenneth branagh but then I remembered he was already in a Harry Potter movie.
Fuck it.
Just go with James McAvoy.
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,529
Likes: 3,133
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:56:23 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Nov 21, 2016 18:12:13 GMT -5
Someone else mentioned Tom Hiddleston. I could see that.
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,783
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 23:39:06 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Nov 21, 2016 18:16:12 GMT -5
Someone else mentioned Tom Hiddleston. I could see that. How old is Dumbledore supposed to be? Grindelwald, just based on the casting, is a guy in his 40's. I'm assuming they're gonna cast an older British actor. If they really wanna think outside the box and play off the crazy choice of you-who-know, just go with Christian Bale.
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,529
Likes: 3,133
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:56:23 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Nov 21, 2016 18:56:27 GMT -5
Dumbledore was born in 1881, so at the time of this movie, he would be 45. But we don't know yet how much time will pass between this and the sequel. Plus, the five movies are supposed to cover 19 years, having it end in 1945, the year Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald.
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,649
Likes: 4,066
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:10:25 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Nov 23, 2016 9:31:15 GMT -5
I found this movie to be really dull and boring. The story was entirely inconsequential and poorly told.
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,529
Likes: 3,133
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:56:23 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Nov 23, 2016 11:17:40 GMT -5
I found this movie to be really dull and boring. The story was entirely inconsequential and poorly told.
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,649
Likes: 4,066
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:10:25 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Nov 23, 2016 11:20:51 GMT -5
I found this movie to be really dull and boring. The story was entirely inconsequential and poorly told. ...sorry
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,529
Likes: 3,133
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:56:23 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Nov 23, 2016 11:47:13 GMT -5
...sorry That's okay; looking forward to arguing.
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,649
Likes: 4,066
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:10:25 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Nov 26, 2016 14:37:41 GMT -5
Right before seeing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part Two in theaters, I remember having a conversation with a friend who was a huge fan of the series. While she was excited to see the final film, she also lamented the fact that it meant the end for the movies. I sympathized with her, but I also pointed out that it was pretty cool the series would actually end. Most movie series see endless sequels or reboots until becoming unprofitable, whereas Harry Potter would get to close out with some dignity. Little did I know Warner Bros. had to go make a fucking liar out of me. The same year that they dusted off and rushed Batman back onto the silver screen, WB decided to not only release the Potter prequel Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, but they also announced that film to be the first in a five part series.
I’m not going to lie, I went into Fantastic Beasts with a pretty skeptical outlook. The Harry Potter franchise was a billion dollar industry for Warner Bros. for a decade and I’m sure it was even more crushing for that gravy train to cease just a year before Christopher Nolan’s wildly successful Dark Knight trilogy finished up. Disney has also proved with Marvel and Star Wars just how profitable a shared cinematic universe can be. A shared “Potterverse” seemed like a desperate attempt to capture a similar trend. The fact that the screenplay for Fantastic Beasts would be written by J.K. Rowling was of little comfort to me given that Rowling’s post-Potter efforts have generally been met with apathy. In short, all signs pointed to Fantastic Beasts as being made less in an effort to expand the mythology of the series, but more to recapture the glory and success of yesteryear. All that said, I did try to go into the film with an open mind. The reviews were fairly solid after all and in the thick of a busy semester, some magic and escapism seemed like a good way to spend an evening.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is set in 1926 and is completely unrelated to the major story beats of the original Harry Potter series but nonetheless occurs in the same world of witchcraft and wizardry. The film opens with British wizard Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) arriving in New York with a briefcase full of fantastical creatures of all forms. After a mix-up at a bank, a few of Newt’s creatures are let loose in the city, risking exposure of the magical world to the Muggles, or No-Majs as they are called in America. This is, of course, outlawed in the magical world, and to make matters worse, Newt is also attracted the attention of a specific No-Maj named Jacob Kowalski (Dan Folger). This catches the attention of demoted Auror Tina Goldstein (Katherine Waterston), who becomes involved in their quest to reclaim Newt’s beasts. Elsewhere in New York, high ranking Auror Percival Graves (Colin Farrell) has secretly been causing destruction while seeking a magical anomaly for unknown reasons.
For all my complaining, the filmmakers do make some strong decisions in terms of doing a new film in the “Potterverse”. This isn’t a sequel following the adventures of Harry’s kids and it also isn’t a direct prequel depicting events that we already know more or less exactly what happens. The film is set long before the main events of the universe, and the film also avoids most of the pandering references these sort of things tend to fall back on. There is no scene, for example, where we get a glimpse at Harry’s grandfather as a young child. The film even situates itself in a fairly novel setting, given that it’s in the 20s and also gives as our first glimpse at America in the wizarding world. All of these are good decisions, and yet, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is still something of a failure. What it comes down to is the story, which is both a jumbled mess and yet also very empty.
Regarding the first point, Fantastic Beasts feels like two different movies slapped together; one about the titular fantastic beasts and another about a new evil wizard and their dastardly plot. These two stories do intermingle, but not in a way that feels natural. In fact the first third of the film is almost solely dedicated to the antics pertaining to Newt’s various magical creatures. When the more villainous plotline emerges it feels like a different movie. It would have been better to focus on one of these ideas. Either make a movie about Newt’s globetrotting adventures as he finds more creatures, possibly centered around is prior romance that’s alluded to, or make a movie about lowly Auror Tina discovering an evil conspiracy and rising to the occasion. In addition to this tension of plots, there are other elements which are set up for seemingly no reason, including whole thing about Jon Voight’s character and his relationship to his two sons. In a novel, details like this can help fill out the world, but in a film, they stand-out as being awkward and a pointless use of screentime.
The other crucial problem is that beneath the film’s messy screenplay is an ultimately hollow story. The main villain’s overall goals are fine, but the details of his plan in this movie pretty vague and ill-defined. I’ll avoid spoilers, but I’m not sure why Graves needed the magic anomaly in the first place. He seemed pretty effective at causing mayhem on his own. There’s also a twist at the end of the film regarding this character, but it doesn’t really amount to much nor does it mean anything. I suppose hardcore Potter fans might get more of a kick out of this reveal, but in the context of this story it’s kinda pointless. I get the feeling the film is mostly just introducing this villain to be used in later films, and that’s fine, but he should also do something of interest in this film too. Otherwise, Fantastic Beasts serves to introduce a new cast of heroes and they’re…mostly fine I guess. I see some potential in them, particularly Katherine Waterston’s Tina, but the characters aren’t especially interesting and they aren’t given much in the way of arcs. Comparatively, I think we saw a lot more growth out of the trio of protagonists in The Philosopher’s Stone then we do for these guys in their first film.
I wouldn’t say I hated Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Returning Potter director David Yates does solid enough work behind the camera, some of the creature designs are pretty fun, and the set-pieces are alright, if unexceptional. However the core story is a mess and simultaneously lacking in substance. Consequently, I found myself bored for large stretches of the film, which is pretty bad when you consider this is supposed to escapist spectacle. I don’t doubt that this series could produce some interesting stories down the line (the lore suggests some good things), but this first entry is disposable.
D+
|
|
SnoBorderZero
CS! Silver
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 17,626
Likes: 3,182
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 17:07:20 GMT -5
|
Post by SnoBorderZero on Nov 28, 2016 20:35:44 GMT -5
I'd held off on my review after seeing this film on Thanksgiving because I found that the more I began to formulate my thoughts on the film the more I began to sour on it. While watching the film I had a good enough time allowing myself to get swept up in its charming escapism, but reflecting on it I came to realize that the film had very little to offer outside of that. Even the weaker Harry Potter films were well made mysteries with strong performances and technical wonder that made it almost necessary to overlook any faults and embrace them for being a fun and unique flavor of cinema. Spin-offs are always difficult, and while I think that this franchise has potential, I can defiantly state that Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is easily weaker than any of the Potter films and doesn't contain nearly the amount of joyous thrills or expert storytelling and lore that we've come to expect, and the result is a film that bumbles around for over two hours and never gains much traction.
The film is set in 1926, before the Great Depression ravaged America and while the Roaring Twenties were still alive and well. Our protagonist Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) arrives on a ship from Britain carrying a suitcase filled with several magical creatures. After some of them escape, Scamander attempts to track them down throughout the city while attempting to stave off the American version of the Ministry of Magic. While all of this plays out in good natured fun where we are not only introduced to Scamander but some amusing observations on the slight differences between British and American wizards and witches customs, what appears to be a larger plot is also taking place. A powerful, magical force has been destroying parts of New York, and Percival Graves (Colin Farrell) is desperately searching for its cause. He holds counsel with a boy named Creedence (Ezra Miller) whose mother leads a campaign for ousting wizards and witches, as he believes that this powerful force is emanating from someone close to him. This never takes shape and never feels to fit in with the rest of the film. I think Rowling was certainly on the right track; a two hour film of Scamander and Co. running around the city catching creatures can only entertain for so long and the narrative was in definite need of an extra push, but this plotline never works and ultimately feels very shoehorned into the whole affair. The Harry Potter films always mixed Harry and Co.'s own story arcs with the more sinister, big picture main plots very well, and here it's so clumsy that when the two story trajectories do collide it bears no emotional response at all.
That might be the biggest problem with this film; everything in it is absurdly contrived. Characters always seem to be in the right place whether it's for helping another character escape, or to provide exposition, or to take us from one location to another. Their conversations feel forced despite a solid cast in place, and nothing blends very naturally. The same can be said for Redmayne as Scamander. He's a likable character, but he doesn't pack any lasting punch. I'm glad he's not an overly eccentric lover of creatures, but I think Rowling mistook him being guarded and secretive for bland and ordinary. He lacks the witty dialogue or banter with the other characters that made Harry, Ron, and Hermione's exchanges so wonderful. It's again another example of where the film fails to distinguish itself. In many ways, this film brings to mind the same issues that The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey contained. We have a bunch of characters that we don't really know or care much about that are running into one zany predicament after another, and while it's fun in an escapist sort of way, once you start looking back on it all you realize it never adds up to much. We can expect more because we've seen all of the Potter films before this balance the escapism with the plot, and Fantastic Beasts bumbles around and not much else. Other plot oddities include a curiously useless role for Jon Voight as a senator and his two sons which goes absolutely nowhere and feels incredibly out of place, and the aforementioned orphanage where a woman rallies against wizards and witches unknowing of the secrets going on in the home. Tonally the film can't balance any of this, and I honestly would've much preferred the silly escapades of Scamander and Co. to the film attempting to shoehorn a new Voldemort-type character into the mix. That's what is most disappointing of all; the script written by Rowling herself lacks the wonder and wit that she brought to the Potter books and films. Too much circumstantial plotting and not enough actual storytelling.
Aside from its narrative shortcomings, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is bolstered from strong direction and technical oversight from returning Potter director David Yates. I really enjoyed his knack for balancing practical storytelling and character development amidst the FX heavy productions, and while the screenplay lets him down here, Yates does his best in keeping the pace moving and frantic so that its faults can be forgotten oversights. The production for 1920s New York is nice as well. They could've done overblown CGI for everything but instead have real street cars, flashing signs, and 5th Avenue department stores that bring the city to life. It's nothing as magical as Hogwarts or even Diagon Alley, but the production team has done a commendable job overall.
Initially I wasn't impressed by this film, but I found it to be a fun time at the movies and was content with leaving it at that. But after reflecting on what has to be one of the most contrived screenplays of the year and realizing that for a somewhat lengthy film that very little of substance and weight occur, I cannot overlook the film's many glaring faults. Perhaps after the franchise gets going with its second installment it'll be easier to overlook my gripes with this film because these issues will be shored up in the subsequent films, but as a stand alone film Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is never able to firmly find its own footing and lacks the ingenuity and storytelling of the Harry Potter films. It's not a bad film, just a very disappointing one given the potential and lore that it had to work with. We expect more from Rowling, and hopefully she has more up her sleeve for round two.
6/10
|
|
daniel
Producer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,072
Likes: 245
Location:
Last Online Mar 13, 2022 22:49:30 GMT -5
|
Post by daniel on Dec 13, 2016 22:03:59 GMT -5
This movie had all the action I wanted in the Harry Potter films, but I didn't really like any of the characters. Felt like a b-side album to Harry Potter's a-side.
5/10
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,783
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 23:39:06 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Dec 13, 2016 22:24:48 GMT -5
This movie had all the action I wanted in the Harry Potter films, but I didn't really like any of the characters. Felt like a b-side album to Harry Potter's a-side. 5/10 Harry Potter is the filler song in the LOTR album. It's the song written by the drummer.
|
|
SnoBorderZero
CS! Silver
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 17,626
Likes: 3,182
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 17:07:20 GMT -5
|
Post by SnoBorderZero on Dec 14, 2016 10:39:08 GMT -5
This movie had all the action I wanted in the Harry Potter films, but I didn't really like any of the characters. Felt like a b-side album to Harry Potter's a-side. 5/10 Harry Potter is the filler song in the LOTR album. It's the song written by the drummer. Fantastic Beasts in a Yellow Submarine.
|
|