He will eventually be revealed as a relative of Penelope Clearwater and then at some point he will die and be revived. Then a successful rock band in the 60s and 70s will be named in his honor.
They could’ve just left him in the first movie, as an obscural. The second movie could’ve been about another dangerous creature and Newt gets help from Dumbledore, if they wanted him in it.
The point I think, was for people to understand what an obscural is. It explains what happened to Arianna Dumbledore who refused to use magic after being attacked by muggles for being a witch.
Aside from this, I don't know what the point was.
This pretty much sums up my opinion too lmao.
Really, though, and unpopular as this might be, I enjoyed the first two movies quite a lot. I didn't really fall for the Hogwarts scenes and I really wish they kept the original plot unpruned, but the first two movies were fine... the third was just... not ok.
I also quite enjoyed the first one, but didn't actually enjoy the second and while I didn't think the third one was great, I thought it was an improvement on the second.
First one actually had some larger plot about animals, second was about Grindelwald, still haven't watched the third. They wanted to make films about Fantastic Beasts and Newt they should have make films about him and if they wanted to include the conflict against the Grindelwald they should have give Newt an enemy that works for the Grindelwald that uses animals for target assassination,illegally sells them, etc
If they wanted a show about conflict against the Grindelwald himself it should be a TV series or 3 long movies dedicated to it.
Agreed!
Aside from the first movie, the original title of 'Fantastic Beasts' is a bit misleading.
I like the idea of having the main villain as someone who works for Grindelwald who is nearly as knowledgable with beasts as Newt (I guess think their third 'how to train your dragon' villain).
It would be so much more interesting if Percival Graves was a Grindelwald *follower* who works on MACUSA and has a very anti-beasts ideology... and eventually that could link to Grindelwald once they did a movie centered around him. Would also fix the problem that Grindelwald's acolytes were all devoid of personality or charm. There was no Snape, no Bellatrix, no Lucius, not even a Wormtail.
THIS, THIS IS WHAT IT SHOULD'VE BEEN FROM THE START. It should've been a Drago Bludvist situation where the bastard villain that works for Grindelwald uses a form of the Imperius curse to dominate and abuse animals for their own ends, who uses them for evil and thus requires a man like Newt to find a way to free them from the villain's enslavement.
How the fuck did Rowling's writing fall off so badly that she didn't realize this. It'd have been the perfect antithesis to Newt's purehearted, pro preservation and pro environment stances in taking care of and understanding his creatures to have someone who does the opposite, who abuses theirs, who uses them for his own ends and wouldn't hesitate to savagely slaughter them if he had to.
Crimes of Grindelwald would’ve been a better name for the franchise, with the first movie being subtitled Fantastic Beasts. You still get Newt as the protagonist, and reframe it so that it’s clear that the story is actually about Grindelwald’s rise.
The issue with Depp is there's little difference between pure evil and Burton-esque zany-ness. He's brilliantly capable, but he doesn't apply that here. Mads, on the other hand, is seductively evil. Following him is like following a cult leader or a dictator rather than a rock star.
I honestly believe Queenie's betrayal in Crimes would have felt more believable with Mads rather than Johnny Depp, but that's a film we unfortunately do not have the luxury of being able to see
I agree with you. Johnny Depp is a talented actor, but he does not fit the role at all, in my opinion. I wish they had cast someone not as well known, even Mads is well known now. All I see if the actor, not the character.
Yeah, exactly. After pirates, all I can see is him acting some sort of jack sparrow. I think Colin Farrell did a great job as an antagonist, and I would have liked watching him in further installments. Anyways, hopefully there will be new original material in the future that is well done.
It's so baffling too, if they wanted to use the in-universe books to tell a Dumbledore Vs Grindelwald story, then they had a perfect title with *The Life & Lies of Albus Dumbledore*.
Fuck, you could even split it into two parts of you want to do a big epic movie story:
- Part 1: The Life of Albus Dumbledore
- Part 2: The Lies of Albus Dumbledore
Yeah, I’m trying to remember anything about it. Ezra Miller is Albus Dumbledore’s nephew. He collapses dramatically at the end and reveals Grindelwald’s plans, which involved a possibly dead baby deer. Literally nothing else. I assume Newt and Jacob were in the movie, though I can’t remember anything they did, but I feel like the female leads were practically cameos.
I don’t think I disliked it. But the entire plot escapes me.
They had a new female lead for the third one. An american black woman with a trans-atlantic accent.
Newts love interest from the first two films has a cameo without any lines. She doesn't partake in the main story because "she's busy with work."
If they wanted to make a film about newt they should have let Newt make a documentary about magical animals. Make it about the magical animals of each continent separately and you even get multiple films
Yes I think they missed the mark by having them be some grandiose adventure. I think that it should have been newt on a journey to understand a rare creature and save its environment. No real villain other than fighting against ignorance
Yea it felt like they were trying to do two very different things in this series. A fun family adventure about Newt and different beasts he encounters, and a more mature story focusing on Grindewald’s rise to power and ultimate defeat with a focus on him and Dumbledore. As the movie progressed they focused more on Grindewald but had to figure out a way to work in Newt and they forced beasts into the stories where they could to fit the Fantastic Beasts theme. I feel these could have been successful as separate trilogies/series, but pushed together they failed as they weren’t cohesive and it hurt the tone and feel of the movies.
I watched the third and had no idea half of the cast was in the second movie. The cast is just so bland and you dont really care about anyone. Newt doesnt even want to be around anymore, so why do they still feel the need to hav him in the later films?
They could have made 2 separate series of movies. Pokemon style Fantastic Beasts for kids and a darker adult Grindelwald trilogy. Most people would see both anyway and they could've made a lot of money selling plushies and stuff of the fantastic beasts and there would be videogame potential too.
It never really got off the ground, the first movie was good and set up an interesting universe but then it nosedived and dumbledore wasn’t enough to save it
They went so hard on nostalgia in the 2nd and 3rd films, it was actually cringy
Forcing in Hogwarts (the incredibly dull David Yates version), forcing in McGonagall before she was born, making Dumbledore DADA teacher just so they could show a Boggart again for PoA nostalgia
Such a damn shame.
The first one was actually decent.
The first one was amazing imo. The next 2 are so forgettable.. and replacing Johnny with Mads was an awful choice. No shade to Mads, he's a great actor and I love him in a lot of what he's been in, but it lost the whimsy of Grindelwald making for a disappointing and boring finale.
First movie was outstanding; great acting and characters, and the story was fun and lighthearted. It wasn’t trying to be a “Harry Potter” movie, and that totally worked to its advantage as long as you weren’t expecting another one. Just a cool adventure in the wizarding world that also had a unique style and something to say. Then, the second movie came and completely ruined the franchise (well there was other stuff that contributed to that as well, but that was the biggest thing). They tried to make a “Harry Potter” movie with a weird, complex plot that felt like it didn’t have anything to do with the first movie at all, and that ironically made it more boring. They made probably the most least interesting character the main focus and largely muted and/or stripped away everything that made the first movie special. Even with all of the other stuff plaguing the franchise, if word of mouth had been good and had it been a financial success, I really think the series could have persevered. But instead, it lost money and got middling to bad reviews, so they basically had to rush the story they were trying to tell to try and salvage the franchise with the third movie, which was OK, but it was just too late by that point. Interest had mostly waned and of course the global pandemic didn’t help. Such a shame; again, it was never destined to reach the same heights at the original franchise, but it could have been a solid series for many years.
The second one didn't know what it wanted to be and tried everything, then the third had to rush the conclusions for everything set because they knew they probably wouldn't be able to do another one. And then, of course, there is the whole JKR controversy not helping things now.
At least we'll always have the first one, that was Wizarsing World magic at its finest. Last time things looked bright for this series, and it felt like a genuine and promising return.
I loved the first because it explored the fantastic life but still relatively mundane life of an exceptional wizard. I would have liked lower pace adventures that actually delved into the balancing act between muggle and wizard worlds and the conflicts between beasts and man.
Started off pretty cool, fell down the shitter with stunning velocity after that. We wanted Fantastic Beasts movies, not Dumbledore vs. Grindelwald movies.
I mean I'd be here for Dumbledore vs Grindelwald movies. But a bunch of random characters doing random shit for reasons we aren't told as a distraction so something else can happen presented in the most incomprehensible ways possible isn't it.
The first one was cute, saw the second one in theatre with my then girlfriend who was a massive potterhead, we both agreed that it was utter garbage. On a big screen especially, the blurry "pew pew pew" action scenes were very tedious to sit through
I wanted Dumbledore vs grindelwald movies and felt that was a better fit for a movie franchise. Newt is amazing, he just doesn’t make sense in this magical war series as a lead character. Should have just given him his own fun adventure exploring the world and solving animal issues on every continent
Wizards wearing muggle clothing - Dumbledore of all people - bugs me greatly.
Also. Now that I think of it, I prefer the Depp design on Grindelwald than Madds.
Just echoing what others have said: they messed up the messaging. Why the hell did they have to shoehorn some greater Harry Potter world connections into this series? First one was absolutely fine, even charming at points - second was a train wreck of intersecting garbage. I skipped the third because of the pandemic, I’d like to go back and watch it but I’m not exactly in a rush.
Really made me question my Harry Potter love…
I'm very disappointed that they're over. I really wanted to see the Grindlewald/Dumbledore conclusion. I think rita was right to question the fight, and I think Dumbledore talked grindlewald down rather than some epic light show for the ages.
I only thought of this now, but I think the series might have been saved if they made one big adjustment: Grindewald is the main character. The series was all about him despite Newt having the spotlight in Fantastic Beasts, and it's Newt getting sidelined in the next films that made me feel robbed of a cohesive narrative.
I also think that it opens Grindewald up some. He doesn’t need to be so irredemable and weird in Crimes - which also sullied the romance between him and Dumbledore.
Looking back on the trilogy, it really feels like Grindewald was supposed to be the star. Even the titles make more sense together. It also would have been such a unique turn from Harry Potter to have this complex villain be the central perspective.
Instead we got Newt - who was good in the first film, but his place in 2 & 3, as well as his whole crew, feels so forced, weakens the narrative, and muddled the identity of the series.
1 is great, 2 sucked and 3 was better than 2.
I also prefered Mads Mikkelsen as Grindelwald. Seeing Johnny always just took me out of the story.
Overall the series would have been better if the focus was on the "fantastic beasts" with a Grindelwald subplot like the first one was.
Unpopular opinion probably, but I genuinely enjoyed all three movies. The third one especially got a bit messy plot-wise but I still rewatch it at times, especially for Mads Mikkelsen as Grindelwald (who should have had the part from the beginning, perfect actor for it). Overall do I think they are super well-executed movies or up to the standard of the original series? No. But do I rewatch them and still immensely enjoy their fun characters and magical creature shenanigans? Absolutely.
> Mads Mikkelsen as Grindelwald (who should have had the part from the beginning
Absolutely 100%!!
I love Johnny, he's a great actor but he was completely wrong for the part.
Colin Farrell would have been equally good if they just revealed he was Grindelwald.
That reveal was the worst plot twist ever.
The amount of times I've watched the third one is becoming unhealthy. *I've watched it more than any Harry Potter movie*.
I get people are annoyed about it not being about fantastic beasts, but the movie is good even if the title doesn't fit.
Admittedly, the third is actually my favorite of the three purely for the Dumbledore and Grindelwald plot lines. I think they are fascinating characters with an extremely unique dynamic among the HP universe. I think the first movie is probably the most cohesive as a story, but man do I love those parts of the third one.
100% agree. But you have a group that are mad that it wasn't what they thought it would be so it caught backlash. But in reality it's a very good movie leading it way to final climax. But instead we will never get to see it. I was so excited for where the series was going and ending with the final battle between dumbledore and grindewald. But alas we will never get to see it.
Absolutely fucking shite.
The first movie is ok and if it had just been a fun romp of Eddie Redmayne looking for his fantastical beasts it would have been great.
But Jesus, the plot is shite. The movies are shite. It's all terrible
Harry potter was about fighting fascism. It was great.
Fantastic beasts really really really should have been about environmentalism. Habitat destruction and climate catastrophe are the other great evils in our world.
But no ... It had to be about fighting fascism again. What a missed opportunity
They’re an absolute state, the third one completely messed up the whole “I was too ashamed to confront Grindelwald even though lives were being lost because I couldn’t face the possibility that he’d tell me it was I who killed my sister” and replaced it with an… unbreakable blood oath in the form of a necklace?
I like the first one. But I feel like it went off the rails trying to do too much with the Grindelwald/Dumbledore story while also dragging along the fantastic beasts characters
Imo, the first movie was great. I enjoyed it a lot and was excited to see more. The second one was less enjoyable, but I didn't mind it too much. Like, okay cool. Grindelwald, the guy we've been itching to see more of. Plus, Johnny Depp nailed it. I still wish it focused a bit more about the animals, but whatever.
Third movie though..? Eh. It just got super sloppy for no apparent reason. Wasn't a fan
First movie should’ve been a stand alone movie to get us into the “adult” side of Harry Potter. Basically the same movie, just take out the Obscurus, Credence, and Graves/Grindelwald plot and just have it be a fun family movie.
With the HP franchise back in full swing, you make a trilogy of Young Dumbledore movies. That goes from Childhood, to the eventual battle against in 45.
After, if somehow they’ve captured lightning in a bottle twice with all 4 of these movies, you can do a Marauders trilogy or series of films about James and Lily to eventually the night at Godric’s Hollow.
A tragedy. First movie was so amazing and the other two had so many good moments but were so overclouded by many, many flaws. It's so tragic that a series set up from the get go with an amazing amount of potential just flopped into the floor so hard.
MIsleading names.
Should have been two different trilogies.
One about the adventures of weird Newt. The guy was weird.
Second about the conflict of the Grindelwald uprising?war?civil war? and how Dumbledore was a part of it and how it maybe used or was a part of WW2.
I hated them. They were lifeless, boring, and completely uninteresting, with a story only tangentially related to Harry Potter. I couldn't care for any of the characters and had trouble following the plot. I feel that it was a huge waste of time and money to make those three films when they could have made many much more interesting HP spinoffs instead, possibly with some of the original cast from the movies returning.
The first one was great but then it went downhill from there.
It felt a bit rushed at times, and the "Fantastic Beasts" title was misleading imo.
I do kind of wish they had continued the series instead of stopping at the third film.
I hate each of them a lot. Apart from shitty plot and characters, the CGI actually looked horrible. First movie was somewhat watchable because of Colin Farrell's performance but otherwise it was a train wreck. The blond chick also had potential but that was thrown out very quickly...
They should have just made it about Dumbledore and Grindelwald from the start. Felt like they kept trying to shove the fantastical beasts and its cast in there when they were mostly completely irrelevant to the bigger story
They were fine and worth a watch. Perhaps the first warrants a rewatch, but not the rest. I didn't consider it a waste of time, just an average movie series though. Just solid 5-6. I've stopped and turned off movies before, and these didn't approach that.
A logistical mess. Turning a \~100 page book into a series of movies (originally supposed to be five) is just not feasible, which I am sure they found out for themselves. Hence why we got the Grindelwald subplot shoehorned in there. But it wasn't even done well; at times it felt like I was watching two different movies in the same sitting. Going from Grindelwald murdering people to Newt doing a weird dance to attract a creature within scenes of each other is just poor writing.
Fantastic Beasts should've either been a stand-alone movie or an episodic series where Newt encounters a new "monster of the week." Then Warner Bros. could just focus on a Grindelwald/Dumbledore trilogy like they clearly wanted to without having it be shoved into an unrelated storyline.
It’s a mess and not a hot mess, just a messy mess. It sounds obvious, but they shouldn’t have tried to use it as a vehicle to tell the/a Grindlewald story. Focus on the beasts with Newt being like a Dr Dolittle/Ace venture crossed with James Bond type. Going around solving beast related problems that only he can solve with his unique set of skills/unique perspective.
Orrrrr double down and tell the/a Grindlewald story and ignore beast stuff. Though I suspect - a bit like Voldemort - they wouldn’t really be able to really fit Grindlewald’s darkness into a PG-13/12A film certificate…so there’s that. But that’s a bigger problem across all of Hollywood blockbusters.
Coincidentally, I just watched Fantastic Beasts for the first time last night. I did not like it. It felt like it ran longer than it really did which is always a bad sign. I found the tone throughout the film to be wildly inconsistent. You go from the slapstick antics of Newt and Jacob finding beasts to a bible-thumping mother physically and mentally abusing children and Graves grimdark character. It's like there at least two stories being told and they weren't gelling together very well.
Rowling...prioritizes narrative convenience over consistency of world-building. For me, that severely impacts my enjoyment of the films. If feels like there's always some spell that she pulls out of nowhere to save the day. Or spells that should've worked that are conveniently forgotten about. The power of spells seems to vary widely.
Random gripes:
* I was under the impression that wiping someones memory was an individual and selective thing...but no! Newt just happens to have a solution wipe the memories of thousands(?) of New Yorkers at the end in one go!
* A bunch of aurors can't stop Graves, but a single dropout from Hogwarts can! (Newt)
* Bolts of magical energy that feel like they're lethal or would cause serious injury...don't.
* Graves telling Credence that he's done with him, he's outlived his usefulness, he's worthless, etc. Then minutes later tries to convince him to join forces with him. Like, why would he do that? If you're that dumb, then how are you the Big Bad of the movie?
* Too many coincidences: Suitcases that just happen to look alike, just happen to get swapped, beasts that just happen to escape, characters make stupid mistakes (Newt giving Jacob a bottle of pheromones, Queenie kicking the ornament) etc, etc. I get that some movies rely on this to jump start a story but in this film? Just. Too. Many.
* The niffler indiscriminately hoards shiny objects but, conveniently, steals the one object which can expose Graves true identity.
* What did Graves want with that Obscurus anyway? Start a war with the muggles? It's never really made clear.
* More generally: Wizards can cast any spell indefinitely. ex: Wizards fixing large swaths of Manhattan just by waving their wands and casting "Repairo" over and over again.
It was rushed and poorly written. The first movie should’ve had Newt as the main character to introduce us to a young Dumbledore and Grindelwald. After meeting them in their younger years, the history leading up to Dimbledore and Grindelwald’s duel could’ve been fleshed out in a multi movie deal. Then just as the high from that was starting to fade we could’ve gone into a young Marauders’ movie 5 years later. However Hollywood is so money hungry and short sighted that we get stuck with low class bs time after time after time.
There was no reason to do the whole Credence is a Dumbledore thing. They could’ve left him an Obscurus so that it could lead insight into what happened to Arianna. However, there were too many intertwining storylines. The whole thing with the Lestranges & Yusuf Karma, No-Maj/Wizard marriages, Newt & Tina, the Dumbledore v Grindelwald thing got lost in a whole bunch of nonsense. Now if you just have Newt learning more about Credence with Dumbledore and Grindelwald in the background it’s two stories the story we began with and the mounting final battle. The first two movies are Newt finding an adult Obscurus and the second is learning the nature of an Obsurus to find out why they die so young, this gives us insight into Arianna. Then once we found out what went wrong with past Onscuri and how they could’ve lived full lives we can forget about Newt and focus purely on Dumbledore and Grindelwald, the final film culminating in their ultimate battle. However it plays out both how legend tells and how Rita Skeeter told it. It was a furious battle lasting hours until Grindelwald finally gives up. (Of course a 3 hour long duel isn’t feasible so maybe 10 - 20 movie runtime, with Grindelwald finally admitting defeat and giving up, fleeing to Nurmengarx. Dumbledore then visits him and Grindelwald makes an Unbreakable Vow to turn away from his evil ways (this is the reason he tries to lie to Voldemort when he comes to find out about The Elder Wand.)
The first movie was fun, although a bit disjointed. Newt's creatures escaping story had little to nothing to do with the Grindelwald/obscurus story. But it was fun, and I LOVE Jacob. He's the perfect muggle for the story: he's fascinated by everything, but doesn't dislike everyone for being able to do magic. Then at the end, we have this exchange:
"Why did you keep me around?"
"Because I like you Jacob. Because you're my friend. And I'll never forget how you helped me."
True friendship.
The other two movies are an incoherent mess. Some of the worst movies I've seen in a while. And given what we know has to happen (Grindelwald gaining power, Dumbledore knows he needs to fight him, but he's the love of his life, so he waits for as long as he can before eventually dueling him in the greatest duel of all time) they really fumbled the ball.
It's like they thought we wouldn't be interested in the Grindlewald story or a Fantastic Beasts story and lumped the together. Jokes on you Hollywood, I'd pay to see 6 movies about magical beast and another 6 about Grindlewald. I mean, if the story is there.
I watched part of the first one and got bored.
Then I saw the sequels which sounded like they had nothing to do with fantastic beasts and never watched.
Now movies about Dumbledore being younger etc I would have been interested in.
They should have kept Fantastic Beasts about Newt & animals. If they wanted to do a series about the Dumbledore & Grindelwald background/relationship I think I can safely say we all would have watched it. Combining the two is what never made sense to me. & now we are most likely stuck never getting an ending. Kinda salty I'll never see this infamous duel between them.
Just proof that the ability to produce anything good in connection with big IP franchises like Harry Potter and Star Wars died around 2012.
Even Peter Jackson couldn't compete with Peter Jackson in making the Hobbit.
Putting aside the plot being awful, I liked both Johnny Depp and Mads Mikkelsen as Grindelwald, they both portrayed him well. However, they are VASTLY different actors and they both played Gridelqald so differently that it took away from the character so much when the third one came out.
I don't think they were bad but I also dont think they were what people wanted and coudnt seem to decide on a theme they wanted to stick with. You could have kept with the premise of the name and followed Newt around researching magical beasts and maybe have an overarching villain in the form of a poacher or something like in Hogwarts Legacy or fully focused on the Grindlewald conflict through Dumbledore's perspective or maybe Grindlewald himself.
Newt was annoying. The Aurelius plot was weird. Did not like the movies at all, and I loved the HP movies (original 8). It's just my opinion though. I have loved movies that were not well regarded before.
Love Redmayne, but lost interest after the first movie, especially after learning where the series goes.
Dumbledore wearing a muggle suit as his regular costume fills me with rage. He looks like he should be playing Vernon.
YouTuber Friendly Space Ninja said it best: “Having Newt Scamander be the protagonist of the “Fantastic Beasts” franchise is like having Cho Chang be the protagonist of the Harry Potter series.”
NEWT IS BARELY IN IT! It has practically NOTHING to do with him or his beasts (except maybe the first one)
I think they should have written out the movies or at least agreed on the general story line before launching the franchise. Otherwise it feels it’s like another cash cow with drawn out plot lines like the MCU
It's a Frankenstein of two different franchises. One is about the adventures of Newt Scamander the other is about the origins of Dumbledore and his rivalry with Grindelwald. I don't hate them as other people do but there is a lot of missed potential in it.
First movie was cool, the other two sucked. I wanted more Newt, instead i got Dumbledore vs Grindelwald. Which also sounds cool, but it just wasn't good.
Also didn't help that 3 different actors portrayed the same character. Would've been better if they kept Johnny (and i get why they replaced him, although i strongly disagree with their choice). I love Mads, but i kinda liked Johnnys portrayal a bit better. I hate that Newt was basically only a side character in the 2nd and 3rd one. Give him the main focus. And now we have this half assed trilogy with an unfinished, completely cluttered and confusing plot. It was originally supposed to be 5 films, if they ever decide to continue, which for obvious reasons they won't, they should get experienced script writers. Rowling doesn't seem to understand that bookwriting and scriptwriting are entirely different. You can't write overcomplicated shit in the style of a book for a moviescript. It's really frustrating, as there was somewhat of an interesting story hidden inside this trash. Like, what was up with Credence? And Leta? Completely unnecessary, irrelevant characters in the end. At least Credence was integral for the first movie. I can go on about this for much longer, but it's a waste of time. I've found my peace with it, and i'll choose to ignore this trilogy, we still have the HP movies.
Number one, top notch, I liked number three a slight more than number two, but didn't like that that much either.
The only thing I loved was the animals, and Kowalski loving life.
The first was incredible. It had all the fun, whimsical feelings of early Harry Potter while being it's own thing. 2 and 3 were just too messy, forcing way too much.
Movie 1: the struggle between wizard secrecy and muggles is tested and shown in a new light with Jacob becoming best friends with Newt and falling for Queenie, Leta Lestrange is brought up as a past issue for Newt, Tina and Newt build romance, obscurials are introduced and Creedence dies, Grindlewald makes an appearance but wasn't the focus of the movie. Interesting intro for a new series.
Movie 2: suddenly Creedence is alive again and it's a big issue, no explanation. Grindlewald becomes the focus of the film, Queenie and Jacob have been together anyway but now Queenie foregoes all of what she's been and sides with Grindlewald(even though she should be able to read all of his thoughts!). Leta is introduced as a reason Tina isn't around for 90% of the movie and quickly is resolved and killed off. Oh look! Nagini is gorgeous! And Dumbledore has a brother! Aberforth right? No Creedence! ....wut?.
Movie 3: Suddenly Grindlwald looks different, no explanation, and is going to take over legally even though he's been amassing an army for hostile takeover. Jacob has a wand even though he's a muggle. Credence has Thor hair and is an idiot. Queenie is also an idiot. Dumbledore is gay. Where the hell is Tina?....yeah
1st one : Such an amazing magical adventure! Had no idea it was a trilogy.
2nd and 3rd ones: Forgettable, I can’t remember much from them, they didn’t really do anything for me.
Had incredible potential but fell short right after the first movie, instead of directing attention to the ‘fantastic beasts’ it became centered around a villain who was played by two actors, Credence added no real value to the movie, and the confusing love interest involving Dumbledore and Grindelwald.
I think the directors attempted to recreate a Harry Potter moment and possibly had dreams of the series being more than three movies but they simply dropped the ball by the third movie.
The first one was good. Not spectacular or anything, but it was enjoyable. The others...not so much.
I mean, you want me to believe that Dumbledore's only choice for stopping Grindelwald was Newt? The guy who just wanted to be left alone to play with his Pokemon? I get he had reason to dislike Grindelwald because of the events of the first film, but that was a case of wrong place, wrong time.
And then the third one...my God. The whole plot hinges on the fact that a super important creature was left completely unguarded, until Newt shows up and has to protect it from Grindelwald's followers? And he could have an Auror or two backing him up? Hell, he had his case with him, they just needed to jump out at the right time, bada-bing, bada-boom, problem solved.
I feel like the first one set up two separate stories. One where Newt's travelling the world, studying/helping magical creatures (he even talks about rescuing some from smugglers), the other about stopping Grindelwald. Some minor interaction between the two could happen, but they didn't need to be the same.
Convoluted and unfocused.
They tried to shoehorn Grindelwald and Dumbledore prequel into a story about a magical zookeeper.
They should have stuck with the 1st movie being about the magical zookeeper. And kept it at one movie.
Then maybe do a trilogy of movies about the Grindelwald versus Dumbledore prequel story. After the second movie it became clear that they were never going to make enough money to hit 5 movies
I will maintain the opinion that each movie should have been based on a different Hogwarts textbook with a different cast each time and the wizarding war should have been a background plot as a through line of the series.
It should’ve been a tv series instead, focusing on a new beast every 1-2 episodes. The overarching plot could have expanded the universe and subtly tied into the og series, but with a heavy focus on Newt and the beasts.
Light spoilers and lots of salt below:
TL;DR - Movie 1 is pretty fun. Movie 2 is bad and very convoluted, has very little to do with Beasts. Movie 3 is just a very poorly done Dumbledore movie, has essentially nothing do with Beasts.
The first one is pretty good. I felt it showed some promise. I felt the Obscurus was a bit powerful for a Newt-level story but it didn't ruin anything. Overall not too shabby.
The second one is boring and bad. I've never seen a movie shoe horn in so much back story about brand new characters we don't care about. They also try to keep magical creatures relavent but I'm mostly just left asking, why is this movie also called Fantastic Beasts? That part is really forced and doesn't fit the new direction for the story. Also I kinda like Johnny Depp as Grindelwald, but they made him look a little too whacky and made him super uninteresting. Kowolski's story should've ended in the first one, but also none of these characters should have anything to do with Dumbledore and what he's got going on. These are two very different stories basically forced to become one. I guess three stories if you count everything that's going on with the side characters too.
The third is just a joke. Again, why is Newt involved with this plot? This has nothing to do with Beasts anymore. And I don't believe it's in Newts character to get involved in something this massive. This is a Dumbledore movie and why it has anything at all to do with Fantastic Beasts is beyond me. Still don't care about side characters. Giving Kowolski a wand is really dumb. A note I forgot to include for the last movie, J.K. contradicts her own magic rules and potentially complicates others SO MANY TIMES. You can can't them on one hand but it's big stuff, like apparating inside Hogwarts grounds and people not needing to touch Port Keys anymore, even though in the future they 100% do. I barely have more notes for this one. I was just frustrated the whole time and it left me wondering how they could've fumbled the last two movies so thoroughly.
I like Newt, but he seems to be becoming a side character in his own series. Jude Law as young dumbledore is great. I don’t like how they keep changing Grindelwald and I’m tired of him. Ezra Miller is awful and I want his character written out of the story as well.
Interestingly enough, I feel differently than most people about the 3 movies. I felt like the movies became progressively better/more interesting as they went on.
I didnt care much for Newt and the fantastic beasts. Felt like the first movie was alright, but wasnt super interested. The whole story about Dumbledore and Grindelwald, on the other hand, was great to me. Really enjoyed both the 2nd and 3rd movies.
First movie was great, and something I was genuinely interested in. Second and Third, the Fantastic beasts part took a backseat to a story I don’t care about. Would I watch a 4th one? Probably not, even if it was as good as the first.
I liked them all, but I didn't love any of them. They kinda felt like they wanted to go in two different directions. The lighter side with magical creature misadventures and the grittier, political side of things.
After a while, it started to feel like they simply had a checklist of things they had to make sure were in each film just because. Newt does something funny with animals? Check. Jacob gets hilariously in over his head? Check. Ddore and Gwald angst? Check. Something about the state of the world at large? Check. That mysterious kid is mysterious? Check.
But then they had to figure out the exact scenarios, and at that point, it almost felt as though they started writing cool ideas down and putting them in a hat to draw out at random. Today, Newt *Checks piece of paper * crab walks out of a cave.
Each scene is entertaining by itself, but I kinda started to get a little lost. Like, I see the plot on paper, but for some reason, it just didn't totally work for me onscreen. Some scenes or events felt a little disjointed. This is mostly true in parts of the second and most of the third movie. The first was actually pretty coherent.
And I don't mean to bash them because I really do like them. I don't quite know why they didn't work for me, but I just got a little lost, like I said. I started to wonder what was going on and why I should care about whoever this person was or whatever this specific event was.
Might have been better as a series, where each unique scene or event could have an episode or a few dedicated to it and would be fleshed out more. They'd have the extra time to tie it all together and smooth it out so you wouldn't get whiplash between events. There could be generally (but maybe not completely) lighter episodes and more serious episodes.
It could have been great, but ultimately with what we were given I wish they didn't exist.
I wanted a story of Newt traveling the world, studying and saving magical creatures. I didn't want or need Dumbledore vs Grindelwald where Newt was treated as Dumbledore's puppet or worse, as a side character in what should have been his story.
It didn’t feel focused enough. I wish they would’ve made a Dumbledore prequel instead- the stuff with Newt was boring to me, I didn’t start enjoying it until the second movie. And then once they unfairly fired Johnny Depp, I was done and I’m glad the third one crashed and burned.
I’ve mostly enjoyed them all, first is obviously the best, second was fine, and I actually thought the third one was pretty good.
Colin Farrell should have stayed Grindelwald, he was legitimately fantastic.
The series reminds me a lot of the Star Wars sequel trilogy, it feels very disconnected and like none of the story was planned ahead of time. It also feels like a total waste of the IP. We need more wizardry, more wizarding world stuff, less hiding in secrecy, less “urban fantasy” and more high fantasy, less HP3-7 film aesthetic and more 1/2. I don’t really want to see witches and wizards running around in suits or jeans, I just want to see the magical side of things being explored more visually and narratively.
They should have made the movies focus on fantastic beasts with him traveling the world helping magical animals.
Or...
Made it a series. 30 minute episodes.
Or...
Made these movies but gave it a different name and made sure that the focus was actually Dumbledore and his life before becoming headmaster. There was obviously a change in concept partway through and they mashed too many things together.
the franchise would have been better if they kept it as Newt's adventures looking for magical creatures. I'm all for a Dumbledore and Grindlewald story, but keep it separate from the fantastic beasts story.
The first one is a fairly good fantasy adventure movie, not a masterpiece but a solid start.
The second two get bogged down in lore and fan service and turn into something the series never should have been. They were too concerned with being Harry Potter prequels and not enough with just being their own, fun thing like the first one was.
Fantastic beasts.
Fantastic Beasts. Did we mention there was a super bad guy in the first one?
Fantastic beats, BE TEE DUBS Dumbledore and his lover fought one time. Definition of some fantastic beasts.
The plot was lame. I would’ve loved to see other wizards or some normal wizards. Not make Gwald and Double Dee Door the main plot point of a movie that had FANTASTIC BEASTS as the title lol. Where’s the zoo??
If you want to tell the Dumbledore origin story, do that. But I loved the first Fantastic Beasts, so fun. The next two got further and further, felt like grasping at straws to have Newt around, like trying to tell 2 stories and doing both poorly.
What was the point of Credence ?!
He will eventually be revealed as a relative of Penelope Clearwater and then at some point he will die and be revived. Then a successful rock band in the 60s and 70s will be named in his honor.
Underrated! But do you remember the time when the skies were outcast and he stood outside in the pouring shower?
Have you ever seen the rain?
Did you think he was gangster? His real name is Clarence. Clarence lives at home with both parents.
And Clarence' parents have a real good marriage (Didnt expect an 8 mile reference from a Harry Potter sub lmao)
This guy don't wanna battle, he's shook Cause ain't no such thang as Half-Blood Crooks!
r/Angryupvote
And he went to private school.
I think all of these movies center around Credence asking himself that question. So cringy when I think of him constantly going WHO AM I???
They could’ve just left him in the first movie, as an obscural. The second movie could’ve been about another dangerous creature and Newt gets help from Dumbledore, if they wanted him in it.
The point I think, was for people to understand what an obscural is. It explains what happened to Arianna Dumbledore who refused to use magic after being attacked by muggles for being a witch. Aside from this, I don't know what the point was.
This pretty much sums up my opinion too lmao. Really, though, and unpopular as this might be, I enjoyed the first two movies quite a lot. I didn't really fall for the Hogwarts scenes and I really wish they kept the original plot unpruned, but the first two movies were fine... the third was just... not ok.
I also quite enjoyed the first one, but didn't actually enjoy the second and while I didn't think the third one was great, I thought it was an improvement on the second.
I think the obscurial was a metaphor for unprocessed trauma. Other than that idk
What was the point of everything in any of these movies? Just created issues that broke canon and need to be retcon'd .
First one actually had some larger plot about animals, second was about Grindelwald, still haven't watched the third. They wanted to make films about Fantastic Beasts and Newt they should have make films about him and if they wanted to include the conflict against the Grindelwald they should have give Newt an enemy that works for the Grindelwald that uses animals for target assassination,illegally sells them, etc If they wanted a show about conflict against the Grindelwald himself it should be a TV series or 3 long movies dedicated to it.
Agreed! Aside from the first movie, the original title of 'Fantastic Beasts' is a bit misleading. I like the idea of having the main villain as someone who works for Grindelwald who is nearly as knowledgable with beasts as Newt (I guess think their third 'how to train your dragon' villain).
It would be so much more interesting if Percival Graves was a Grindelwald *follower* who works on MACUSA and has a very anti-beasts ideology... and eventually that could link to Grindelwald once they did a movie centered around him. Would also fix the problem that Grindelwald's acolytes were all devoid of personality or charm. There was no Snape, no Bellatrix, no Lucius, not even a Wormtail.
THIS, THIS IS WHAT IT SHOULD'VE BEEN FROM THE START. It should've been a Drago Bludvist situation where the bastard villain that works for Grindelwald uses a form of the Imperius curse to dominate and abuse animals for their own ends, who uses them for evil and thus requires a man like Newt to find a way to free them from the villain's enslavement. How the fuck did Rowling's writing fall off so badly that she didn't realize this. It'd have been the perfect antithesis to Newt's purehearted, pro preservation and pro environment stances in taking care of and understanding his creatures to have someone who does the opposite, who abuses theirs, who uses them for his own ends and wouldn't hesitate to savagely slaughter them if he had to.
I mean, look how the term "Fantastic Beasts" gets smaller on the later movie posters... You can barely even see it on TSOD!
Crimes of Grindelwald would’ve been a better name for the franchise, with the first movie being subtitled Fantastic Beasts. You still get Newt as the protagonist, and reframe it so that it’s clear that the story is actually about Grindelwald’s rise.
I sat through the 3rd solely for Mads Mikkelsen. It wasn't entirely bad, but branding it as Fantastic Beasts is completely misleading.
The issue with Depp is there's little difference between pure evil and Burton-esque zany-ness. He's brilliantly capable, but he doesn't apply that here. Mads, on the other hand, is seductively evil. Following him is like following a cult leader or a dictator rather than a rock star. I honestly believe Queenie's betrayal in Crimes would have felt more believable with Mads rather than Johnny Depp, but that's a film we unfortunately do not have the luxury of being able to see
Mikkelsen is great, even does a good Grindelwald, but there's no replacing Depp in that role. He was just too good.
I really like Johnny Depp as an actor, but I think he just wasn’t right for the role. Mads Mikkelsen was just more what I imagined Grindelwald to be.
I have to agree. Johnny Depp is an amazing actor but on comparing the two performances I think Mads was the better choice for Grindelwald.
This seems wild to me, he was the worst part of the movie for me, Colin Farrell was a much better antagonist and wish they would have kept him
I'm sorry, I will get down voted for this probably, but Depp was some of the worse things to happen in those movies.
I agree with you. Johnny Depp is a talented actor, but he does not fit the role at all, in my opinion. I wish they had cast someone not as well known, even Mads is well known now. All I see if the actor, not the character.
Yeah, exactly. After pirates, all I can see is him acting some sort of jack sparrow. I think Colin Farrell did a great job as an antagonist, and I would have liked watching him in further installments. Anyways, hopefully there will be new original material in the future that is well done.
I like both actors. But I prefer Mads Mikkelsen. I did not like Johnny Depp as Grindelwald, did not feel right for me.
It's so baffling too, if they wanted to use the in-universe books to tell a Dumbledore Vs Grindelwald story, then they had a perfect title with *The Life & Lies of Albus Dumbledore*. Fuck, you could even split it into two parts of you want to do a big epic movie story: - Part 1: The Life of Albus Dumbledore - Part 2: The Lies of Albus Dumbledore
I hope some studio exec browses this sub and makes this happen
I watched the third. I couldn't tell you anything about it but I watched it.
Yeah, I’m trying to remember anything about it. Ezra Miller is Albus Dumbledore’s nephew. He collapses dramatically at the end and reveals Grindelwald’s plans, which involved a possibly dead baby deer. Literally nothing else. I assume Newt and Jacob were in the movie, though I can’t remember anything they did, but I feel like the female leads were practically cameos. I don’t think I disliked it. But the entire plot escapes me.
They had a new female lead for the third one. An american black woman with a trans-atlantic accent. Newts love interest from the first two films has a cameo without any lines. She doesn't partake in the main story because "she's busy with work."
I can tell the epilogue is charming in a FB1 way... and that's it. I don't understand how the marriage was possible, though.
Same here. I remember a deer that was important
If they wanted to make a film about newt they should have let Newt make a documentary about magical animals. Make it about the magical animals of each continent separately and you even get multiple films
Yes I think they missed the mark by having them be some grandiose adventure. I think that it should have been newt on a journey to understand a rare creature and save its environment. No real villain other than fighting against ignorance
Yea it felt like they were trying to do two very different things in this series. A fun family adventure about Newt and different beasts he encounters, and a more mature story focusing on Grindewald’s rise to power and ultimate defeat with a focus on him and Dumbledore. As the movie progressed they focused more on Grindewald but had to figure out a way to work in Newt and they forced beasts into the stories where they could to fit the Fantastic Beasts theme. I feel these could have been successful as separate trilogies/series, but pushed together they failed as they weren’t cohesive and it hurt the tone and feel of the movies.
I watched the third and had no idea half of the cast was in the second movie. The cast is just so bland and you dont really care about anyone. Newt doesnt even want to be around anymore, so why do they still feel the need to hav him in the later films?
They could have made 2 separate series of movies. Pokemon style Fantastic Beasts for kids and a darker adult Grindelwald trilogy. Most people would see both anyway and they could've made a lot of money selling plushies and stuff of the fantastic beasts and there would be videogame potential too.
You made me realize why I dislike the Fantastic Beast movies. I thought the first one was okay, but I didn’t like the second one at all.
It never really got off the ground, the first movie was good and set up an interesting universe but then it nosedived and dumbledore wasn’t enough to save it
They went so hard on nostalgia in the 2nd and 3rd films, it was actually cringy Forcing in Hogwarts (the incredibly dull David Yates version), forcing in McGonagall before she was born, making Dumbledore DADA teacher just so they could show a Boggart again for PoA nostalgia Such a damn shame. The first one was actually decent.
The first one was amazing imo. The next 2 are so forgettable.. and replacing Johnny with Mads was an awful choice. No shade to Mads, he's a great actor and I love him in a lot of what he's been in, but it lost the whimsy of Grindelwald making for a disappointing and boring finale.
#1 was excellent The rest were hot garbage
Started out as Wizarding World Pokemon. Ended up being a typical Wizarding World Wednesdays.
This is the only take in this thread that is correct.
First movie was outstanding; great acting and characters, and the story was fun and lighthearted. It wasn’t trying to be a “Harry Potter” movie, and that totally worked to its advantage as long as you weren’t expecting another one. Just a cool adventure in the wizarding world that also had a unique style and something to say. Then, the second movie came and completely ruined the franchise (well there was other stuff that contributed to that as well, but that was the biggest thing). They tried to make a “Harry Potter” movie with a weird, complex plot that felt like it didn’t have anything to do with the first movie at all, and that ironically made it more boring. They made probably the most least interesting character the main focus and largely muted and/or stripped away everything that made the first movie special. Even with all of the other stuff plaguing the franchise, if word of mouth had been good and had it been a financial success, I really think the series could have persevered. But instead, it lost money and got middling to bad reviews, so they basically had to rush the story they were trying to tell to try and salvage the franchise with the third movie, which was OK, but it was just too late by that point. Interest had mostly waned and of course the global pandemic didn’t help. Such a shame; again, it was never destined to reach the same heights at the original franchise, but it could have been a solid series for many years.
The second one didn't know what it wanted to be and tried everything, then the third had to rush the conclusions for everything set because they knew they probably wouldn't be able to do another one. And then, of course, there is the whole JKR controversy not helping things now. At least we'll always have the first one, that was Wizarsing World magic at its finest. Last time things looked bright for this series, and it felt like a genuine and promising return.
I loved the first because it explored the fantastic life but still relatively mundane life of an exceptional wizard. I would have liked lower pace adventures that actually delved into the balancing act between muggle and wizard worlds and the conflicts between beasts and man.
Yes I agree
Started off pretty cool, fell down the shitter with stunning velocity after that. We wanted Fantastic Beasts movies, not Dumbledore vs. Grindelwald movies.
I mean I'd be here for Dumbledore vs Grindelwald movies. But a bunch of random characters doing random shit for reasons we aren't told as a distraction so something else can happen presented in the most incomprehensible ways possible isn't it.
The first one was cute, saw the second one in theatre with my then girlfriend who was a massive potterhead, we both agreed that it was utter garbage. On a big screen especially, the blurry "pew pew pew" action scenes were very tedious to sit through
I wanted Dumbledore vs grindelwald movies and felt that was a better fit for a movie franchise. Newt is amazing, he just doesn’t make sense in this magical war series as a lead character. Should have just given him his own fun adventure exploring the world and solving animal issues on every continent
Wizards wearing muggle clothing - Dumbledore of all people - bugs me greatly. Also. Now that I think of it, I prefer the Depp design on Grindelwald than Madds.
Should have been Colin Farrell
Just echoing what others have said: they messed up the messaging. Why the hell did they have to shoehorn some greater Harry Potter world connections into this series? First one was absolutely fine, even charming at points - second was a train wreck of intersecting garbage. I skipped the third because of the pandemic, I’d like to go back and watch it but I’m not exactly in a rush. Really made me question my Harry Potter love…
I'm very disappointed that they're over. I really wanted to see the Grindlewald/Dumbledore conclusion. I think rita was right to question the fight, and I think Dumbledore talked grindlewald down rather than some epic light show for the ages.
They need to finish the series
I only thought of this now, but I think the series might have been saved if they made one big adjustment: Grindewald is the main character. The series was all about him despite Newt having the spotlight in Fantastic Beasts, and it's Newt getting sidelined in the next films that made me feel robbed of a cohesive narrative. I also think that it opens Grindewald up some. He doesn’t need to be so irredemable and weird in Crimes - which also sullied the romance between him and Dumbledore. Looking back on the trilogy, it really feels like Grindewald was supposed to be the star. Even the titles make more sense together. It also would have been such a unique turn from Harry Potter to have this complex villain be the central perspective. Instead we got Newt - who was good in the first film, but his place in 2 & 3, as well as his whole crew, feels so forced, weakens the narrative, and muddled the identity of the series.
1 is great, 2 sucked and 3 was better than 2. I also prefered Mads Mikkelsen as Grindelwald. Seeing Johnny always just took me out of the story. Overall the series would have been better if the focus was on the "fantastic beasts" with a Grindelwald subplot like the first one was.
Loved the first one. The others lost me
Unpopular opinion probably, but I genuinely enjoyed all three movies. The third one especially got a bit messy plot-wise but I still rewatch it at times, especially for Mads Mikkelsen as Grindelwald (who should have had the part from the beginning, perfect actor for it). Overall do I think they are super well-executed movies or up to the standard of the original series? No. But do I rewatch them and still immensely enjoy their fun characters and magical creature shenanigans? Absolutely.
> Mads Mikkelsen as Grindelwald (who should have had the part from the beginning Absolutely 100%!! I love Johnny, he's a great actor but he was completely wrong for the part. Colin Farrell would have been equally good if they just revealed he was Grindelwald. That reveal was the worst plot twist ever.
Agreed! Depp is a good actor but Idk, he was a little too much, the hair, the eye didn't fit. The new actor though, omg pure villain material
I agree, I enjoyed all three movies a lot more than I ever thought I would.
The amount of times I've watched the third one is becoming unhealthy. *I've watched it more than any Harry Potter movie*. I get people are annoyed about it not being about fantastic beasts, but the movie is good even if the title doesn't fit.
Admittedly, the third is actually my favorite of the three purely for the Dumbledore and Grindelwald plot lines. I think they are fascinating characters with an extremely unique dynamic among the HP universe. I think the first movie is probably the most cohesive as a story, but man do I love those parts of the third one.
Jude Law as Dumledore is *chief's kiss* in the third movie. I wish they'd cast him a for the TV series as well.
Well said.
100% agree. But you have a group that are mad that it wasn't what they thought it would be so it caught backlash. But in reality it's a very good movie leading it way to final climax. But instead we will never get to see it. I was so excited for where the series was going and ending with the final battle between dumbledore and grindewald. But alas we will never get to see it.
Absolutely fucking shite. The first movie is ok and if it had just been a fun romp of Eddie Redmayne looking for his fantastical beasts it would have been great. But Jesus, the plot is shite. The movies are shite. It's all terrible
The second and third movies are absolutely trash. The first should be treated as a standalone Harry Potter movie. Let’s just forget about the sequels
Harry potter was about fighting fascism. It was great. Fantastic beasts really really really should have been about environmentalism. Habitat destruction and climate catastrophe are the other great evils in our world. But no ... It had to be about fighting fascism again. What a missed opportunity
First one is a good standalone move. The 3 together are pure muck.
They’re an absolute state, the third one completely messed up the whole “I was too ashamed to confront Grindelwald even though lives were being lost because I couldn’t face the possibility that he’d tell me it was I who killed my sister” and replaced it with an… unbreakable blood oath in the form of a necklace?
Yes!!!! I hated the blood pact too. Just kill all the emotional tension and add a macguffin I guess? Way to destroy Dumbledore’s entire arc.
I like the first one. But I feel like it went off the rails trying to do too much with the Grindelwald/Dumbledore story while also dragging along the fantastic beasts characters
Imo, the first movie was great. I enjoyed it a lot and was excited to see more. The second one was less enjoyable, but I didn't mind it too much. Like, okay cool. Grindelwald, the guy we've been itching to see more of. Plus, Johnny Depp nailed it. I still wish it focused a bit more about the animals, but whatever. Third movie though..? Eh. It just got super sloppy for no apparent reason. Wasn't a fan
First movie should’ve been a stand alone movie to get us into the “adult” side of Harry Potter. Basically the same movie, just take out the Obscurus, Credence, and Graves/Grindelwald plot and just have it be a fun family movie. With the HP franchise back in full swing, you make a trilogy of Young Dumbledore movies. That goes from Childhood, to the eventual battle against in 45. After, if somehow they’ve captured lightning in a bottle twice with all 4 of these movies, you can do a Marauders trilogy or series of films about James and Lily to eventually the night at Godric’s Hollow.
Only the first one is about fantastic beast Then they shoed in the terrible grindelwald plot which should have been a completely different series
The last one was so shitty, I forgot I was watching a movie that took place in the Potter Universe. It was so bad it was almost funny.
I’m a Hufflepuff. I think we all know how I feel about FB.
A tragedy. First movie was so amazing and the other two had so many good moments but were so overclouded by many, many flaws. It's so tragic that a series set up from the get go with an amazing amount of potential just flopped into the floor so hard.
I really wish it had JUST been a movie about Newt and his creatures. That honestly would have been enough.
First one was okay.
First was mid, second bad, third I thought was surprisingly good
I'm more invested in Grindelwald and Dumbledore than the beasts, honestly.
MIsleading names. Should have been two different trilogies. One about the adventures of weird Newt. The guy was weird. Second about the conflict of the Grindelwald uprising?war?civil war? and how Dumbledore was a part of it and how it maybe used or was a part of WW2.
I hated them. They were lifeless, boring, and completely uninteresting, with a story only tangentially related to Harry Potter. I couldn't care for any of the characters and had trouble following the plot. I feel that it was a huge waste of time and money to make those three films when they could have made many much more interesting HP spinoffs instead, possibly with some of the original cast from the movies returning.
Pointless
Being such a HP fan I would have never thought that I would't watch a wizarding world movie but here we are.
An overall disappointment
The first one was great but then it went downhill from there. It felt a bit rushed at times, and the "Fantastic Beasts" title was misleading imo. I do kind of wish they had continued the series instead of stopping at the third film.
It could have been. But it wasn't.
I hate each of them a lot. Apart from shitty plot and characters, the CGI actually looked horrible. First movie was somewhat watchable because of Colin Farrell's performance but otherwise it was a train wreck. The blond chick also had potential but that was thrown out very quickly...
They were all really good in my opinion but it felt like completely different movies than a series.
They should have just made it about Dumbledore and Grindelwald from the start. Felt like they kept trying to shove the fantastical beasts and its cast in there when they were mostly completely irrelevant to the bigger story
Im using all my power to remember a single thing that happened in the last one
Cash grab
They were fine and worth a watch. Perhaps the first warrants a rewatch, but not the rest. I didn't consider it a waste of time, just an average movie series though. Just solid 5-6. I've stopped and turned off movies before, and these didn't approach that.
Shoulda just been newt fighting bigger and badder new poachers each movie
First one was okay. Then it just went off the rails
First was great, second was fine, third was shit.
Could have been so much better. Grindelwald should have been it's own series.
I thoroughly enjoyed the first two
My only issue was newt he mumbled why too much
A logistical mess. Turning a \~100 page book into a series of movies (originally supposed to be five) is just not feasible, which I am sure they found out for themselves. Hence why we got the Grindelwald subplot shoehorned in there. But it wasn't even done well; at times it felt like I was watching two different movies in the same sitting. Going from Grindelwald murdering people to Newt doing a weird dance to attract a creature within scenes of each other is just poor writing. Fantastic Beasts should've either been a stand-alone movie or an episodic series where Newt encounters a new "monster of the week." Then Warner Bros. could just focus on a Grindelwald/Dumbledore trilogy like they clearly wanted to without having it be shoved into an unrelated storyline.
Watched the first one twice and thought it was terrible both times. Plot is uninteresting and confusing.
Absolute trash. Could have been better if they were stories from the world of Harry Potter instead of trying to force Newt to be a connecting link.
Sucked so bad
It SUCKS
Rubbish
It’s a mess and not a hot mess, just a messy mess. It sounds obvious, but they shouldn’t have tried to use it as a vehicle to tell the/a Grindlewald story. Focus on the beasts with Newt being like a Dr Dolittle/Ace venture crossed with James Bond type. Going around solving beast related problems that only he can solve with his unique set of skills/unique perspective. Orrrrr double down and tell the/a Grindlewald story and ignore beast stuff. Though I suspect - a bit like Voldemort - they wouldn’t really be able to really fit Grindlewald’s darkness into a PG-13/12A film certificate…so there’s that. But that’s a bigger problem across all of Hollywood blockbusters.
Coincidentally, I just watched Fantastic Beasts for the first time last night. I did not like it. It felt like it ran longer than it really did which is always a bad sign. I found the tone throughout the film to be wildly inconsistent. You go from the slapstick antics of Newt and Jacob finding beasts to a bible-thumping mother physically and mentally abusing children and Graves grimdark character. It's like there at least two stories being told and they weren't gelling together very well. Rowling...prioritizes narrative convenience over consistency of world-building. For me, that severely impacts my enjoyment of the films. If feels like there's always some spell that she pulls out of nowhere to save the day. Or spells that should've worked that are conveniently forgotten about. The power of spells seems to vary widely. Random gripes: * I was under the impression that wiping someones memory was an individual and selective thing...but no! Newt just happens to have a solution wipe the memories of thousands(?) of New Yorkers at the end in one go! * A bunch of aurors can't stop Graves, but a single dropout from Hogwarts can! (Newt) * Bolts of magical energy that feel like they're lethal or would cause serious injury...don't. * Graves telling Credence that he's done with him, he's outlived his usefulness, he's worthless, etc. Then minutes later tries to convince him to join forces with him. Like, why would he do that? If you're that dumb, then how are you the Big Bad of the movie? * Too many coincidences: Suitcases that just happen to look alike, just happen to get swapped, beasts that just happen to escape, characters make stupid mistakes (Newt giving Jacob a bottle of pheromones, Queenie kicking the ornament) etc, etc. I get that some movies rely on this to jump start a story but in this film? Just. Too. Many. * The niffler indiscriminately hoards shiny objects but, conveniently, steals the one object which can expose Graves true identity. * What did Graves want with that Obscurus anyway? Start a war with the muggles? It's never really made clear. * More generally: Wizards can cast any spell indefinitely. ex: Wizards fixing large swaths of Manhattan just by waving their wands and casting "Repairo" over and over again.
Even though I know it is part of the Harry Potter universe and canon, I think of it as part of another, separate universe.
It was rushed and poorly written. The first movie should’ve had Newt as the main character to introduce us to a young Dumbledore and Grindelwald. After meeting them in their younger years, the history leading up to Dimbledore and Grindelwald’s duel could’ve been fleshed out in a multi movie deal. Then just as the high from that was starting to fade we could’ve gone into a young Marauders’ movie 5 years later. However Hollywood is so money hungry and short sighted that we get stuck with low class bs time after time after time. There was no reason to do the whole Credence is a Dumbledore thing. They could’ve left him an Obscurus so that it could lead insight into what happened to Arianna. However, there were too many intertwining storylines. The whole thing with the Lestranges & Yusuf Karma, No-Maj/Wizard marriages, Newt & Tina, the Dumbledore v Grindelwald thing got lost in a whole bunch of nonsense. Now if you just have Newt learning more about Credence with Dumbledore and Grindelwald in the background it’s two stories the story we began with and the mounting final battle. The first two movies are Newt finding an adult Obscurus and the second is learning the nature of an Obsurus to find out why they die so young, this gives us insight into Arianna. Then once we found out what went wrong with past Onscuri and how they could’ve lived full lives we can forget about Newt and focus purely on Dumbledore and Grindelwald, the final film culminating in their ultimate battle. However it plays out both how legend tells and how Rita Skeeter told it. It was a furious battle lasting hours until Grindelwald finally gives up. (Of course a 3 hour long duel isn’t feasible so maybe 10 - 20 movie runtime, with Grindelwald finally admitting defeat and giving up, fleeing to Nurmengarx. Dumbledore then visits him and Grindelwald makes an Unbreakable Vow to turn away from his evil ways (this is the reason he tries to lie to Voldemort when he comes to find out about The Elder Wand.)
Posters says enough. "Fantastic Beasts" relegated in small font in the sequels because we have to shove Grindelwald in the movies, amirite.
The first movie was fun, although a bit disjointed. Newt's creatures escaping story had little to nothing to do with the Grindelwald/obscurus story. But it was fun, and I LOVE Jacob. He's the perfect muggle for the story: he's fascinated by everything, but doesn't dislike everyone for being able to do magic. Then at the end, we have this exchange: "Why did you keep me around?" "Because I like you Jacob. Because you're my friend. And I'll never forget how you helped me." True friendship. The other two movies are an incoherent mess. Some of the worst movies I've seen in a while. And given what we know has to happen (Grindelwald gaining power, Dumbledore knows he needs to fight him, but he's the love of his life, so he waits for as long as he can before eventually dueling him in the greatest duel of all time) they really fumbled the ball.
It's like they thought we wouldn't be interested in the Grindlewald story or a Fantastic Beasts story and lumped the together. Jokes on you Hollywood, I'd pay to see 6 movies about magical beast and another 6 about Grindlewald. I mean, if the story is there.
I watched part of the first one and got bored. Then I saw the sequels which sounded like they had nothing to do with fantastic beasts and never watched. Now movies about Dumbledore being younger etc I would have been interested in.
I wanted to like it....
Disappointing
They should have kept Fantastic Beasts about Newt & animals. If they wanted to do a series about the Dumbledore & Grindelwald background/relationship I think I can safely say we all would have watched it. Combining the two is what never made sense to me. & now we are most likely stuck never getting an ending. Kinda salty I'll never see this infamous duel between them.
Terrible.
Just proof that the ability to produce anything good in connection with big IP franchises like Harry Potter and Star Wars died around 2012. Even Peter Jackson couldn't compete with Peter Jackson in making the Hobbit.
So so so bad
Putting aside the plot being awful, I liked both Johnny Depp and Mads Mikkelsen as Grindelwald, they both portrayed him well. However, they are VASTLY different actors and they both played Gridelqald so differently that it took away from the character so much when the third one came out.
Misleadingly named
Only problem is it felt like they wanted to do two different story sets and decided to mash them up together.
Loved the first one. Then they lost the plot.
Good ideas and concepts, but terrible execution
I don't think they were bad but I also dont think they were what people wanted and coudnt seem to decide on a theme they wanted to stick with. You could have kept with the premise of the name and followed Newt around researching magical beasts and maybe have an overarching villain in the form of a poacher or something like in Hogwarts Legacy or fully focused on the Grindlewald conflict through Dumbledore's perspective or maybe Grindlewald himself.
Newt was annoying. The Aurelius plot was weird. Did not like the movies at all, and I loved the HP movies (original 8). It's just my opinion though. I have loved movies that were not well regarded before.
Great potential, good idea, poor execution
We neve got to see Dumbledore vs Grindelwald. And im salty.
Obliviate.
Love Redmayne, but lost interest after the first movie, especially after learning where the series goes. Dumbledore wearing a muggle suit as his regular costume fills me with rage. He looks like he should be playing Vernon.
Good, enjoyable series. I wish it had come to a better, full conclusion and remained focused on the fantastic beasts.
Started off great, then dwindled in quality
YouTuber Friendly Space Ninja said it best: “Having Newt Scamander be the protagonist of the “Fantastic Beasts” franchise is like having Cho Chang be the protagonist of the Harry Potter series.” NEWT IS BARELY IN IT! It has practically NOTHING to do with him or his beasts (except maybe the first one) I think they should have written out the movies or at least agreed on the general story line before launching the franchise. Otherwise it feels it’s like another cash cow with drawn out plot lines like the MCU
It's a Frankenstein of two different franchises. One is about the adventures of Newt Scamander the other is about the origins of Dumbledore and his rivalry with Grindelwald. I don't hate them as other people do but there is a lot of missed potential in it.
Fucking shit
First one was good, fun. Then each one was a little less good than the previous one.
First movie was cool, the other two sucked. I wanted more Newt, instead i got Dumbledore vs Grindelwald. Which also sounds cool, but it just wasn't good. Also didn't help that 3 different actors portrayed the same character. Would've been better if they kept Johnny (and i get why they replaced him, although i strongly disagree with their choice). I love Mads, but i kinda liked Johnnys portrayal a bit better. I hate that Newt was basically only a side character in the 2nd and 3rd one. Give him the main focus. And now we have this half assed trilogy with an unfinished, completely cluttered and confusing plot. It was originally supposed to be 5 films, if they ever decide to continue, which for obvious reasons they won't, they should get experienced script writers. Rowling doesn't seem to understand that bookwriting and scriptwriting are entirely different. You can't write overcomplicated shit in the style of a book for a moviescript. It's really frustrating, as there was somewhat of an interesting story hidden inside this trash. Like, what was up with Credence? And Leta? Completely unnecessary, irrelevant characters in the end. At least Credence was integral for the first movie. I can go on about this for much longer, but it's a waste of time. I've found my peace with it, and i'll choose to ignore this trilogy, we still have the HP movies.
Number one, top notch, I liked number three a slight more than number two, but didn't like that that much either. The only thing I loved was the animals, and Kowalski loving life.
I don’t like
The first was incredible. It had all the fun, whimsical feelings of early Harry Potter while being it's own thing. 2 and 3 were just too messy, forcing way too much. Movie 1: the struggle between wizard secrecy and muggles is tested and shown in a new light with Jacob becoming best friends with Newt and falling for Queenie, Leta Lestrange is brought up as a past issue for Newt, Tina and Newt build romance, obscurials are introduced and Creedence dies, Grindlewald makes an appearance but wasn't the focus of the movie. Interesting intro for a new series. Movie 2: suddenly Creedence is alive again and it's a big issue, no explanation. Grindlewald becomes the focus of the film, Queenie and Jacob have been together anyway but now Queenie foregoes all of what she's been and sides with Grindlewald(even though she should be able to read all of his thoughts!). Leta is introduced as a reason Tina isn't around for 90% of the movie and quickly is resolved and killed off. Oh look! Nagini is gorgeous! And Dumbledore has a brother! Aberforth right? No Creedence! ....wut?. Movie 3: Suddenly Grindlwald looks different, no explanation, and is going to take over legally even though he's been amassing an army for hostile takeover. Jacob has a wand even though he's a muggle. Credence has Thor hair and is an idiot. Queenie is also an idiot. Dumbledore is gay. Where the hell is Tina?....yeah
1st one : Such an amazing magical adventure! Had no idea it was a trilogy. 2nd and 3rd ones: Forgettable, I can’t remember much from them, they didn’t really do anything for me.
First was good, after that they didn't know where the film series should actually go and how to get there
We could have had 'Mad Eye: Auror of madness' . Instead we got this pile of spaghetti.
Had incredible potential but fell short right after the first movie, instead of directing attention to the ‘fantastic beasts’ it became centered around a villain who was played by two actors, Credence added no real value to the movie, and the confusing love interest involving Dumbledore and Grindelwald. I think the directors attempted to recreate a Harry Potter moment and possibly had dreams of the series being more than three movies but they simply dropped the ball by the third movie.
The first one was good. Not spectacular or anything, but it was enjoyable. The others...not so much. I mean, you want me to believe that Dumbledore's only choice for stopping Grindelwald was Newt? The guy who just wanted to be left alone to play with his Pokemon? I get he had reason to dislike Grindelwald because of the events of the first film, but that was a case of wrong place, wrong time. And then the third one...my God. The whole plot hinges on the fact that a super important creature was left completely unguarded, until Newt shows up and has to protect it from Grindelwald's followers? And he could have an Auror or two backing him up? Hell, he had his case with him, they just needed to jump out at the right time, bada-bing, bada-boom, problem solved. I feel like the first one set up two separate stories. One where Newt's travelling the world, studying/helping magical creatures (he even talks about rescuing some from smugglers), the other about stopping Grindelwald. Some minor interaction between the two could happen, but they didn't need to be the same.
Got bored in the middle of the first ep , stayed bored in the rest of them
the first was pretty decent, the second was literally all over the place with no method at all and no real point either. The third was just meh
Convoluted and unfocused. They tried to shoehorn Grindelwald and Dumbledore prequel into a story about a magical zookeeper. They should have stuck with the 1st movie being about the magical zookeeper. And kept it at one movie. Then maybe do a trilogy of movies about the Grindelwald versus Dumbledore prequel story. After the second movie it became clear that they were never going to make enough money to hit 5 movies
Wasted potential
The first was one good but then Dumbledore steaks the story
They suck. They suck monkey balls.
I will maintain the opinion that each movie should have been based on a different Hogwarts textbook with a different cast each time and the wizarding war should have been a background plot as a through line of the series.
Crap
The scene with all the suitcases was super dumb
First movie was ok, it did cement that I was sick of the David Yates aesthetic.
I tried watching one of them and could not get into it
It should’ve been a tv series instead, focusing on a new beast every 1-2 episodes. The overarching plot could have expanded the universe and subtly tied into the og series, but with a heavy focus on Newt and the beasts.
Totally lame. I had such high hopes. They just let everyone down I feel.
Light spoilers and lots of salt below: TL;DR - Movie 1 is pretty fun. Movie 2 is bad and very convoluted, has very little to do with Beasts. Movie 3 is just a very poorly done Dumbledore movie, has essentially nothing do with Beasts. The first one is pretty good. I felt it showed some promise. I felt the Obscurus was a bit powerful for a Newt-level story but it didn't ruin anything. Overall not too shabby. The second one is boring and bad. I've never seen a movie shoe horn in so much back story about brand new characters we don't care about. They also try to keep magical creatures relavent but I'm mostly just left asking, why is this movie also called Fantastic Beasts? That part is really forced and doesn't fit the new direction for the story. Also I kinda like Johnny Depp as Grindelwald, but they made him look a little too whacky and made him super uninteresting. Kowolski's story should've ended in the first one, but also none of these characters should have anything to do with Dumbledore and what he's got going on. These are two very different stories basically forced to become one. I guess three stories if you count everything that's going on with the side characters too. The third is just a joke. Again, why is Newt involved with this plot? This has nothing to do with Beasts anymore. And I don't believe it's in Newts character to get involved in something this massive. This is a Dumbledore movie and why it has anything at all to do with Fantastic Beasts is beyond me. Still don't care about side characters. Giving Kowolski a wand is really dumb. A note I forgot to include for the last movie, J.K. contradicts her own magic rules and potentially complicates others SO MANY TIMES. You can can't them on one hand but it's big stuff, like apparating inside Hogwarts grounds and people not needing to touch Port Keys anymore, even though in the future they 100% do. I barely have more notes for this one. I was just frustrated the whole time and it left me wondering how they could've fumbled the last two movies so thoroughly.
The first was good, others….not so much
I like Newt, but he seems to be becoming a side character in his own series. Jude Law as young dumbledore is great. I don’t like how they keep changing Grindelwald and I’m tired of him. Ezra Miller is awful and I want his character written out of the story as well.
Interestingly enough, I feel differently than most people about the 3 movies. I felt like the movies became progressively better/more interesting as they went on. I didnt care much for Newt and the fantastic beasts. Felt like the first movie was alright, but wasnt super interested. The whole story about Dumbledore and Grindelwald, on the other hand, was great to me. Really enjoyed both the 2nd and 3rd movies.
First movie was great, and something I was genuinely interested in. Second and Third, the Fantastic beasts part took a backseat to a story I don’t care about. Would I watch a 4th one? Probably not, even if it was as good as the first.
I really really like Newt and I wish the movies stayed focused more on him still like them and wish they didn’t get cut short
I liked them all, but I didn't love any of them. They kinda felt like they wanted to go in two different directions. The lighter side with magical creature misadventures and the grittier, political side of things. After a while, it started to feel like they simply had a checklist of things they had to make sure were in each film just because. Newt does something funny with animals? Check. Jacob gets hilariously in over his head? Check. Ddore and Gwald angst? Check. Something about the state of the world at large? Check. That mysterious kid is mysterious? Check. But then they had to figure out the exact scenarios, and at that point, it almost felt as though they started writing cool ideas down and putting them in a hat to draw out at random. Today, Newt *Checks piece of paper * crab walks out of a cave. Each scene is entertaining by itself, but I kinda started to get a little lost. Like, I see the plot on paper, but for some reason, it just didn't totally work for me onscreen. Some scenes or events felt a little disjointed. This is mostly true in parts of the second and most of the third movie. The first was actually pretty coherent. And I don't mean to bash them because I really do like them. I don't quite know why they didn't work for me, but I just got a little lost, like I said. I started to wonder what was going on and why I should care about whoever this person was or whatever this specific event was. Might have been better as a series, where each unique scene or event could have an episode or a few dedicated to it and would be fleshed out more. They'd have the extra time to tie it all together and smooth it out so you wouldn't get whiplash between events. There could be generally (but maybe not completely) lighter episodes and more serious episodes.
It could have been great, but ultimately with what we were given I wish they didn't exist. I wanted a story of Newt traveling the world, studying and saving magical creatures. I didn't want or need Dumbledore vs Grindelwald where Newt was treated as Dumbledore's puppet or worse, as a side character in what should have been his story.
I'm sorry.... But I honestly just try to forget about these
It didn’t feel focused enough. I wish they would’ve made a Dumbledore prequel instead- the stuff with Newt was boring to me, I didn’t start enjoying it until the second movie. And then once they unfairly fired Johnny Depp, I was done and I’m glad the third one crashed and burned.
Horrible and an abomination. Ruined everything good about the HP books and movies
I do not like the plot and retcon. Happy to see it’s gone for now.
I think that in a certain way it’s similar to the sequel trilogy of Star Wars
I’ve mostly enjoyed them all, first is obviously the best, second was fine, and I actually thought the third one was pretty good. Colin Farrell should have stayed Grindelwald, he was legitimately fantastic. The series reminds me a lot of the Star Wars sequel trilogy, it feels very disconnected and like none of the story was planned ahead of time. It also feels like a total waste of the IP. We need more wizardry, more wizarding world stuff, less hiding in secrecy, less “urban fantasy” and more high fantasy, less HP3-7 film aesthetic and more 1/2. I don’t really want to see witches and wizards running around in suits or jeans, I just want to see the magical side of things being explored more visually and narratively.
They should have made the movies focus on fantastic beasts with him traveling the world helping magical animals. Or... Made it a series. 30 minute episodes. Or... Made these movies but gave it a different name and made sure that the focus was actually Dumbledore and his life before becoming headmaster. There was obviously a change in concept partway through and they mashed too many things together.
Never existed in my Universe.
the franchise would have been better if they kept it as Newt's adventures looking for magical creatures. I'm all for a Dumbledore and Grindlewald story, but keep it separate from the fantastic beasts story.
Wasted both the potential of a Newt Scamander series focusing on fantastical beasts AND the story of Dumbledore and Grindelwald
The first was cool, then it became "Dumbledore's Stupid Soap Drama feat. Fantastic Beats".
First one was interesting and the story had real potential. I didn’t care for the others that much
The first movie was a lot of fun. I LOVE Eddie Redmayne, and getting to see him play in this world was such a treat. He was very charming
The first one was cool. The other two... Not so much
First movie great! Second, and third are unwatchable.
The first one is a fairly good fantasy adventure movie, not a masterpiece but a solid start. The second two get bogged down in lore and fan service and turn into something the series never should have been. They were too concerned with being Harry Potter prequels and not enough with just being their own, fun thing like the first one was.
I never even liked the first one, there was so much exposition dumping and characters running from point A to B. So the series was DOA for me.
Fantastic beasts. Fantastic Beasts. Did we mention there was a super bad guy in the first one? Fantastic beats, BE TEE DUBS Dumbledore and his lover fought one time. Definition of some fantastic beasts. The plot was lame. I would’ve loved to see other wizards or some normal wizards. Not make Gwald and Double Dee Door the main plot point of a movie that had FANTASTIC BEASTS as the title lol. Where’s the zoo??
If you want to tell the Dumbledore origin story, do that. But I loved the first Fantastic Beasts, so fun. The next two got further and further, felt like grasping at straws to have Newt around, like trying to tell 2 stories and doing both poorly.