I never read the Harry Potter books, I just watched the movies. The last three or four Harry Potter films suffered from a serious case of taking themselves too seriously. What started off as a somewhat silly story about a boy living in a cupboard who discovers he’s really a wizard turned into this totally silly story about that boy saving the world.
The first Fantastic Beasts was kind of fun. It was like the first couple of Harry Potter films, where Harry could worry about House Points and walk around with a stunned look on his face all the time. Fantastic Beasts II has already fallen down the well of The End of The World is Nigh!
Our hero Newt is still carrying around his magical suitcase, which is more like a TARDIS than the bag that Hermione used. We meet a few new monsters and there seems to be a woman living in the bag now, who cares for the magical beasts when Newt is busy saving the world. The idea that two people can manage this zoo’s hundreds of animals and infinite landscapes is silly, but not in a good way.
The bad guy, Grindelwald, has way too much screen time. He’s a horrible person, I get that. He murders his guards as he escapes, he murders a family so he can move into their apartment, he murders a lot of wizards who try to stand in his way, though none that we care about or have any idea who they are. And he looks goofy. Johnny Depp done up as an albino with different colored eyes and a haircut completely out of phase with the story’s 1920s settings. He goal in this film is to recruit a secondary villain.
The best character from the first film, Jacob the Baker, returns, but he is underutilized this time round. He’s just a poor sap along for the ride who can do nothing but look helpless as his world falls apart. Since the bulk of the story is set in Paris, I was expecting there to be some logical reason for him to show up, such as he was taking a cooking class. But no, he was just kidnapped by his slightly insane witchy girlfriend.
The special effects were brilliant. The few times things looked goofy or odd, I have to assume that they meant them to look goofy and odd. The world of computer generated graphics has come a long way since Harry first waved a wand. And that is part of the problem with The Crimes of Grindelwald, the effects are too damned easy to put into a film. The big bad in Harry Potter was Tom Riddle, a wizard who turned into The Dark Lord Voldemort. But Voldemort never actually did anything in the Harry Potter films. Yes, he killed Harry’s parents and marked the boy for life, but I don’t recall him just murdering people for the hell of it or using his power to destroy an entire city or to cause a mountain to collapse. He Who Must Not Be Named was limited by the special effects budget/capabilities of his time. Grindelwald has no such limits and appeared to be damn near a god. Setting up a villain as unstoppable can led to disappointment when the good guys defeat then by some ridiculous method, such as when Data put The Borg to sleep in Star Trek. How is Newt going to defeat Grindelwald? By feeding him to a Wish Dragon?
All successful writers suffer from their success. JK Rowling is no different. The first book is tightly edited and kept to a reasonable length. The story focuses on the main character. Then comes success and an audience that will literally read anything you write, no matter how long or how many characters you decide to cram into it. Grindelwald has dozens of people cluttering the screen and at least two or three scenes that could have been cut without effecting the story at all. The runtime was only 2 hours and 13 minutes, but it felt a lot longer than that.
Yes, it was nice to be back in Pottersville, and good to see Dumbledore at Hogwarts. But seeing a class being taught just made me want to watch that movie and not the one I was watching.
