I loved Spencer's comment about how Magical NYC, London, and Paris were indistinguishable. The cinematography of all of the Yates' movies has been so bland and brown and gray that everything looks the same.
Finally someone said it. I really dislike the HP movies, and most of them are Yates'. I did enjoy Fantastic Beasts to be fair (because it introduced some more color and saturation), but Crimes of Grindelwald regressed back to Yates' typical gray and grimy palette. *sighs*
Dumbledore has *always* been manipulative. Like Snape said, raising cattle for the slaughter. He does things without telling his allies, feels no need to explain himself, just believing that his cause and course are correct. In the end it works out, but he truly did manipulate almost the entirety of Harry's life until he defeated Voldemort.
But Harry was already dead from the beginning once he was shot with abracadabra, so he wasn't raised for slaughter, Dumbledore did the best you can do for a cattle in that situation
@@muserussell2377 No, you're just yet another person who sorely misunderstands the character. JK Rowling herself has said that Dumbledore is meant to be the epitome of goodness. And if you actually understand the story and character, you see that that is pretty much spot on. Yes he was misguided as a teenager, but after that he was an incredibly good person for the rest of his life.
He did it because he felt it was necessary. He felt very remorseful about it, and even cried when asking Harry for forgiveness in Order of the Phoenix (the book). As he explains in the novels, he didn't know what else to do. You accuse him of keeping allies in the dark. What is he supposed to do ? Tell an eleven year old boy that he probably has to die to defeat Hitler ? He didn't know when or how to tell Harry certain things. That makes him human.
I would totally love some fun light hearted not epic Indiana jones type movies with newt and jacob traveling to different exotic lands capturing dope monsters.
Yeah, if they were going to do a series called “Fantastic Beasts”, that’s more along the lines of what it should have been. Could have done a separate series about Grindelwald.
This is true. It was actually a MAJOR plot point in the later HP books/movies. I was a little surprised at their surprise in this review. If anything, I feel like they could have shown a lot more of that side of him.
yes, and he has been on Grindelwalds side when it comes to the quest for power until the fallout where his sister died. he was not always kind and old, and even then he was manipulative, for the greater good. . . guess he never could really get rid of that philosophy.
It does seem that a lot of people don’t really get how much was revealed about Dumbledore during Snape’s Memory. We found out that he had been using Harry all along, knowing that he was the only one who could stop Voldemort and that he would have to die to do so. Dumbledore was “raising him like a pig for slaughter” as Snape says, and Dumbledore never counters this or says that he actually cared for or loved Harry regardless of knowing he would have to die... instead, he almost ridicules Snape for how much he seems to care: “Don’t tell me now that you’ve come to care for the boy.” This seems to suggest that Dumbledore never really did care about Harry, and just pretended to in order to keep Harry close and trusting, so he could direct Harry towards his inevitable death. Obviously, he did this with the greater good in mind, and perhaps he did care about Harry as much as he would anybody, but he did know Harry’s destiny all along, without knowing he would be resurrected, and he intentionally directed Harry towards that destiny. Certainly pretty manipulative. Dumbledore not being who Harry thought he was is a major point in Deathly Hallows. Ultimately, Harry chooses to remember who Dumbledore was to him. The real man, however, was revealed to be a manipulative, morally gray character who hid a lot of things and may not have been as sympathetic a person as he presented himself when playing the role of a teacher/headmaster or mentor/father-figure to Harry. It seems like a lot of Harry Potter fans have done the same as Harry and choose to remember Dumbledore as they thought he was, instead of what he was actually revealed to be.
I feel like Newt and his 3 friends weren’t really necessary in this movie and ended up bogging down the plot. I don’t dislike the characters, but they seemed kind of useless in this movie that should be centered around Grindelwald , Dumbledore, Leta, and Creedence. In fact I believe telling this story from the point of view of Credence would have actually made a lot more sense and solved a lot of the narrative/pacing issues.
The shitty part is they had like 3 good movies crammed into one. The whole wizard spy game with Newt and Dumbledore would have been awesome. The chase for the girl by Newt and Jacob would have been cool. The broken relationship between Jacob and Queenie and how someone can be twisted by a master manipulator would have been interesting. If they focused on ONE with ancillary subplots it would have been a great movie. But they crammed them all plus more into one movie, so they All felt like subplots and made the movie what it was.
mikewillis33 I agree that Grindelwald's speech and by extension Queenie's reaction to it was the best part of the movie (plotwise I' don't mean acting) so it does feel like most of the work went there but if she had left out the other parts of the plot it would feel even less like the Hp movies and I think they were banking a lot on nostalgia (for these 2 movies at least)
I am so incredibly happy that this video exists. Especially coming from people who both love the books and are perfectly happy to critique the hell out of the movie.
This movie made me want to watch the original Harry Potter films again with a warm cup of tea and a blanket. A nice, straightforward story where killing curses are banned and the world makes sense.
How were Dumbledore, Grindlewald, and Abeforth able to have a 3 way duel that killed Ariana if Dumbledore and Grindlewald made a blood bond to not fight each other?
History Muse then why would he feel guilty about potentially being the one that killed her also that would mean that Grindlewald would have to mostly used defensive spells as well since the blood bond goes both ways
Queenie is a natural born Legilimens and extremely powerful. But Grindelwald and Dumbeldore are both Extremely Accomplished Occulemens. If Queenie just struggles with Newt cause he's British. Then there is no way she can read the mind of someone who has mastered the defense of the mind. Also. Grindelwald is A+ wizard when it comes to power. Queenie is probably C+ at best. And without extra training. The natural ability only goes so far. Grindelwald is letting her think she is reading his mind and projecting what he wants her to see to convince her cause she is a very useful subject against the weak minded.
Taylor Ohl Add to that, his native language probably isn’t even English. And so he probably thinks in like Bulgarian or something considering he’s a Durmstrang Alumnus
THANK YOU! So many people are missing this! I do wish they addressed this in some way in the movie, a passing comment between Rosier and Grindewald, or even him waiting for her to get a certain distance before he relaxes a bit. People either don’t think about Queenie’s ability or they think he’s thinking very hard about only kind thoughts at the time or something, or that she’s naive. If he’s hiding some of this thoughts and memories and is displaying false ones (we know it can happen from HP; both the planted vision from Voldemort and Snape having alternate events in his mind when Voldemort inspected it), she really does think she’s seeing his heart and he’s not leading them down a dark path. It does look crazy without a satisfactory explanation, if you don’t understand how Legilimency does has limitations and how Occlumency (especially used by such a powerful wizard) can impact the reading so much. Gaaah.
Absolutely right. Not to mention that her judgment is flawed due to her feelings towards Jacob. She is socially awkward and hasn't a lot of experience of trained people. Grindelwald plays on her weaknesses to manipulate her even more esily. SHe probably blames herself about bewitching Jacob and being discovered. She tries to find a way to make things more natural.
Yes, Spencer has it! Make a Newt movie that is separate from a young Grindewald/Albus movie. My favorite scene from FB1 was the travel into his case, seeing all the fantastic beasts! Have a separate adventure! Loved the acting in this movie, but absolutely no character development was allowed because they just shoved too much in this.
I thought they were going to go to Arizona next to release the thunderbird. Only Jacob wouldn't want to leave his bakery, and Queenie would be trying to get Jacob to fall in love with her again. And now that Tina is an Auror it would be her job to stop Newt. Am I just making things up, or was this somewhat implied in Movie 1?
As for the phoenix appearing, Credence was in much more need in the first movie and there was no phoenix. He was in fact, in no great need or danger when the “phoenix” appeared in this movie.
I don't know if you already saw this comment, but another person said they think Dumbledore sent that Phoenix to watch over credence, and the movie just makes us think credence is a Dumbledore.
Maybe it means that Credence WILL BE in a great need/danger, aka, when he's suppose to take on Albus. As in, he is NOW in great need/danger cause he will need incredible strength to kill Albus.
Grindewald was showing the clips of World War 2 to show the other wizards that if they didn’t destroy the muggles now, their technology would be too powerful to overcome with magic in the future.
30 minutes later, 3 fucking blue fire magic dragons appear and burn effortlessly many people, and threatening everyone in Paris. If they didn't catch them in time they would have probably wiped Paris off. So, no, I don't think that is a strong argument. In any case, mages should be ruling over humanity, and not once have they disclosed why they fear muggles or why shouldn't they know about their existence. This is Xmen Apocalypse all over again.
Fantastic Beasts 1: we are on the TITANIC and nothing can go wrong! Fantastic Beasts 2: Getting cold here huh? Fantastic Beasts 5: Wake up Jack....wake up!
I completely agree with what was said here, especially with Queenie. Each Harry Potter book was framed by his school year at Hogwarts and I think some sort of framing needed to be there to help these films be more self contained.
That's what I was hoping for, that the locations would set the framing for each story. I wanted a more defined French wizarding world with Crimes of Grindelwald, but as you said, it really blended with the other places too much. I was hoping they'd at least meet a French wizard that would join their group. Perhaps someone who graduated from Beauxbatons.
J.K. Rowling at this point seems to channeling Doctor Who's Steven Moffat in terms of convoluted storytelling; the only real difference is that the later has more wits, panache and ACTUAL restrain.
The story of this film for me was very much about identity. Questions of "Who am I?" and "What do I stand for?" As the vessel into this world, Newt enters a story greater than himself and, despite initially wanting to avoid conflict, by the end is forced to not only pick a side but to fight for that side. I don't think there's a more relatable narrative in current cinematic culture to today's political climate. Newt is the most "good" person we've encountered in the entire wizarding world, and even he realizes by the end that doing nothing contributes to the rise of evil. After being the focus of the first film, Credence gets a reprieve from the limelight for the first half of the movie. We see that after all the shit he's been through, all he really wants to understand is his parentage (same central thematic element of identity and purpose). His journey lies in opposition to Newt as one without friends and love and instead he is led astray by Grindelwald's addictive vision of freedom and self-control. He's the only one that makes Credence feel empowered. While Leta was the most interesting character in this movie, Credence is the most interesting character in this series. I love the Kylo Ren vibes of struggling between light and dark and in the end being tempted by the allure of Grindelwald's vision of the future. It's so much more interesting than characters that choose the path of light. The beam of magic that crumbled the mountainside reflects all the pent up energy of confusion and frustration, and it is a turning point where we see how his path has shifted in the exact opposite direction of Newt's. These are the two characters who most represent the theme for me and who go through very different journeys, but many of the characters struggle with their identity in this film. That is the true "Crime of Grindelwald" in setting up an environment where friends and family are forced to come to terms with who they are when not all of them are ready to do so, driving stakes in the middle of otherwise loving relationships. While there are some timeline issues and the story isn't explicit in its presentation, one thing Rowling and Yates absolutely excel at in this movie is the presentation of magic. More than anything else in the past decade, this film fleshed out the wizarding world both in tone by showing some of the truly darker sides of magic and in breadth by expanding into (NY and now) Paris. I'm biased here because I would watch an entire version of Newt traveling the world and learning about different creatures even if there were no stakes, but I loved all of the new additions in this film. The vault cats with the glowing eyes, the lion dragon thing. We got more of our favorite little tree twig and pangolin mole as well, both who served the story in key moments. I want to experience a fantastic world for 2 hours on a Friday evening with some characters that I love, and on that front there are no disappointments. I guess this is what I expect most out of the series, and it's the thing that it is doing the best. It is the story of Fantastic Beasts and the unusual lives they live. That includes the tiny lovable ones only Newt sees the value in, and it also includes the dark and unnerving ones like Credence and Nagini who have much longer and nuanced journeys filled with darkness and despair.
I thought the entire premise of Newt's "I don't do sides" take was asinine. It is clear that the movie is trying to go through the progression you talked about at the top, but I can't imagine that a thinking "good" person would not realize immediately that the right thing to do is to fight evil. In fact, since this big change only happens immediately after the death of Leta Lestrange, the movie does not give us a good philosophical reason for him to change but it could be said that he's motivated only by revenge. Is Credence tempted by Grindelwald's vision? I may be wrong but I thought even as he is going to him in the fire circle he says it is because Grindelwald knows who he is. If so, it once again has nothing to do with a deep philosophical change in Credence but a surface level desire to know who he is at all costs. And don't get me started on Queenie. If I'm interested in anyone's philosophical shift it is Nagini's shift that is yet to come. I hope we'll see how that happens but it seems like a pretty sharp turn between now and her time with Voldemort.
The low stakes newt with fantastic beasts Story would actually be way better and then the title of the movie would make sense and wouldn’t just carry on from the first movie which already wasn’t about these beasts in the first place
These beasts are just like decorations for the movie, to slow down it, and I’m glad they didn’t spend most time on it, the point is on Grindelwald’s vision of the future
Guys, Dumbledore and Grindelwald duel and Grindelwald falls in 1945. *1945* The end of Grindelwald is the end of Hitler. I always assumed it was heavily implied that Grindelwald stoked Muggle conflict leading to World War II as a means to justify his Magic is Might rhetoric. That has always been present in the book's narrative, right??
Did it say he was born in 1912? I don't think it did. I think the only way to get that year is to base off the fan conspiracy theory that the boat was the Titanic.
Agreed. For a movie titled Fantastic Beasts, there were very little beasts. Agreed with Spencer, just the core 4 group on another magical safari. He's the main character, I don't care about fake Dumbledore over there. Also agreed that it was a lie, because it'll ruin lore otherwise. At the build up shown for Creedence, given his powers and his acts on the Wizarding World, no way Rita Skeeter/Bathilda Bagshot would miss the scandal of the lost Dumbledore. I don't agree with Keeley on just making a movie for a nostalgia trip. A waste, and for Mcgonagall and Nagini(to a lesser extent), canon breaking. Those two were truly frustrating, as they had *zero* role to play in that story other than "hey, remember us?"
@@deeya Yeah, cool, I can dig that. Also, I've heard a bluegrass cover today of Dear Prudence, and I believe that that says it all quite better than I could ever have. That is all. Good day.
The Phoenix looks like Fawkes, so I'm thinking that maybe Dumbledore sent Fawkes to look after Credence. I don't really like the idea of Credence being a Dumbledore, and the only way I can see a connection is through that Aunt as a cousin or first cousin once removed, but I'd prefer that it's a lie. I also think Queenie was drugged by Rosier, and that's why that stupid tea pot wouldn't leave her alone; it was trying to give her more of the drug.
Good catch! I didn't think that they could have put something in Queenie's drink to make it easy to manipulate and use her. However, I think Queenie already had problems growing up with her powers, maybe she was bullied, and seeing as that she can read their minds, she knows that other people think she's crazy. The fact that Jacob said it to her (or thought it) hurt her, and out of anger and loneliness, she decided to join Grindlewald. She still loves Jacob, but she might be doing this in order to fulfill what she thinks is best, and when Grindlewald has become successful, she can be with Jacob. Of course, we know it's not going to happen that way. Eventually Queenie will see for herself that she chose the wrong 'side' and will go back to Jacob (if she's not turned into a prisoner that is).
I thought that too! I liked Queenie a lot because it was actually nice to see a female portrayed like that but not villainized or whatever but I guess not :-( I hope it was the tea.
The whole discussion about Grindewald lying is heavily undermined by the movie narrative. It's a final shot of the movie with rising phoenix. Sure, they can tell he's lying, but from the movie standpoint that will be the biggest cop out, I think, ever. Think of that, climax of the movie is just a lie. I think they are obliged to go with this reveal and double down
Well if done well then it won't be the biggest cop out but probably the best way to showcase the power of Grindelwald when it comes to manipulating things. If done right that is.
"I thought we obliviated you." "It didn't work!" They are familiar now with ignoring what came before. This movie had some great performances, but was such a terrible mess otherwise.
@@orkiso1 This is totally right, I meant to say that. Misleading is fine if done throughout one movie. Film should stand on its own without backtracking.
How is EVERYONE completely missing the fact that this movie established Queenie being mentally unstable? She is clearly not making the right decisions because of her misguided judgement. It's a lot like Credence actually. It comes from being alone and isolated her whole life aside from her sister whom they haven't been in good terms for the past year. Jacob called her crazy twice in this movie. She lost it when he didn't walk with her. I love it, I absolutely love they took her to this direction.
I think it's actually toying with the thought of her being crazy. Because Jacob does refer to her that way, I think Rowling was clever to lead us to believe it is true. However, one thing Roth, Spencer, and Keely missed mentioning is that Grindelwald is a "great wizard" because he clearly already has The Elder Wand. It makes me think that Grindelwald has actually pulled a sheet over Queenie's eyes with his magical power, because her turn was so abrupt from that moment they were in Paris together. If this is true, then when Dumbledore eventually defeats him, and Queenie is still alive to be there, she will come running back to Jacob...which would make it all okay...? Lol
Movie had some faults but I actually feel that Queenies arc is the best part of it. Very believable to me. She will do anything to be with Jacob and she feel Johnny Depp can help her.
I kinda half think that JK Rowling writes in these plot holes so that the fans can suss it out for her, then she can just tweet "you're right!" to the one she likes the most.
Nope, the duel between those three happened when Ariana died, which was caused because of that Duel. But here in this movie it's shown that the blood pact was made before that happened because both Albus and Grindelwald were on good terms. Which makes no sense at all.
Madhukar Nandagudi that’s what I thought but wasn’t sure because I’m more familiar w/ the movies than the books. Thanks for breaking it down, I knew that part made no sense. It sounds like a lazy plot device to keep dumbledore from confronting grindelwald too early in the series.
@@jchacho6335 it started with a confrontation between Aberforth and Albus because of how Albus was ignoring his family and how Aberforth had to give up on his career to look after his sister. This angered Grindelwald and cast cruciatus on Aberforth, so yeah Albus did try to stop but it eventually ended up being a three way duel. Still doesn't explain the blood pact of this movie though, because before the duel Grindelwald and Albus were on good terms.
6:39 - Albus Dumbledore isn't the one who sent his sibling to the abusive orphanage keeper. It was Corvus Lestrange who sent his child to protect his son (also Corvus) from Mustafa Kama. However, Leta swaps out Corvus for Credence who survives the sinking ship. As for his parentage, the woman on the boat with Credence might be an aunt, but certainly cannot be Kendra Dumbledore.
Grindewald can’t fight Dumbledore, so he has been looking for someone powerful enough who can. He went to NY looking for the obscurial to do it. It turned out to be Credence. He is now manipulating Credence to fight Dumbledore. Credence is not a Dumbledore but now thinks Albus is keeping him away from his birthright on purpose. Also, if Credence ‘s mother was a witch, she would have gotten off the boat magically. Leta’s nanny couldn’t because she was a half-elf and didn’t have magic. So, his mother couldn’t be Albus’s aunt.
@@loretta5653 Yeah, it would have been a great moral crisis for Dumbledore to face. Can he face the man he loves knowing he might have to kill him? Or does he choose to avoid that heartbreak, knowing Grindewald might kill others in the meantime?
The World War II vision is supposed to serve as an analogy to Grindelwald being the Wizarding equivalent of Hitler. J.K. Rowling has already stated that it’s no coincidence Grindelwald and Hitler both fell in 1945. Both men used propaganda to gathering a following. Grindelwald has blonde hair and blue eyes-two traits of the Aryan “master race,” Grindelwald has an undercut which is the standard haircut for the Hitler Youth, both Grindelwald and Hitler adopted an ancient symbol as their sigil. Grindelwald has a prison that he uses to hold his enemies, but eventually ends up there himself: Nurmengard. This is a parallel to Nuremberg that eventually held trials for Nazi war criminals. This is just my interpretation. I’m assuming the reason for the WWII vision is because Grindelwald’s rule is eerily similar to that of Nazi Germany.
Mey I thought Voldemort was done so much better. Grindelwald is not a badly done character but you’re right, it seems like we have been there and done that.
Mey I wouldn’t say it was already done with Voldemort because he’s such a weak villain. He’s poorly written, he’s one dimensional, he has weak character motivations, and a questionable plan. Grindelwald actually has some nuance and complexity to him. Voldemort was very one dimensional. He was a loose canon who wanted to be immortal and wanted to kill a teenager to achieve this goal. Grindelwald at least has a vision. He does what he does because he believes he’s right.
If done well, the idea that this sort of thing keeps happening because good people become complacent and allow these types to keep rising can be a powerful message.
I'm with Spencer - I could watch a whole movie of Newt and Jacob having adventures with fantastic beasts. Those were all my favourite parts of both this and the first movie. I think Newt may be my soul mate, honestly.
Plz JK... Leave Dumbledore and his family alone. Why can't we just get movies about Newt going on adventures and chasing beasts,How about Hogwarts four founders, or exploring the other Wizarding schools...just leave the Harry Potter characters alone 😭😭😭😭
Yes, I think they should either focus on Newt’s Pokemon journey, or like Keely suggested, do an anthology series. How long can this franchise bank on fans love of the Wizarding World? Was I excited to see Hogwarts? Of course, but there’s going to be a point where I start not caring anymore due to these poorly written movies. Edit: I think they should bring in a new director for the third movie, same as you guys, Azkaban is my favorite Harry Potter film, and the change of director clearly brought something fresh to the franchise
The thing I loved about the first 4-5 HP books/movies was that at least half the story was dedicated to relatively inconsequential character and world building. A portrayal of everyday life in the magical world which allows us to truly form a connection with the characters. With both FB films so far I've felt that was totally missed, we just jump straight into the action as if it's a superhero movie.
The woman in the book is implied to be a previous Headmistress at Hogwarts, just like when Arthur Weasley gets attacked in OotP, though she probably had another portrait in Dumbledore's office that he could use to contact Nicolas Flamel. After all, we know that wizard portraits can travel between their counterparts, and Dumbledore has been shown to use both Phineas Nigellus Black as well as Everard and Dillys for communication. Edit: Also to remind you guys, cuz you seem to have forgotten, Ariana was 5-6 when she was attacked by the Muggle boys, and 14 when she died.
So about Queenie and Grindelwald and why she would still choose to go with him, the speech that Grindelwald gives before he forces them to choose sides was all about how he doesnt hate muggles. He says he does not hate them, he does not wish to kill them, that they are not opposites but only different, they are not lesser being but simply have a different purpose, and Queenie hearing that while Jacob is standing next to her is vital bc she's now thinking that Grindelwald does have a solution to her problems, that he can actually bring about change that will allow her to be with her significant other without prejudice
@ 37:25, the screenplay book also states the ship sank in 1901, so it's not the Titanic. Which also would make Credence around 27/28 years old in the movies and possibly Dumbledore's unknown son if Albus was 45 in 1927? Also, Credence was travelling with his aunt.
I love Harry Potter (books & movies), I loved Fantastic Beasts 1. This film felt bloated, contrived and unfocused. I really wanted this franchise to tie in to the existing HP universe, but at this point it feels like it's going the way of The Cursed Child, which although it's _supposed_ to be canon, most fans reject and ignore for how fanficcy it is.
The scull said "Für das grössere Wohl" which means for the Greater Good in German. I am not really sure but i think i remember cause i am german and i watched the Movie in English and was really confused to see the it in German...
Why would that be confusing...? The movie takes place in Europe and in France, which are near Germany. The skull could have been from Germany. Also, his name was Grindelwald - were you also confused by that?
@@draum8103 I wasn't sure if it was on purpose or if they just had the German Version and the english language (like sometimws if i watch something in English there is still German text but this time it was in the cinema so i do not know if it is still the case)
Haven't seen the movie yet, but after seeing this, did Jk Rowling try the stephen king method of filmmaking during his cocaine phase? What is this movie?
Nah, I think she is in her Anne Rice stage of "thinking she doesn't need an editor because everything she writes is perfect" when it's really just a garbled mess.
This is my first time watching your show, and I must give guys kudos! I think your very professional and credible , Your studio set shows sophistication and good taste! Plus I truly enjoy your panel discussion! Brilliant and well done !
As for the whole coincidental visit to Paris thing - was is that, though? Credence was in Paris, therefore Tina went there as well. So did Grindelwald, because getting Credence was his plan. Queenie wanted to be with her sister, and Newt was supposed to go to Paris to get Credence on Dumbledore's orders. Those aren't coincidences. Heck, I wouldn't even call this convoluted.
I liked both movies but I just don't understand why putting so little in the first one and so much in the second. The flashbacks at least could fit in the former. Good discussion as always
Even GRRM, who quite framkly is a lot more throrough and well versed in history than JKR, gets help from others to help with producing books and stories away from the central narrative - and he is not that involved with the scripts of the TV series. And he worked as a TV script writer! Rowlings really needs to step back and give the big ideas and have others help with the movies.
So hey, just a couple details! I imagine that Queenie didn't read Grindelwald, or even that one female follower of his, is because they were using Occlumency. Remember, Snape could hide his thought from Voldemort himself. Queenie is a pretty powerful Legilimens, but I think that she doesn't have a lot of ways to go around Occlumency. Also, everyone went to Paris because that's where Credence was. After all, Grindelwald and Tina went there for him. Newt and Queenie went there for Tina (Newt also going for Credence). Jacob went there with Newt for Queenie. And the Aurors went there for Grindelwald. I can be complex, but still, it kinda makes sense.
Okay lemme start from why Newt Scamander is the chosen one by Dumbledore... Because Dumbledore choses people who always do what they're asked to without questioning him, Snape Harry Hagrid so many more people ... Dumbledore asks for trust and choose people who'll do the right things always.... Newt Scamander was sent to New York by Dumbledore because Newt knows how to extract an obscures.. plus he doesn't hate his brother or he isn't insensitive to all the girls because he just can't feel empathy to his fellow Humans like he does to the beasts. He is tries being more expressive with Tina but fails to.... And talking about Queine ... She puts Jacob under confundus charm so he could love her... She makes him her beast of burden.... Even though he loves her back... The direct comparison can be made to Voldemort's mother Merope who jinxed Tom riddle Sr. With love potion and married him and then when he was finally sober he refused to be with her and that's why Voldemort was born without love... Another example is what Severus Snape did for Lilly Potter... He wanted dark lord to kill James and Harry so he could love her...... JK's message is pretty clear... Good people make bad choices in love... Newt Scamander is the best character in the movie because he knows who he is and has a very strong character and a back story to back his actions.. Even in Hogwarts he refuses to go home in Christmas just to nurse the beasts.... He wants to do the same with credence.... Dumbledore cares about credence and hence wants newt to take care of him...... Whereas Leita Lestrange choice of swapping that baby makes sense because she is a Lestrange..... They feel people are deplorables... That runs in the black family too... Even Corvious Lestrange would treat women as deplorable.... So it's makes perfect sense why Leita Lestrange would swap and kill the baby.... Finally Nicholas flamel is the only one who knows how to protect the entire city because he is one of the most powerful wizards in wizarding world... Plus ofcourse to show no one is as Powerful in this universe as Dumbledore or Grindelwald except if you're 650 years old!!! Hope you do a bit of homework because the movie is on point with JK's universe... Just we don't have the next book to understand why something's are important like we had with HP movies....
I agree with a lot of what was said but the fact that everyone was in Paris didn't bother me at all. I thought it was pretty clear that most of them were simply following Credence for various reasons and others were following some of the people who were following Credence, so it made sense to me that they would all end up at the same place.
My McGonagall theory is that it it is Minerva who has gone back in time with a Time Turner to teach in this generation probably at Dumbledore’s direction (possibly as the Transfiguration teacher until he is moved to that position), and that Time Turner is the one that she gives Hermione in Prisoner of Azkaban
I saw someone say that this Obscuris in Credence is the same Obscuris in Ariana. While it doesn't say Ariana had an Obscuris, dumbledore basically says it. Says an Obscuris is caused by a lack of love, he then said I didn't love my sister enough. Which caused her death. So I think it says it basically.
All of them being in Paris was not a coincidence at ALL, though I feel like people are letting others' confusion cloud their own memory: Credence had relocated to Paris from the first film; Yusuf Kama and Tina were the first to arrive and stayed the longest in Paris, searching for him. Grindelwald escaped, and followed Credence, prompting Dumbledore and the Ministry to send their own delegations each, to find Credence before the others (which happened to be Newt for Albus and Credence and Leta and their battalion of Aurors for the Ministry). The Ministry also tried to recruit Newt but disagreeing with their violent policies, Newt declined. Queenie comes to Europe under the excuse of following Tina, though really forcibly eloping with Jacob to London, where it isn't illegal to marry Muggles, and the ensuing argument results in her actually going to find her sister to Paris. Jacob of course, accompanies Newt as they know Queenie is going there to Tina and their goals are pretty much similar, searching for the two sisters for personal reasons.
They all have solid, narrative reasons to go to Paris, so where is the coincidence? Any Sherlock-ian whodunnit has just as complex a plot as this film, the only issue is the choppy editing, and sometimes, complete removal of scenes providing context.
what I though about this, is that the setting didn't need to change to Paris, not just for the box with the family tree. They all could have been doing the same things in London and it wouldn't have affected the story. I don't think they are actually confused how is everyone at Paris, more like why.
@@Raening Lestrange is a French pure-blooded family, that has descendants settled in Britain. It would be extremely odd and nonsensical for them to have their birth records, Mausoleums and family tree in Britain, when they have their own Ministry and governmental institutions in their homeland. Not to mention that their nationalities are a source of pride for most aristocrats. The Malfoys for example, wouldn't even consider relocating to Bulgaria because they see themselves as British wizarding royalty and pride themselves on it. Credence suspected that he was a Lestrange, and thus traced his own origin to Paris. Everyone else simply followed him there, it's just that the placement of the scenes and cuts would make it a little jumbled for people not paying 100% attention.
As for the Queenie arc, while her love potioning Jacob as seen in the beginning is OOC (love potion abuse is how Tom Marvolo Riddle was born, and the cause of his rough childhood), her giving her allegiance to Grindelwald makes sense. She's internally conflicted between her love for Jacob and knowing that this can never happen in magical society as it currently stands, and Grindelwald plays on this to pray on her. He tells Queenie what she wants to hear, even if it's in half-truths because she is receptive to what he's saying. It's even possible her legimancy skills are less effective because of her internal conflict, making it even easier for Grindelwald to win her over.
Sorry if someone has already answered it but according to the "crimes of grindelwald" screenplay that came out Friday, the women in the book that flammel talks to is the headmistress of ilvermony and the women on the boat is credence aunt.
"Hey, congrats, now you know! You're a Dumbledore! Now go and kill this Dumbledore for me!" - Grindlewald gains nothing from this if it's a lie. It could just be the truth as he sees it.
I just watched Fantastic Beasts the Crimes of Grindelwald, and quoting Dan Murrell, it was a "chore to watch". It's not an awful film. Out of the Fantastic Beasts movies so far, this is the one that feels more like a Harry Potter movie. Seeing Hogwarts grace the big screen once more is such a glorious sight for anyone who loves movies. And Jude Law is entertaining as young Dumbledore. That's where a lot of the magic in this film resides. I just wished there's more of the magic than just in the Hogwarts sequence. What makes Crimes of Grindelwald a chore to watch is J.K. Rowling's script. It might be Fantastic Beasts 2 by name, but it feels like I'm watching 3, 4 and 5 at the same time. As a result, I got a film with a random series of events that never come together as a cohesive whole. It wants to be a movie that focus on the core four who spends the whole narrative separated from each other (Newt, Jacob, Tina & Queenie), Dumbledore & Grindelwald relationship, Leta Lestrange backstory and more backstories with Nagini and Credence, but because there's just so much to cram in such limited runtime, all of these plot threads become underdeveloped. By then, I get a lot of reveals and twists and turns that kind of felt like it came out of nowhere since it never takes its time to build these moments up. 6/10
I think that the point of not attacking right away was that they didn't want to feed into Grindelwald's propaganda that the Aurors would attack his followers when they were simply listening to a speech, since at this point I don't think it's clear (to them) that Grindelwald's followers have done anything more than listen to him and help him spread propaganda. If they attack, they prove him right and anyone who is on the fence is likely to be tipped towards Grindelwald's side, which is what happens when his mole kills the girl in the crowd
Your discussion was very interesting. Tina was in Paris because she was on an assignment looking for Grindelwald...Queenie went to Paris to look for Tina because she felt so lost after Jacob wasn't willing to marry her....Newt and Jacob went because of Credence and Queenie....the character I feel will. have a huge consequence in the narrative is Nagini...Credence abandoned her and I think that she will end up killing Credence for his betrayal.....the reason she was so afraid at the meeting was her experience of abuse and treatment from the purebreds...maybe Credence was a manifestation of Dombeldore's sister after being attacked by the smuggle boys.....she gave birth to an obsecurial....
That was my first thought as well, but then I realized I think they were talking about ALL of the other characters. Like Leta and everyone else who was at the rally at the end.
When they showed those WWII images, my heart broke when Jacob said "another war?" Bc hes a vet, he has already seen and been a part of a war and now hes being told that it's going to happen again. Only this time, hes more involved than just digging trenches
18:16 KEELEY THANKYOU FOR PUTTING THIS INTO WORDS I have a question. What is up with Grindelwald and the snake stuff? He went to durmstrang so he can't possibly be familiar with slytherin imagery. Also, I don't completely conform to this theory but I can't help but wonder if Queenie was enchanted at the end, just like how she had enchanted Jacob to propose to her. I do agree with Spencer that Grindelwald and Dumbledore are OP at this point. Grindelwald is a legilimens, an occlumens, a seer, a silver tongue and overall a master manipulator- he could totally make Queenie do a 180, especially in the fragile state she was in. It just comes back to Keeley's point that these behind-the-scene details belong in a book format. It's how the fans have been watching the HP movies, too. A LOT of important plot points are brought up in HP movies without any explanation, but since the general audience has read the books, they're able to fill those details in themselves. For the crazy titanic theory, Credence was born in 1901 so I think that's surely out of the question.
Oh man this was exactly what I was looking for. I wanted a video to talk through all the spoilers so I didn’t have to go see this movie :/ Great discussion as always!
Something that also bothered me was that Leta’s fear was Corvus sinking in his white sheet or whatever, but we see that shot from the eyes of the “mom”. Leta wasn’t underwater so how did she know what that looked like?
The ship cannot be the titanic because on the day the titanic sang the water was said to be completely still and in this movie the sea is rough and the boat gets turned over by a rouge wave. So maybe the ship these magical babies are on is a ship specifically carrying magical families.
My guess on the obcurus is that it was Ariana and as she died, Dumbledore took it with his grief, but he was an adult and had remorse, so he passed the obscurus on someone else like a dark twin. Credence is a nobody that just happened to be there and be taken by Leta on the sinking boat instead of Corvus. Dumbledore says that Obscuruses grow when the host is deprived of love, just like depression and that love could destroy the Obscurus, at least that's what he hoped. You didn't want the Grindelwald ark to have anything to do with WW2? Too bad that the last duel between him and Dumbledore happen in 1945 and that Grindelwald has basically the same ideas than the Nazis... Of course there was going to have some connection to WW2... It was doomed to happen. And besides the idea of preventing WW2 might be a lie. For what we know he could actually want to make it happen so to have the ultimate pretext to take power over No Majs... All that Grindy says in his speech is a lie. ANd using small bits of truth beneath lots of lies is a well known manipulation tactic. Look at what Dooku did in Star Wars AotC. He said the truth to Obiwan, that there was a Sith lord manipulating the Senate, he just omited to tell that HE was his apprentice... Obiwan doesn't even believe him about the Sith Lord because he doesn't trust Dooku in the first place. And so Sith manipulation stays in the shadows despite being announced clearly and in the next movie, the Jedi let themselves be caught by surprise... And also, the point of Grindelwald is more like to prevent to the Muggles to use these weapons against wizards. But turning Muggles against each other is a good way to weaken them in the first place before initialing a full planetary conquest by the Wizards.
People are seriously overrating J.K.Rowling as a writer in general. She wrote a entertaining and hugely successful series of books for kids/young adults that grew with their audience over time, and I really liked reading them. But let's be honest here - the success wasn't just because of her literary genius. There are a huge number of moving parts that contributed to the HP series taking off, they can't all be pinpointed; and I don't think warping the image of Rowling into that of some kind of messiah of fantasy literature does anyone any good. As for the Hogwarts scenes, they really didn't blow me away. Even when Hogwarts was shown in the trailer, I thought "well, here they are going for the nostalgia grab, eh?" and I had the exact same reaction when I saw the scenes in the theater. What happened at Hogwarts in this movie wasn't even all that important in the end, they just stuck it in there because something something people like recognizing old things they love. They touched on this in their discussion here, but I think it really says a lot about the strength (or rather, lack thereof) of the new characters and story when they have to rely on nostalgia that heavily in the second film already.
Could Dumbledore's blood that was in the locket have been able to summon the phoenix and that is why it came to Grindlewald so he could lie to Creedance?
1.- I loved this analysis of the movie, both telling the mistakes and the beauty of the HP world. 2.- Keeley was a great guest 3.- It's the first time I hear ALL of my arguments said outloud in a SJ video.
I believe the World War 2 imagery was either Grindelwald misunderstanding what he's seen and thinking that the war would be against the wizards if they don't act quickly, or he was spinning the visions of WW2 to make the public think it would be against the wizards. That's the way I read it at least.
Josh Moeller I disagree. I took it as the wizards could be innocent bystanders and that man would destroy the earth and the wizards could prevent it for the humans own good.i have a problem that they don’t really show how humans and wizards exist aside eo.
The woman in the book is Eulalie "Lally" Hicks. You can see her name, at least partially, under her "image" in the first shot she appears in. She is apparently a professor at Ilvermorny and, presumably, a member of a proto-Order of the Phoenix that'll probably be officially revealed in a future film.
Agree pretty much with everything, except with the "Dumbledore is already the Dumbledore we know at this point"..point. I think that, yes, he has most of the traits we know from the original franchise, BUT probably one of his most defining moments was the final duel with Grindelwald, think about it: from where we are know on the story to the moment where they duel, Grindelwald will do such horrible things and, in Dumbledore´s eyes, irredimable things, that he's going to have to kill his love for the guy in order to stop him...and at THAT moment is when he becomes the sage, wise and magnificent Dumbledore that we know. What do you think?
I saw this movie yesterday, thank you for making a spoiler review it makes things a bit clearer and to realise that I am not alone not understanding some things in the movie.
This video just really healed me and I'm grateful to you guys for doing this, and for bringing Keely because she was absolutely delightful! I hope Joe can offer his 2 cents as well when he sees the movie.
Tina was working in Paris looking for Credence, and when Queenie was upset over Newt lifting the love spell over Jacob she went to Paris to go see Tina (she first goes to the Paris Ministry). Newt and Jacob go there to follow Queenie, and Newt wants to see Tina. Theseus and Leta are in Paris on Ministry business. It's not that coincidental.
Thanks, guys. This helped. I haven't so loved a move with which I had so many problems since the Star Wars prequels. There are 3 more movies planned, so Rowling has time to dig herself out of some of these mistakes, but some can't be unseen. I'm in for the full ride, but . . .
Bless you guys, Roth, Keeley and Spencer: this was such an informative and fascinating discussion! I just watched the movie tonight and I felt so disappointed and confused. I was so happy that you essentially felt the same way I did about a lot of the movie. I wasn't a big fan of the first Fantastic Beasts, so I wanted to love this one or at least like it more than the first one...it was sadly not the case, for all the flaws that you have mentioned about this movie. And to make matters worse, one of my silver linings for this movie was the Mirror of Erised scene which, like Spencer, I thought WAS a confirmation of Dumbledore and Grindelwald's relationship, but after listening to Roth and Keeley, I feel totally played. They WERE trying to have it both ways by still keeping it open to interpretation so as to not piss off the more homophobic or anti fans. I know there's more movies on the way that might change things, so I can only continue to hope that the next one is better, in every way. I'm almost ok with them retconning the Queenie development and the Credence reveal because I hated those choices. I love the world JKR created; I just wish these movies lived up to it.
I actually believe that Grindelwald was telling the truth. Many people seem to doubt that Credence could be Albus Dumbledore's actual brother based on the fact that it's established in the books that Kendra Dumbledore died long before Credence was born and that Percival Dumbledore was sent to Azkaban and eventually died there. But the answer is actually quite simple. Like, it's even explained several times in FB2, hidden in plain sight, how Percival Dumbledore could in fact have secretly escaped from Azkaban. He simply escaped by flying. On the back of a phoenix. Which, as pointed out several times in the film, "will always appear to a Dumbledore in times of need". It is possible that what happened next is that he went on to change his last name to Graves, possibly by marrying a woman by that name, with whom he would father a son - Aurelius. Then, after Aurelius was born, he took his family on a ship to New York in order to start a new life for them, and he himself became an auror for the MACUSA. Then either he pursued Grindelwald in order to avenge the death of Ariana, or Grindelwald pursued him, but in any case the two would eventually meet, and Grindelwald would obviously recognize him as Percival Dumbledore and discover his secret, including the fact that he had a fourth child named Aurelius (by that time believed to have died when the ship sank, but later realized by Grindelwald to have survived and that the person he had known as Credence Barebone was in fact Aurelius), and ended up killing Percival and taking on his identity by the use of polyjuice potion. I'm quite amazed that no one else seems to have figured this theory out, as, at least to me, it's the one that by far would make the most sense. It would basically explain everything, and tie all the pieces of the puzzle together. Like, from a storytelling perspective it would make zero sense to have the final big reveal in the movie be a complete lie or even a half-truth, or to not have Credence's true identity be something that makes him closely related to some major, well-established character after dedicating an entire movie to figuring it out (for example it would be completely pointless if he actually was Corvus Lestrange V, since that would make him related to no one important but Leta, herself nothing more than a minor side character unimportant enough that they could so easily kill her off once she'd played her part in telling Credence's backstory. It would be equally pointless if he was just some random cousin or something to Dumbledore, or just a complete nobody who just happened to serve as the new host for Ariana's obscurus, as some people are actually speculating). It also wouldn't make much sense if the character of Percival Graves turned out to just be a random, insignificant nobody and that neither he, nor the fact that he just so happened to share his rather uncommon first name with Albus Dumbledore's father while acting as a sort of father figure for Credence, or for that matter the fact that they chose to cast an actor who just like Richard Harris and Michael Gambon happens to be Irish to play him instead of an actual American, would have any deeper meaning to the story. This theory would also explain the actual significance of the repeated line about the phoenix's relationship to the Dumbledores, how Percival Dumbledore could have had another child while still being out of the picture during the events of the movies, and why Grindelwald would be the only person still alive who knew about it. Or is there anything I'm missing?
Why is everyone talking as if the franchise just ended?? Credence being Dumbledore is a cliffhanger. They just told you he's Dumbledore and not lestrange, the movie never said how Credence is Dumbledore. Also Albus is 60 years younger than when we see him in Harry Potter. Of course he won't be the same. And remember, Bagshot even mentions it that the Albus Dumbledore we know isn't who he truly is. So it fits that narrative too.
@@zachfakelastname It's a Empire Strikes Back-ending with Han Solo frozen in carbonite and Luke I'm your Father-moment. There are three movies after this one!
Queenie is a MASTER legitimance, but ANYONE who is great at oclamancy can block her. We learned this in Order of the Phoenix. Grindelwald can block her out.
The world war 2 thing makes the story complex and doesn’t make it bad to want to root for Grindelwald to me. It made me think about who how these people would look at a murder if they are fighting for what you believe it. It is intriguing
When Lita died. (I personally think that she was saying I love you to Newt) so she died to save Newt which I think means Newt has her sacrificial magic surrounding him. And Grindlewold can't harm him.
I think Grindelwald says to Credence that "his brother is after him" and then says he's a Dumbledore, implying that Albus is his brother. Perhaps half-brother, but brother nonetheless.
As someone who has never read a Harry Potter book or seen a movie, this review is awesome. It feels like in a conversation of a foreign language, only catching hints of common words. 😄
3 beautiful nerds 😍😍😍
bust0ne your photo bothers my screen xD
You are disgusting.
3 empty-headed fools who look like they haven't watched the movie.
Bless Keeley for being so prepared to talk about all of the obscure lore we're apparently supposed to know to understand these movies now!
I loved Spencer's comment about how Magical NYC, London, and Paris were indistinguishable. The cinematography of all of the Yates' movies has been so bland and brown and gray that everything looks the same.
that's why i dislike the later HP movies. meanwhile Prisoner of Azkaban is the most beautiful movie in the series
Finally someone said it. I really dislike the HP movies, and most of them are Yates'. I did enjoy Fantastic Beasts to be fair (because it introduced some more color and saturation), but Crimes of Grindelwald regressed back to Yates' typical gray and grimy palette. *sighs*
Highly disagree, half Blood Prince is probably the best cinematography in the whole series
@@elliemoon88 Half of them are Yates'
YEAH, they were!!! The color pallette for this movie was AWFUL! It was so grimy, and Hogwarts was bleached of wonder!
It´s hard to remain....Newt-ral?
Str4vv so punny! 😂😂
I see what u did there
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice. :)
I made this exact pun in my head when they said were talking about Newt choosing a side
Dumbledore has *always* been manipulative. Like Snape said, raising cattle for the slaughter. He does things without telling his allies, feels no need to explain himself, just believing that his cause and course are correct. In the end it works out, but he truly did manipulate almost the entirety of Harry's life until he defeated Voldemort.
Dumbledore really isnt that good of a person, he just happened to be a very powerful wizard
Much of the first book/movie seems almost like he's guiding Harry towards the stone.
But Harry was already dead from the beginning once he was shot with abracadabra, so he wasn't raised for slaughter, Dumbledore did the best you can do for a cattle in that situation
@@muserussell2377 No, you're just yet another person who sorely misunderstands the character. JK Rowling herself has said that Dumbledore is meant to be the epitome of goodness. And if you actually understand the story and character, you see that that is pretty much spot on. Yes he was misguided as a teenager, but after that he was an incredibly good person for the rest of his life.
He did it because he felt it was necessary. He felt very remorseful about it, and even cried when asking Harry for forgiveness in Order of the Phoenix (the book). As he explains in the novels, he didn't know what else to do. You accuse him of keeping allies in the dark. What is he supposed to do ? Tell an eleven year old boy that he probably has to die to defeat Hitler ? He didn't know when or how to tell Harry certain things. That makes him human.
I would totally love some fun light hearted not epic Indiana jones type movies with newt and jacob traveling to different exotic lands capturing dope monsters.
This was what I thought the Fantastic Beasts movies were going to be. Maybe in the Berenstein universe.
This was more of a 'Fantastic Beasts' - 'Dumbledore Grindlewald Saga' cross-over episode than a 'Fantastic Beasts' film.
Sadly it’s just a background story as to why the plot has given our new protagonists ugh
Yeah, if they were going to do a series called “Fantastic Beasts”, that’s more along the lines of what it should have been. Could have done a separate series about Grindelwald.
Exactly, would have been cool to see them in different parts of the world in each movie, and explore the unique wizarding cultures
Dumbledore has always been manipulative lol old people just seem nicer and more innocent 😂
This is true. It was actually a MAJOR plot point in the later HP books/movies. I was a little surprised at their surprise in this review. If anything, I feel like they could have shown a lot more of that side of him.
yes, and he has been on Grindelwalds side when it comes to the quest for power until the fallout where his sister died. he was not always kind and old, and even then he was manipulative, for the greater good. . . guess he never could really get rid of that philosophy.
Yeah. I thought him being a manipulative jackass who was keeping vital information from Harry was obvious by Book 5.
YES!! Albus Percival Manipulation Dumbledore.
It does seem that a lot of people don’t really get how much was revealed about Dumbledore during Snape’s Memory. We found out that he had been using Harry all along, knowing that he was the only one who could stop Voldemort and that he would have to die to do so. Dumbledore was “raising him like a pig for slaughter” as Snape says, and Dumbledore never counters this or says that he actually cared for or loved Harry regardless of knowing he would have to die... instead, he almost ridicules Snape for how much he seems to care: “Don’t tell me now that you’ve come to care for the boy.” This seems to suggest that Dumbledore never really did care about Harry, and just pretended to in order to keep Harry close and trusting, so he could direct Harry towards his inevitable death. Obviously, he did this with the greater good in mind, and perhaps he did care about Harry as much as he would anybody, but he did know Harry’s destiny all along, without knowing he would be resurrected, and he intentionally directed Harry towards that destiny. Certainly pretty manipulative.
Dumbledore not being who Harry thought he was is a major point in Deathly Hallows. Ultimately, Harry chooses to remember who Dumbledore was to him. The real man, however, was revealed to be a manipulative, morally gray character who hid a lot of things and may not have been as sympathetic a person as he presented himself when playing the role of a teacher/headmaster or mentor/father-figure to Harry. It seems like a lot of Harry Potter fans have done the same as Harry and choose to remember Dumbledore as they thought he was, instead of what he was actually revealed to be.
I feel like Newt and his 3 friends weren’t really necessary in this movie and ended up bogging down the plot. I don’t dislike the characters, but they seemed kind of useless in this movie that should be centered around Grindelwald , Dumbledore, Leta, and Creedence. In fact I believe telling this story from the point of view of Credence would have actually made a lot more sense and solved a lot of the narrative/pacing issues.
The shitty part is they had like 3 good movies crammed into one. The whole wizard spy game with Newt and Dumbledore would have been awesome. The chase for the girl by Newt and Jacob would have been cool. The broken relationship between Jacob and Queenie and how someone can be twisted by a master manipulator would have been interesting. If they focused on ONE with ancillary subplots it would have been a great movie. But they crammed them all plus more into one movie, so they All felt like subplots and made the movie what it was.
Agree
Agree
mikewillis33 I agree that Grindelwald's speech and by extension Queenie's reaction to it was the best part of the movie (plotwise I' don't mean acting) so it does feel like most of the work went there but if she had left out the other parts of the plot it would feel even less like the Hp movies and I think they were banking a lot on nostalgia (for these 2 movies at least)
I am so incredibly happy that this video exists. Especially coming from people who both love the books and are perfectly happy to critique the hell out of the movie.
This movie made me want to watch the original Harry Potter films again with a warm cup of tea and a blanket. A nice, straightforward story where killing curses are banned and the world makes sense.
And good scripts.
How were Dumbledore, Grindlewald, and Abeforth able to have a 3 way duel that killed Ariana if Dumbledore and Grindlewald made a blood bond to not fight each other?
That is a good point. Maybe Dumbledore was mainly using defensive spells?
History Muse then why would he feel guilty about potentially being the one that killed her also that would mean that Grindlewald would have to mostly used defensive spells as well since the blood bond goes both ways
Grindelwald was attacking Aberforth, Albus was defending him, Ariana got in the way trying to defend him too because Aberforth was her favourite.
Katie Evans that is possible the whole blood bond thing still feels very retcony though and it takes a lot of the nuance out of their relationship
Exactly
Queenie is a natural born Legilimens and extremely powerful. But Grindelwald and Dumbeldore are both Extremely Accomplished Occulemens. If Queenie just struggles with Newt cause he's British. Then there is no way she can read the mind of someone who has mastered the defense of the mind. Also. Grindelwald is A+ wizard when it comes to power. Queenie is probably C+ at best. And without extra training. The natural ability only goes so far. Grindelwald is letting her think she is reading his mind and projecting what he wants her to see to convince her cause she is a very useful subject against the weak minded.
Taylor Ohl Add to that, his native language probably isn’t even English. And so he probably thinks in like Bulgarian or something considering he’s a Durmstrang Alumnus
THANK YOU! So many people are missing this! I do wish they addressed this in some way in the movie, a passing comment between Rosier and Grindewald, or even him waiting for her to get a certain distance before he relaxes a bit. People either don’t think about Queenie’s ability or they think he’s thinking very hard about only kind thoughts at the time or something, or that she’s naive.
If he’s hiding some of this thoughts and memories and is displaying false ones (we know it can happen from HP; both the planted vision from Voldemort and Snape having alternate events in his mind when Voldemort inspected it), she really does think she’s seeing his heart and he’s not leading them down a dark path. It does look crazy without a satisfactory explanation, if you don’t understand how Legilimency does has limitations and how Occlumency (especially used by such a powerful wizard) can impact the reading so much. Gaaah.
Absolutely right. Not to mention that her judgment is flawed due to her feelings towards Jacob. She is socially awkward and hasn't a lot of experience of trained people. Grindelwald plays on her weaknesses to manipulate her even more esily. SHe probably blames herself about bewitching Jacob and being discovered. She tries to find a way to make things more natural.
Yes, Spencer has it! Make a Newt movie that is separate from a young Grindewald/Albus movie. My favorite scene from FB1 was the travel into his case, seeing all the fantastic beasts! Have a separate adventure! Loved the acting in this movie, but absolutely no character development was allowed because they just shoved too much in this.
Him and Jacob traveling to a jungle to find a new beast thought to be extinct sounds like a fun movie.
I thought they were going to go to Arizona next to release the thunderbird. Only Jacob wouldn't want to leave his bakery, and Queenie would be trying to get Jacob to fall in love with her again. And now that Tina is an Auror it would be her job to stop Newt. Am I just making things up, or was this somewhat implied in Movie 1?
As for the phoenix appearing, Credence was in much more need in the first movie and there was no phoenix. He was in fact, in no great need or danger when the “phoenix” appeared in this movie.
I don't know if you already saw this comment, but another person said they think Dumbledore sent that Phoenix to watch over credence, and the movie just makes us think credence is a Dumbledore.
what if the phoenix was grindlewalds?
I mean in a way it would make sense
idk just a guess
Maybe it means that Credence WILL BE in a great need/danger, aka, when he's suppose to take on Albus. As in, he is NOW in great need/danger cause he will need incredible strength to kill Albus.
Grindewald was showing the clips of World War 2 to show the other wizards that if they didn’t destroy the muggles now, their technology would be too powerful to overcome with magic in the future.
30 minutes later, 3 fucking blue fire magic dragons appear and burn effortlessly many people, and threatening everyone in Paris. If they didn't catch them in time they would have probably wiped Paris off. So, no, I don't think that is a strong argument. In any case, mages should be ruling over humanity, and not once have they disclosed why they fear muggles or why shouldn't they know about their existence. This is Xmen Apocalypse all over again.
Fantastic Beasts 1: we are on the TITANIC and nothing can go wrong!
Fantastic Beasts 2: Getting cold here huh?
Fantastic Beasts 5: Wake up Jack....wake up!
olavo ps ROFL 🤣
Yay I like Keeley.
The problem is that they are so wrapped up with "Fantastic Beasts" as the main series title for all of these when it actually is not and shouldn't be.
@Zoe Kouf lol that was funny
The crime is his decision of taking over the world with his followers, that’s his crime
I completely agree with what was said here, especially with Queenie. Each Harry Potter book was framed by his school year at Hogwarts and I think some sort of framing needed to be there to help these films be more self contained.
That's what I was hoping for, that the locations would set the framing for each story. I wanted a more defined French wizarding world with Crimes of Grindelwald, but as you said, it really blended with the other places too much. I was hoping they'd at least meet a French wizard that would join their group. Perhaps someone who graduated from Beauxbatons.
J.K. Rowling at this point seems to channeling Doctor Who's Steven Moffat in terms of convoluted storytelling; the only real difference is that the later has more wits, panache and ACTUAL restrain.
The story of this film for me was very much about identity. Questions of "Who am I?" and "What do I stand for?" As the vessel into this world, Newt enters a story greater than himself and, despite initially wanting to avoid conflict, by the end is forced to not only pick a side but to fight for that side. I don't think there's a more relatable narrative in current cinematic culture to today's political climate. Newt is the most "good" person we've encountered in the entire wizarding world, and even he realizes by the end that doing nothing contributes to the rise of evil.
After being the focus of the first film, Credence gets a reprieve from the limelight for the first half of the movie. We see that after all the shit he's been through, all he really wants to understand is his parentage (same central thematic element of identity and purpose). His journey lies in opposition to Newt as one without friends and love and instead he is led astray by Grindelwald's addictive vision of freedom and self-control. He's the only one that makes Credence feel empowered. While Leta was the most interesting character in this movie, Credence is the most interesting character in this series. I love the Kylo Ren vibes of struggling between light and dark and in the end being tempted by the allure of Grindelwald's vision of the future. It's so much more interesting than characters that choose the path of light. The beam of magic that crumbled the mountainside reflects all the pent up energy of confusion and frustration, and it is a turning point where we see how his path has shifted in the exact opposite direction of Newt's.
These are the two characters who most represent the theme for me and who go through very different journeys, but many of the characters struggle with their identity in this film. That is the true "Crime of Grindelwald" in setting up an environment where friends and family are forced to come to terms with who they are when not all of them are ready to do so, driving stakes in the middle of otherwise loving relationships.
While there are some timeline issues and the story isn't explicit in its presentation, one thing Rowling and Yates absolutely excel at in this movie is the presentation of magic. More than anything else in the past decade, this film fleshed out the wizarding world both in tone by showing some of the truly darker sides of magic and in breadth by expanding into (NY and now) Paris. I'm biased here because I would watch an entire version of Newt traveling the world and learning about different creatures even if there were no stakes, but I loved all of the new additions in this film. The vault cats with the glowing eyes, the lion dragon thing. We got more of our favorite little tree twig and pangolin mole as well, both who served the story in key moments. I want to experience a fantastic world for 2 hours on a Friday evening with some characters that I love, and on that front there are no disappointments. I guess this is what I expect most out of the series, and it's the thing that it is doing the best. It is the story of Fantastic Beasts and the unusual lives they live. That includes the tiny lovable ones only Newt sees the value in, and it also includes the dark and unnerving ones like Credence and Nagini who have much longer and nuanced journeys filled with darkness and despair.
Too Long, Did read. You write your point very well.
I thought the entire premise of Newt's "I don't do sides" take was asinine. It is clear that the movie is trying to go through the progression you talked about at the top, but I can't imagine that a thinking "good" person would not realize immediately that the right thing to do is to fight evil. In fact, since this big change only happens immediately after the death of Leta Lestrange, the movie does not give us a good philosophical reason for him to change but it could be said that he's motivated only by revenge.
Is Credence tempted by Grindelwald's vision? I may be wrong but I thought even as he is going to him in the fire circle he says it is because Grindelwald knows who he is. If so, it once again has nothing to do with a deep philosophical change in Credence but a surface level desire to know who he is at all costs. And don't get me started on Queenie.
If I'm interested in anyone's philosophical shift it is Nagini's shift that is yet to come. I hope we'll see how that happens but it seems like a pretty sharp turn between now and her time with Voldemort.
The low stakes newt with fantastic beasts Story would actually be way better and then the title of the movie would make sense and wouldn’t just carry on from the first movie which already wasn’t about these beasts in the first place
These beasts are just like decorations for the movie, to slow down it, and I’m glad they didn’t spend most time on it, the point is on Grindelwald’s vision of the future
Queenie was poorly handled in this movie. Yikes.
Guys, Dumbledore and Grindelwald duel and Grindelwald falls in 1945. *1945* The end of Grindelwald is the end of Hitler. I always assumed it was heavily implied that Grindelwald stoked Muggle conflict leading to World War II as a means to justify his Magic is Might rhetoric. That has always been present in the book's narrative, right??
If Credence was the baby on the boat, he was born in 1911-12 because the boat sank in 1912. So he is 16-17 in 1928
Did it say he was born in 1912? I don't think it did. I think the only way to get that year is to base off the fan conspiracy theory that the boat was the Titanic.
The boat sank in 1901, it's in the screenplay.
@@Retrogirlgamer Shortly after he attacked the muggles who hurt his daughter. So that was in the 1800s
Spencer, for the win, and for so many reasons that I won't deign to list.
Good show, Sir.
Agreed. For a movie titled Fantastic Beasts, there were very little beasts. Agreed with Spencer, just the core 4 group on another magical safari. He's the main character, I don't care about fake Dumbledore over there. Also agreed that it was a lie, because it'll ruin lore otherwise. At the build up shown for Creedence, given his powers and his acts on the Wizarding World, no way Rita Skeeter/Bathilda Bagshot would miss the scandal of the lost Dumbledore. I don't agree with Keeley on just making a movie for a nostalgia trip. A waste, and for Mcgonagall and Nagini(to a lesser extent), canon breaking. Those two were truly frustrating, as they had *zero* role to play in that story other than "hey, remember us?"
@@deeya
Yeah, cool, I can dig that.
Also, I've heard a bluegrass cover today of Dear Prudence, and I believe that that says it all quite better than I could ever have.
That is all.
Good day.
The Phoenix looks like Fawkes, so I'm thinking that maybe Dumbledore sent Fawkes to look after Credence. I don't really like the idea of Credence being a Dumbledore, and the only way I can see a connection is through that Aunt as a cousin or first cousin once removed, but I'd prefer that it's a lie. I also think Queenie was drugged by Rosier, and that's why that stupid tea pot wouldn't leave her alone; it was trying to give her more of the drug.
The tea is a good point. It did bother me that the teapot kept trying to pour her more
That is exactly what I think too!
Good catch! I didn't think that they could have put something in Queenie's drink to make it easy to manipulate and use her. However, I think Queenie already had problems growing up with her powers, maybe she was bullied, and seeing as that she can read their minds, she knows that other people think she's crazy. The fact that Jacob said it to her (or thought it) hurt her, and out of anger and loneliness, she decided to join Grindlewald. She still loves Jacob, but she might be doing this in order to fulfill what she thinks is best, and when Grindlewald has become successful, she can be with Jacob. Of course, we know it's not going to happen that way. Eventually Queenie will see for herself that she chose the wrong 'side' and will go back to Jacob (if she's not turned into a prisoner that is).
my theory is well that grindelwald is lying and the pheonix was actually his I mean it would make sense
just a guess really
I thought that too! I liked Queenie a lot because it was actually nice to see a female portrayed like that but not villainized or whatever but I guess not :-( I hope it was the tea.
This is Star Wars prequel territory.
The whole discussion about Grindewald lying is heavily undermined by the movie narrative. It's a final shot of the movie with rising phoenix. Sure, they can tell he's lying, but from the movie standpoint that will be the biggest cop out, I think, ever. Think of that, climax of the movie is just a lie. I think they are obliged to go with this reveal and double down
Well if done well then it won't be the biggest cop out but probably the best way to showcase the power of Grindelwald when it comes to manipulating things. If done right that is.
"I thought we obliviated you."
"It didn't work!"
They are familiar now with ignoring what came before. This movie had some great performances, but was such a terrible mess otherwise.
Exactly! These kind of reveals are only a lie if it happens midway through the movie and the twist is that it was a lie and it's revealed by the end.
@@orkiso1 This is totally right, I meant to say that. Misleading is fine if done throughout one movie. Film should stand on its own without backtracking.
If he is lying, then this movie is even worse. “Hey remember that finale? Not important!”
How is EVERYONE completely missing the fact that this movie established Queenie being mentally unstable? She is clearly not making the right decisions because of her misguided judgement. It's a lot like Credence actually. It comes from being alone and isolated her whole life aside from her sister whom they haven't been in good terms for the past year. Jacob called her crazy twice in this movie. She lost it when he didn't walk with her. I love it, I absolutely love they took her to this direction.
It's also very clear that she is very lonely
I think it's actually toying with the thought of her being crazy. Because Jacob does refer to her that way, I think Rowling was clever to lead us to believe it is true. However, one thing Roth, Spencer, and Keely missed mentioning is that Grindelwald is a "great wizard" because he clearly already has The Elder Wand. It makes me think that Grindelwald has actually pulled a sheet over Queenie's eyes with his magical power, because her turn was so abrupt from that moment they were in Paris together. If this is true, then when Dumbledore eventually defeats him, and Queenie is still alive to be there, she will come running back to Jacob...which would make it all okay...? Lol
its very tragic just like snape, it was about wanting to be a part of something because they cant fit in
Movie had some faults but I actually feel that Queenies arc is the best part of it. Very believable to me. She will do anything to be with Jacob and she feel Johnny Depp can help her.
I was definitely shocked that she actually went with him.
I kinda half think that JK Rowling writes in these plot holes so that the fans can suss it out for her, then she can just tweet "you're right!" to the one she likes the most.
@Zoe Kouf you either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself turn into Voldemort.
Does the aberforth v albus v grindelwald duel make sense now w/ the blood vial thing ?
Nope, the duel between those three happened when Ariana died, which was caused because of that Duel.
But here in this movie it's shown that the blood pact was made before that happened because both Albus and Grindelwald were on good terms.
Which makes no sense at all.
Madhukar Nandagudi that’s what I thought but wasn’t sure because I’m more familiar w/ the movies than the books. Thanks for breaking it down, I knew that part made no sense. It sounds like a lazy plot device to keep dumbledore from confronting grindelwald too early in the series.
I always thought Grindewald was fighting Aberforth and Albus was trying to stop it.
@@jchacho6335 it started with a confrontation between Aberforth and Albus because of how Albus was ignoring his family and how Aberforth had to give up on his career to look after his sister. This angered Grindelwald and cast cruciatus on Aberforth, so yeah Albus did try to stop but it eventually ended up being a three way duel.
Still doesn't explain the blood pact of this movie though, because before the duel Grindelwald and Albus were on good terms.
Maybe they made the blood pact when they parted ways, just because of how they still felt about each other
6:39 - Albus Dumbledore isn't the one who sent his sibling to the abusive orphanage keeper. It was Corvus Lestrange who sent his child to protect his son (also Corvus) from Mustafa Kama.
However, Leta swaps out Corvus for Credence who survives the sinking ship.
As for his parentage, the woman on the boat with Credence might be an aunt, but certainly cannot be Kendra Dumbledore.
I was confused when she said that...did these fools even watch the movie?
Chamber of secrets is a 10 time more interesting movie than this .
Omg yes
Grindewald can’t fight Dumbledore, so he has been looking for someone powerful enough who can. He went to NY looking for the obscurial to do it. It turned out to be Credence. He is now manipulating Credence to fight Dumbledore. Credence is not a Dumbledore but now thinks Albus is keeping him away from his birthright on purpose. Also, if Credence ‘s mother was a witch, she would have gotten off the boat magically. Leta’s nanny couldn’t because she was a half-elf and didn’t have magic. So, his mother couldn’t be Albus’s aunt.
Why is no one mentioning that Newt is on Autism Spectrum? The portrayal is amazing
the whole blood thing, is just a way for the producers to straight wash this.
A romantic attachment would’ve felt more human? Maybe? I dunno, but I wish they didn’t do the blood thing.
@@loretta5653 Yeah, it would have been a great moral crisis for Dumbledore to face. Can he face the man he loves knowing he might have to kill him? Or does he choose to avoid that heartbreak, knowing Grindewald might kill others in the meantime?
The World War II vision is supposed to serve as an analogy to Grindelwald being the Wizarding equivalent of Hitler. J.K. Rowling has already stated that it’s no coincidence Grindelwald and Hitler both fell in 1945. Both men used propaganda to gathering a following. Grindelwald has blonde hair and blue eyes-two traits of the Aryan “master race,” Grindelwald has an undercut which is the standard haircut for the Hitler Youth, both Grindelwald and Hitler adopted an ancient symbol as their sigil. Grindelwald has a prison that he uses to hold his enemies, but eventually ends up there himself: Nurmengard. This is a parallel to Nuremberg that eventually held trials for Nazi war criminals.
This is just my interpretation. I’m assuming the reason for the WWII vision is because Grindelwald’s rule is eerily similar to that of Nazi Germany.
but she already did it in a very smart way with Voldemort and his blood-racist dictatorship, it's feel repetitive to be going the same way again.
Mey I thought Voldemort was done so much better. Grindelwald is not a badly done character but you’re right, it seems like we have been there and done that.
Mey I wouldn’t say it was already done with Voldemort because he’s such a weak villain. He’s poorly written, he’s one dimensional, he has weak character motivations, and a questionable plan. Grindelwald actually has some nuance and complexity to him. Voldemort was very one dimensional. He was a loose canon who wanted to be immortal and wanted to kill a teenager to achieve this goal. Grindelwald at least has a vision. He does what he does because he believes he’s right.
If done well, the idea that this sort of thing keeps happening because good people become complacent and allow these types to keep rising can be a powerful message.
This is the same writer that also made it canon that Voldemort had a child....nothing she does these days makes sense. The twist was terrible.
Why could Voldemort not have a child? Bellatrix was his most loyal follower, it makes sense.
I'm with Spencer - I could watch a whole movie of Newt and Jacob having adventures with fantastic beasts. Those were all my favourite parts of both this and the first movie. I think Newt may be my soul mate, honestly.
Plz JK... Leave Dumbledore and his family alone. Why can't we just get movies about Newt going on adventures and chasing beasts,How about Hogwarts four founders, or exploring the other Wizarding schools...just leave the Harry Potter characters alone 😭😭😭😭
Yes, I think they should either focus on Newt’s Pokemon journey, or like Keely suggested, do an anthology series. How long can this franchise bank on fans love of the Wizarding World? Was I excited to see Hogwarts? Of course, but there’s going to be a point where I start not caring anymore due to these poorly written movies.
Edit: I think they should bring in a new director for the third movie, same as you guys, Azkaban is my favorite Harry Potter film, and the change of director clearly brought something fresh to the franchise
Pokemon :-)
The thing I loved about the first 4-5 HP books/movies was that at least half the story was dedicated to relatively inconsequential character and world building. A portrayal of everyday life in the magical world which allows us to truly form a connection with the characters. With both FB films so far I've felt that was totally missed, we just jump straight into the action as if it's a superhero movie.
Loved the great discussion!
I never thought for a moment that Credence was a Dumbledore. I was just, “There’s Grindelwald trying to manipulate him.”
The woman in the book is implied to be a previous Headmistress at Hogwarts, just like when Arthur Weasley gets attacked in OotP, though she probably had another portrait in Dumbledore's office that he could use to contact Nicolas Flamel. After all, we know that wizard portraits can travel between their counterparts, and Dumbledore has been shown to use both Phineas Nigellus Black as well as Everard and Dillys for communication.
Edit: Also to remind you guys, cuz you seem to have forgotten, Ariana was 5-6 when she was attacked by the Muggle boys, and 14 when she died.
So about Queenie and Grindelwald and why she would still choose to go with him, the speech that Grindelwald gives before he forces them to choose sides was all about how he doesnt hate muggles. He says he does not hate them, he does not wish to kill them, that they are not opposites but only different, they are not lesser being but simply have a different purpose, and Queenie hearing that while Jacob is standing next to her is vital bc she's now thinking that Grindelwald does have a solution to her problems, that he can actually bring about change that will allow her to be with her significant other without prejudice
@ 37:25, the screenplay book also states the ship sank in 1901, so it's not the Titanic. Which also would make Credence around 27/28 years old in the movies and possibly Dumbledore's unknown son if Albus was 45 in 1927? Also, Credence was travelling with his aunt.
I love Harry Potter (books & movies), I loved Fantastic Beasts 1. This film felt bloated, contrived and unfocused. I really wanted this franchise to tie in to the existing HP universe, but at this point it feels like it's going the way of The Cursed Child, which although it's _supposed_ to be canon, most fans reject and ignore for how fanficcy it is.
The scull said "Für das grössere Wohl" which means for the Greater Good in German. I am not really sure but i think i remember cause i am german and i watched the Movie in English and was really confused to see the it in German...
pineapplemusic Nazi black magic!!!
Why would that be confusing...? The movie takes place in Europe and in France, which are near Germany. The skull could have been from Germany. Also, his name was Grindelwald - were you also confused by that?
@@draum8103 I wasn't sure if it was on purpose or if they just had the German Version and the english language (like sometimws if i watch something in English there is still German text but this time it was in the cinema so i do not know if it is still the case)
Haven't seen the movie yet, but after seeing this, did Jk Rowling try the stephen king method of filmmaking during his cocaine phase? What is this movie?
Nah, I think she is in her Anne Rice stage of "thinking she doesn't need an editor because everything she writes is perfect" when it's really just a garbled mess.
They can actually filter their thoughts. It’s called occulemency. It’s in the Order of the Phoenix.
@ 35:30, the screenplay book actually states that it is Minerva McGonnigal at Hogwarts in 1927 and the earlier flashback scene from Leta.
This is my first time watching your show, and I must give guys kudos! I think your very professional and credible ,
Your studio set shows sophistication and good taste!
Plus I truly enjoy your panel discussion! Brilliant and well done !
I haven0t seen the movie yet and I don't mind it enough to avoid spoilers... I've listened to this video thinking 'wtf' every 5 seconds.
As for the whole coincidental visit to Paris thing - was is that, though? Credence was in Paris, therefore Tina went there as well. So did Grindelwald, because getting Credence was his plan. Queenie wanted to be with her sister, and Newt was supposed to go to Paris to get Credence on Dumbledore's orders. Those aren't coincidences. Heck, I wouldn't even call this convoluted.
100% agree
I liked both movies but I just don't understand why putting so little in the first one and so much in the second. The flashbacks at least could fit in the former.
Good discussion as always
Even GRRM, who quite framkly is a lot more throrough and well versed in history than JKR, gets help from others to help with producing books and stories away from the central narrative - and he is not that involved with the scripts of the TV series. And he worked as a TV script writer! Rowlings really needs to step back and give the big ideas and have others help with the movies.
So hey, just a couple details! I imagine that Queenie didn't read Grindelwald, or even that one female follower of his, is because they were using Occlumency. Remember, Snape could hide his thought from Voldemort himself. Queenie is a pretty powerful Legilimens, but I think that she doesn't have a lot of ways to go around Occlumency. Also, everyone went to Paris because that's where Credence was. After all, Grindelwald and Tina went there for him. Newt and Queenie went there for Tina (Newt also going for Credence). Jacob went there with Newt for Queenie. And the Aurors went there for Grindelwald. I can be complex, but still, it kinda makes sense.
This movie should be called Fantastic Beasts: A Series of Random Events
Okay lemme start from why Newt Scamander is the chosen one by Dumbledore... Because Dumbledore choses people who always do what they're asked to without questioning him, Snape Harry Hagrid so many more people ... Dumbledore asks for trust and choose people who'll do the right things always.... Newt Scamander was sent to New York by Dumbledore because Newt knows how to extract an obscures.. plus he doesn't hate his brother or he isn't insensitive to all the girls because he just can't feel empathy to his fellow Humans like he does to the beasts. He is tries being more expressive with Tina but fails to.... And talking about Queine ... She puts Jacob under confundus charm so he could love her... She makes him her beast of burden.... Even though he loves her back... The direct comparison can be made to Voldemort's mother Merope who jinxed Tom riddle Sr. With love potion and married him and then when he was finally sober he refused to be with her and that's why Voldemort was born without love... Another example is what Severus Snape did for Lilly Potter... He wanted dark lord to kill James and Harry so he could love her...... JK's message is pretty clear... Good people make bad choices in love... Newt Scamander is the best character in the movie because he knows who he is and has a very strong character and a back story to back his actions.. Even in Hogwarts he refuses to go home in Christmas just to nurse the beasts.... He wants to do the same with credence.... Dumbledore cares about credence and hence wants newt to take care of him...... Whereas Leita Lestrange choice of swapping that baby makes sense because she is a Lestrange..... They feel people are deplorables... That runs in the black family too... Even Corvious Lestrange would treat women as deplorable.... So it's makes perfect sense why Leita Lestrange would swap and kill the baby.... Finally Nicholas flamel is the only one who knows how to protect the entire city because he is one of the most powerful wizards in wizarding world... Plus ofcourse to show no one is as Powerful in this universe as Dumbledore or Grindelwald except if you're 650 years old!!! Hope you do a bit of homework because the movie is on point with JK's universe... Just we don't have the next book to understand why something's are important like we had with HP movies....
I agree with a lot of what was said but the fact that everyone was in Paris didn't bother me at all. I thought it was pretty clear that most of them were simply following Credence for various reasons and others were following some of the people who were following Credence, so it made sense to me that they would all end up at the same place.
My McGonagall theory is that it it is Minerva who has gone back in time with a Time Turner to teach in this generation probably at Dumbledore’s direction (possibly as the Transfiguration teacher until he is moved to that position), and that Time Turner is the one that she gives Hermione in Prisoner of Azkaban
I saw someone say that this Obscuris in Credence is the same Obscuris in Ariana.
While it doesn't say Ariana had an Obscuris, dumbledore basically says it. Says an Obscuris is caused by a lack of love, he then said I didn't love my sister enough. Which caused her death. So I think it says it basically.
All of them being in Paris was not a coincidence at ALL, though I feel like people are letting others' confusion cloud their own memory: Credence had relocated to Paris from the first film; Yusuf Kama and Tina were the first to arrive and stayed the longest in Paris, searching for him. Grindelwald escaped, and followed Credence, prompting Dumbledore and the Ministry to send their own delegations each, to find Credence before the others (which happened to be Newt for Albus and Credence and Leta and their battalion of Aurors for the Ministry). The Ministry also tried to recruit Newt but disagreeing with their violent policies, Newt declined.
Queenie comes to Europe under the excuse of following Tina, though really forcibly eloping with Jacob to London, where it isn't illegal to marry Muggles, and the ensuing argument results in her actually going to find her sister to Paris. Jacob of course, accompanies Newt as they know Queenie is going there to Tina and their goals are pretty much similar, searching for the two sisters for personal reasons.
They all have solid, narrative reasons to go to Paris, so where is the coincidence? Any Sherlock-ian whodunnit has just as complex a plot as this film, the only issue is the choppy editing, and sometimes, complete removal of scenes providing context.
what I though about this, is that the setting didn't need to change to Paris, not just for the box with the family tree. They all could have been doing the same things in London and it wouldn't have affected the story. I don't think they are actually confused how is everyone at Paris, more like why.
@@Raening Lestrange is a French pure-blooded family, that has descendants settled in Britain. It would be extremely odd and nonsensical for them to have their birth records, Mausoleums and family tree in Britain, when they have their own Ministry and governmental institutions in their homeland. Not to mention that their nationalities are a source of pride for most aristocrats. The Malfoys for example, wouldn't even consider relocating to Bulgaria because they see themselves as British wizarding royalty and pride themselves on it.
Credence suspected that he was a Lestrange, and thus traced his own origin to Paris. Everyone else simply followed him there, it's just that the placement of the scenes and cuts would make it a little jumbled for people not paying 100% attention.
As for the Queenie arc, while her love potioning Jacob as seen in the beginning is OOC (love potion abuse is how Tom Marvolo Riddle was born, and the cause of his rough childhood), her giving her allegiance to Grindelwald makes sense. She's internally conflicted between her love for Jacob and knowing that this can never happen in magical society as it currently stands, and Grindelwald plays on this to pray on her. He tells Queenie what she wants to hear, even if it's in half-truths because she is receptive to what he's saying. It's even possible her legimancy skills are less effective because of her internal conflict, making it even easier for Grindelwald to win her over.
In Potterverse, isn't Grindelwald the mastermind behind WWII?
I thought H.Y.D.R.A. was behind everything.
Sorry if someone has already answered it but according to the "crimes of grindelwald" screenplay that came out Friday, the women in the book that flammel talks to is the headmistress of ilvermony and the women on the boat is credence aunt.
"Hey, congrats, now you know! You're a Dumbledore! Now go and kill this Dumbledore for me!" - Grindlewald gains nothing from this if it's a lie. It could just be the truth as he sees it.
I just watched Fantastic Beasts the Crimes of Grindelwald, and quoting Dan Murrell, it was a "chore to watch". It's not an awful film. Out of the Fantastic Beasts movies so far, this is the one that feels more like a Harry Potter movie. Seeing Hogwarts grace the big screen once more is such a glorious sight for anyone who loves movies. And Jude Law is entertaining as young Dumbledore. That's where a lot of the magic in this film resides. I just wished there's more of the magic than just in the Hogwarts sequence.
What makes Crimes of Grindelwald a chore to watch is J.K. Rowling's script. It might be Fantastic Beasts 2 by name, but it feels like I'm watching 3, 4 and 5 at the same time. As a result, I got a film with a random series of events that never come together as a cohesive whole.
It wants to be a movie that focus on the core four who spends the whole narrative separated from each other (Newt, Jacob, Tina & Queenie), Dumbledore & Grindelwald relationship, Leta Lestrange backstory and more backstories with Nagini and Credence, but because there's just so much to cram in such limited runtime, all of these plot threads become underdeveloped. By then, I get a lot of reveals and twists and turns that kind of felt like it came out of nowhere since it never takes its time to build these moments up.
6/10
I think that the point of not attacking right away was that they didn't want to feed into Grindelwald's propaganda that the Aurors would attack his followers when they were simply listening to a speech, since at this point I don't think it's clear (to them) that Grindelwald's followers have done anything more than listen to him and help him spread propaganda. If they attack, they prove him right and anyone who is on the fence is likely to be tipped towards Grindelwald's side, which is what happens when his mole kills the girl in the crowd
Your discussion was very interesting. Tina was in Paris because she was on an assignment looking for Grindelwald...Queenie went to Paris to look for Tina because she felt so lost after Jacob wasn't willing to marry her....Newt and Jacob went because of Credence and Queenie....the character I feel will. have a huge consequence in the narrative is Nagini...Credence abandoned her and I think that she will end up killing Credence for his betrayal.....the reason she was so afraid at the meeting was her experience of abuse and treatment from the purebreds...maybe Credence was a manifestation of Dombeldore's sister after being attacked by the smuggle boys.....she gave birth to an obsecurial....
That was my first thought as well, but then I realized I think they were talking about ALL of the other characters. Like Leta and everyone else who was at the rally at the end.
When they showed those WWII images, my heart broke when Jacob said "another war?" Bc hes a vet, he has already seen and been a part of a war and now hes being told that it's going to happen again. Only this time, hes more involved than just digging trenches
18:16 KEELEY THANKYOU FOR PUTTING THIS INTO WORDS
I have a question. What is up with Grindelwald and the snake stuff? He went to durmstrang so he can't possibly be familiar with slytherin imagery.
Also, I don't completely conform to this theory but I can't help but wonder if Queenie was enchanted at the end, just like how she had enchanted Jacob to propose to her.
I do agree with Spencer that Grindelwald and Dumbledore are OP at this point. Grindelwald is a legilimens, an occlumens, a seer, a silver tongue and overall a master manipulator- he could totally make Queenie do a 180, especially in the fragile state she was in. It just comes back to Keeley's point that these behind-the-scene details belong in a book format. It's how the fans have been watching the HP movies, too. A LOT of important plot points are brought up in HP movies without any explanation, but since the general audience has read the books, they're able to fill those details in themselves.
For the crazy titanic theory, Credence was born in 1901 so I think that's surely out of the question.
I wouldn’t have guessed that spencer is the potterhead “bro” on the screen junkies team. That’s really endearing.
Oh man this was exactly what I was looking for. I wanted a video to talk through all the spoilers so I didn’t have to go see this movie :/ Great discussion as always!
Something that also bothered me was that Leta’s fear was Corvus sinking in his white sheet or whatever, but we see that shot from the eyes of the “mom”. Leta wasn’t underwater so how did she know what that looked like?
The ship cannot be the titanic because on the day the titanic sang the water was said to be completely still and in this movie the sea is rough and the boat gets turned over by a rouge wave. So maybe the ship these magical babies are on is a ship specifically carrying magical families.
My guess on the obcurus is that it was Ariana and as she died, Dumbledore took it with his grief, but he was an adult and had remorse, so he passed the obscurus on someone else like a dark twin.
Credence is a nobody that just happened to be there and be taken by Leta on the sinking boat instead of Corvus.
Dumbledore says that Obscuruses grow when the host is deprived of love, just like depression and that love could destroy the Obscurus, at least that's what he hoped.
You didn't want the Grindelwald ark to have anything to do with WW2?
Too bad that the last duel between him and Dumbledore happen in 1945 and that Grindelwald has basically the same ideas than the Nazis... Of course there was going to have some connection to WW2... It was doomed to happen.
And besides the idea of preventing WW2 might be a lie. For what we know he could actually want to make it happen so to have the ultimate pretext to take power over No Majs... All that Grindy says in his speech is a lie. ANd using small bits of truth beneath lots of lies is a well known manipulation tactic.
Look at what Dooku did in Star Wars AotC. He said the truth to Obiwan, that there was a Sith lord manipulating the Senate, he just omited to tell that HE was his apprentice... Obiwan doesn't even believe him about the Sith Lord because he doesn't trust Dooku in the first place. And so Sith manipulation stays in the shadows despite being announced clearly and in the next movie, the Jedi let themselves be caught by surprise...
And also, the point of Grindelwald is more like to prevent to the Muggles to use these weapons against wizards. But turning Muggles against each other is a good way to weaken them in the first place before initialing a full planetary conquest by the Wizards.
People are seriously overrating J.K.Rowling as a writer in general. She wrote a entertaining and hugely successful series of books for kids/young adults that grew with their audience over time, and I really liked reading them. But let's be honest here - the success wasn't just because of her literary genius. There are a huge number of moving parts that contributed to the HP series taking off, they can't all be pinpointed; and I don't think warping the image of Rowling into that of some kind of messiah of fantasy literature does anyone any good.
As for the Hogwarts scenes, they really didn't blow me away. Even when Hogwarts was shown in the trailer, I thought "well, here they are going for the nostalgia grab, eh?" and I had the exact same reaction when I saw the scenes in the theater. What happened at Hogwarts in this movie wasn't even all that important in the end, they just stuck it in there because something something people like recognizing old things they love. They touched on this in their discussion here, but I think it really says a lot about the strength (or rather, lack thereof) of the new characters and story when they have to rely on nostalgia that heavily in the second film already.
Could Dumbledore's blood that was in the locket have been able to summon the phoenix and that is why it came to Grindlewald so he could lie to Creedance?
1.- I loved this analysis of the movie, both telling the mistakes and the beauty of the HP world.
2.- Keeley was a great guest
3.- It's the first time I hear ALL of my arguments said outloud in a SJ video.
I believe the World War 2 imagery was either Grindelwald misunderstanding what he's seen and thinking that the war would be against the wizards if they don't act quickly, or he was spinning the visions of WW2 to make the public think it would be against the wizards. That's the way I read it at least.
Josh Moeller I disagree. I took it as the wizards could be innocent bystanders and that man would destroy the earth and the wizards could prevent it for the humans own good.i have a problem that they don’t really show how humans and wizards exist aside eo.
The woman in the book is Eulalie "Lally" Hicks. You can see her name, at least partially, under her "image" in the first shot she appears in. She is apparently a professor at Ilvermorny and, presumably, a member of a proto-Order of the Phoenix that'll probably be officially revealed in a future film.
Agree pretty much with everything, except with the "Dumbledore is already the Dumbledore we know at this point"..point. I think that, yes, he has most of the traits we know from the original franchise, BUT probably one of his most defining moments was the final duel with Grindelwald, think about it: from where we are know on the story to the moment where they duel, Grindelwald will do such horrible things and, in Dumbledore´s eyes, irredimable things, that he's going to have to kill his love for the guy in order to stop him...and at THAT moment is when he becomes the sage, wise and magnificent Dumbledore that we know. What do you think?
I saw this movie yesterday, thank you for making a spoiler review it makes things a bit clearer and to realise that I am not alone not understanding some things in the movie.
Dumbledore is using Queeni as a mule (like Snape) that would be one of the twists in the upcoming movies
I don't think so, she's really not a smart character.
This video just really healed me and I'm grateful to you guys for doing this, and for bringing Keely because she was absolutely delightful! I hope Joe can offer his 2 cents as well when he sees the movie.
Hold up, Grindelwald literally says "your brother wants to kill you" so yes it is explicitly said
Tina was working in Paris looking for Credence, and when Queenie was upset over Newt lifting the love spell over Jacob she went to Paris to go see Tina (she first goes to the Paris Ministry). Newt and Jacob go there to follow Queenie, and Newt wants to see Tina. Theseus and Leta are in Paris on Ministry business. It's not that coincidental.
Thanks, guys. This helped. I haven't so loved a move with which I had so many problems since the Star Wars prequels. There are 3 more movies planned, so Rowling has time to dig herself out of some of these mistakes, but some can't be unseen. I'm in for the full ride, but . . .
Bless you guys, Roth, Keeley and Spencer: this was such an informative and fascinating discussion! I just watched the movie tonight and I felt so disappointed and confused. I was so happy that you essentially felt the same way I did about a lot of the movie. I wasn't a big fan of the first Fantastic Beasts, so I wanted to love this one or at least like it more than the first one...it was sadly not the case, for all the flaws that you have mentioned about this movie. And to make matters worse, one of my silver linings for this movie was the Mirror of Erised scene which, like Spencer, I thought WAS a confirmation of Dumbledore and Grindelwald's relationship, but after listening to Roth and Keeley, I feel totally played. They WERE trying to have it both ways by still keeping it open to interpretation so as to not piss off the more homophobic or anti fans. I know there's more movies on the way that might change things, so I can only continue to hope that the next one is better, in every way. I'm almost ok with them retconning the Queenie development and the Credence reveal because I hated those choices. I love the world JKR created; I just wish these movies lived up to it.
I actually believe that Grindelwald was telling the truth. Many people seem to doubt that Credence could be Albus Dumbledore's actual brother based on the fact that it's established in the books that Kendra Dumbledore died long before Credence was born and that Percival Dumbledore was sent to Azkaban and eventually died there. But the answer is actually quite simple. Like, it's even explained several times in FB2, hidden in plain sight, how Percival Dumbledore could in fact have secretly escaped from Azkaban. He simply escaped by flying. On the back of a phoenix. Which, as pointed out several times in the film, "will always appear to a Dumbledore in times of need".
It is possible that what happened next is that he went on to change his last name to Graves, possibly by marrying a woman by that name, with whom he would father a son - Aurelius. Then, after Aurelius was born, he took his family on a ship to New York in order to start a new life for them, and he himself became an auror for the MACUSA. Then either he pursued Grindelwald in order to avenge the death of Ariana, or Grindelwald pursued him, but in any case the two would eventually meet, and Grindelwald would obviously recognize him as Percival Dumbledore and discover his secret, including the fact that he had a fourth child named Aurelius (by that time believed to have died when the ship sank, but later realized by Grindelwald to have survived and that the person he had known as Credence Barebone was in fact Aurelius), and ended up killing Percival and taking on his identity by the use of polyjuice potion.
I'm quite amazed that no one else seems to have figured this theory out, as, at least to me, it's the one that by far would make the most sense. It would basically explain everything, and tie all the pieces of the puzzle together. Like, from a storytelling perspective it would make zero sense to have the final big reveal in the movie be a complete lie or even a half-truth, or to not have Credence's true identity be something that makes him closely related to some major, well-established character after dedicating an entire movie to figuring it out (for example it would be completely pointless if he actually was Corvus Lestrange V, since that would make him related to no one important but Leta, herself nothing more than a minor side character unimportant enough that they could so easily kill her off once she'd played her part in telling Credence's backstory. It would be equally pointless if he was just some random cousin or something to Dumbledore, or just a complete nobody who just happened to serve as the new host for Ariana's obscurus, as some people are actually speculating).
It also wouldn't make much sense if the character of Percival Graves turned out to just be a random, insignificant nobody and that neither he, nor the fact that he just so happened to share his rather uncommon first name with Albus Dumbledore's father while acting as a sort of father figure for Credence, or for that matter the fact that they chose to cast an actor who just like Richard Harris and Michael Gambon happens to be Irish to play him instead of an actual American, would have any deeper meaning to the story. This theory would also explain the actual significance of the repeated line about the phoenix's relationship to the Dumbledores, how Percival Dumbledore could have had another child while still being out of the picture during the events of the movies, and why Grindelwald would be the only person still alive who knew about it. Or is there anything I'm missing?
Why is everyone talking as if the franchise just ended?? Credence being Dumbledore is a cliffhanger. They just told you he's Dumbledore and not lestrange, the movie never said how Credence is Dumbledore. Also Albus is 60 years younger than when we see him in Harry Potter. Of course he won't be the same. And remember, Bagshot even mentions it that the Albus Dumbledore we know isn't who he truly is. So it fits that narrative too.
That's not a cliffhanger, that's just ending the movie prematurely
@@zachfakelastname It's a Empire Strikes Back-ending with Han Solo frozen in carbonite and Luke I'm your Father-moment. There are three movies after this one!
Queenie is a MASTER legitimance, but ANYONE who is great at oclamancy can block her. We learned this in Order of the Phoenix. Grindelwald can block her out.
The world war 2 thing makes the story complex and doesn’t make it bad to want to root for Grindelwald to me. It made me think about who how these people would look at a murder if they are fighting for what you believe it. It is intriguing
When Lita died. (I personally think that she was saying I love you to Newt) so she died to save Newt which I think means Newt has her sacrificial magic surrounding him. And Grindlewold can't harm him.
I think Grindelwald says to Credence that "his brother is after him" and then says he's a Dumbledore, implying that Albus is his brother. Perhaps half-brother, but brother nonetheless.
huge fan of SJ. Keep it up!
As someone who has never read a Harry Potter book or seen a movie, this review is awesome. It feels like in a conversation of a foreign language, only catching hints of common words. 😄