At the end of the first film, the powerful Dark wizard Gellert Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) was captured by MACUSA (Magical Congress of the United States of America), with the help of Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne). But, making good on his threat, Grindelwald escaped custody and has set about gathering followers, most unsuspecting of his true agenda: to raise pure-blood wizards up to rule over all non-magical beings. In an effort to thwart Grindelwald’s plans, Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law) enlists his former student Newt Scamander, who agrees to help, unaware of the dangers that lie ahead. Lines are drawn as love and loyalty are tested, even among the truest friends and family, in an increasingly divided wizarding world Show Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them launched a brand new adventure through the past of the Wizarding World of Harry Potter. All great fantasy film franchises must follow up by going backward right? Prequels are so hot? The first adventure of Newt Scamander and friends was a nice little standalone fare that left possibilities of a continued adventure that could go in any direction they’d love to take it and seemed to resonate overall pretty well. Its sequel, The Crimes of Grindelwald features the return of some familiar and added bonus elements, but tries a little too hard to jump into a more connected Harry Potter narrative as opposed to just being comfortable and exploring what the previous adventure had established. The Crimes of Grindelwald’s biggest crime seems to be the script is overplotted, sloppy (Its shocking how bad the throw away set up for Ezra Miller’s character is still alive is) and completely convoluted, bound and determined to shock us with a grand reveal it holds onto until the closing moments. And once revealed, it very much rivals the grand twist at the end of Order of the Phoenix which is pretty much an “eh”. But instead of that one being a prophecy we’d figured was the whole point of the series from the first book, this one feels quite forced and begging to add some sort of meat to chew on that really isn’t all that tasty when it comes down to it. In keeping us from this reveal, we are given a big red herring through the journey of this film that winds up in one of the most over-expositioned, convoluted explanations I’ve ever seen put into a major franchise film to a point that is almost infuriating for having us lead through both this false flag and the ridiculous explanation of what it really was. While my gripes feel big, its still pretty entertaining on its core levels. The returning characters are still charming and I’m happy to see them back together and not tossed to the side in favor of the more familiar ones. There are also some pretty cool action beats in the film (The opening escape sequence is a series highlight) and a heartbreaking moment that works and should have been given the attention to its buildup instead of all the setups for a red herring and building the reveal. There is still an enjoyment in the effects, magic and adventure aspects of the film, but we could be nearing the end of that flashiness and demanding something more compelling in the next journey. One thing the film must be commended for is that it doesn’t crutch on Dumbledore’s addition to the story. He’s a player, albeit in a more cameo-friendly fashion. Jude Law is absolutely wonderful here and has you eager to see him play a bigger part in future films. Not a popular opinion probably (I’m judging a performance here, not a person), but Johnny Depp is terrific here. This is his best “goofy-looking” role in a blockbuster since maybe Sweeney Todd. His Grindelwald is stealthy in his eeriness and you can also understand how convincing and compelling he may be in finding followers. The finale of the film offers a grand moment for the villain and Depp does not disappoint. Its his underplaying that really is valued here and one of the strengths of the film. David Yates and J.K. Rowling’s latest addition to the Wizarding World franchise is one that is overcooked and underwhelming, but still manages to entertain on its more basic levels. A shorter film would have been more forgivable, but this one has an insanely long runtime. I’m going to give this one the benefit of the doubt as I still enjoyed watching it at a minimal level and feel this is a film that we might have to wait and see how the whole thing plays out before properly assessing it. Was it a necessary bridge or ripping off of a bandaid to get things in place for a great run or was it the quick dissension off of a steep cliff? Time will tell, and I’m still looking forward to the next Fantastic Beasts adventure.  Video
Disclaimer: Screen captures used in the review are taken from the Blu-ray disc, not the 4K UHD disc.Encoding: HEVC / H.265 Resolution: 4K (2160p) Aspect Ratio: 2.39:1 Layers: BD-66 Clarity/Detail: Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is a step in a less interesting direction that the creators maybe thought too necessary to tie things in to the original mythology. Overall, its solid entertainment, but is it a one-time view kinda entertainment or one that you can continue to return to as most of this series has been. I’m not so sure yet, but we’ll see as the series continues and completes. This 4K Ultra-HD Blu-ray however should be returned to for its terrific sight and sound and also packs a nice load of informative bonus features to boot. This is the best way to own it for sure, whether its day one for you or not depends on how much you enjoyed it. Is Fantastic Beasts 2 hit or flop?Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald grossed $159.6 million in the United States and Canada, and $495.3 million in other territories, for a total worldwide gross of $654.9 million, against a production budget of $200 million. Why didn t Johnny Depp play Grindelwald?Johnny Depp's Grindelwald character was recast in Fantastic Beasts 3 due to controversies and legal cases surrounding the actor, including allegations of domestic abuse made by his ex-wife Amber Heard. Which Fantastic Beasts movie is better?The film that reintroduced us to the wizarding world (albeit in an entirely new location), Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is by far the best of the three films in the franchise. Eddie Redmayne is phenomenal as the awkward but incredibly brave and kind-hearted Newt Scamander. Is Fantastic Beasts 3 doing good?They're extremely OK, but never truly inspiring or transporting. This third installment is somewhat of an improvement over 2018's dour “The Crimes of Grindelwald,” and it's about on par with the first film in the series, 2016's whimsical “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them,” in terms of pure enjoyment. |
