Did "Grindlewald"'s Critics Watch the Same Movie I Did?

Discuss past, present, and future releases. This is the place for news, reviews, and your 'best' lists.

Moderators: Buscemi, BarcaRulz, Geezer, W

Post Reply
User avatar
NicodemustheSage
Fletch
Posts: 650
Joined: February 25th, 2012, 11:17 pm
Location: Allen, Texas
Contact:

Did "Grindlewald"'s Critics Watch the Same Movie I Did?

Post by NicodemustheSage »

WTFF? I just DO NOT get the collective "meh" "Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindlewald" received from reviewers and audiences. It ain't just good; it's freaking SPECTACULAR. Might be my favorite of all TEN Jo Rowling "Harry Potter" / 'Wizarding World's films: It's narratively rich, the characters are complex and interesting, the acting (especially by Eddie Redmayne, Jude Law, and Johnny Depp) is excellent, it has real thematic weight and import, and, best of all, it broadens, deepens, and enriches the world she created like NO other film in the series before it. I'd put it up there with the top films in the entire series: "Azkaban", "Goblet of Fire", "Half-Blood Prince", and the two "Deathy Hallows" films. Just unreal. It deserved SO much better from critics and theatergoers! This is, hands down, "The Empire Strikes Back" of the "Wizarding World" saga. I really CANNOT say enough about "Grindlewald"; its box-office performance is the REAL crime. It's even made me give a shit about Johnny Depp's career, again.

Anyone want to set me straight? Because I just. Do. Not. Grok. This. At. ...ALL.
I remain, as always.

User avatar
Buscemi2
Mad Max
Posts: 6664
Joined: July 25th, 2017, 9:13 pm
Location: Neither here nor there.

Re: Did "Grindlewald"'s Critics Watch the Same Movie I Did?

Post by Buscemi2 »

The Harry Potter franchise should have ended once Harry beat Voldemort. Rowling got greedy and began her obsessive quest to rewrite every single detail of the franchise (I've seen comparisons between her and George Lucas and I believe them) while trying to expand the series in the most soulless way possible. Warner Bros. only enabled her quest by deciding her terrible screenplay to Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them was filmable and expected audiences to keep buying into something without giving us a reason to.

If Rowling and Warner Bros. had wanted this to work, they should have done these things:

1. Make Dumbledore the main character instead of a random stand-in. Newt is just Eddie Redmayne playing himself again.
2. Have Steve Kloves write the script based on an outline provided by Rowling. Yes, a lot of the more obsessive fans hate Kloves but would anyone outside of them want to watch an eight-hour movie where every random character has a five minute scene?
3. Get someone who understands history outside of their own country and not sound like Lars von Trier about it because they're still pissed off about something that happened over twenty years ago (I'm not sure who's worse, Rowling or Trey Parker).
4. Make use of the good ideas. I want to see Dumbledore as a cowboy. The concept of wizardry against extremist religion could have worked. What about the underground world were there are no laws? What if there's a Cosa Nostra of wizards? Rowling presents concepts but fails to flesh them out.
5. Lastly, why does Grindlewald need to be another Voldemort? I now I understand the reason for Colin Farrell turning into Johnny Depp but it's not necessary. Samantha Morton's character was a more interesting villain but Rowling never developed the character past "crazy religious nutter".

I never read all the books (the later books could have easily been 300 pages instead of the tome-sized monstrosities they became) but I feel I have better ideas than Rowling does. For one, they don't need to be set in the 80's for the most random reasons (though Dumbledore vs. Thatcher could be a fun fanfic).
It's like what Lenin said...I am the walrus.

User avatar
undeadmonkey
Leon
Posts: 4413
Joined: October 22nd, 2009, 1:39 pm

Re: Did "Grindlewald"'s Critics Watch the Same Movie I Did?

Post by undeadmonkey »

I really liked it too, much better than the first. Then again Half Blood Prince is my favorite potter film.

I'm not saying there werent flaws, and i agree partially with boosh, there are a lot of amazing ideas that just never seem to go anywhere. On the other end though, i think the small battle at the end was an easy top 5 most awesome battles of the whole wizarding world.

Wifey was completely opposite, she loved the lightheartedness of the first one.

Friend was annoyed at Queenie's sudden change of heart, which i admit was sudden and odd, but i'm sure she's just been 'imperiused'... 'imperiated'... cursed

User avatar
Screen203
Clark Griswald
Posts: 1170
Joined: December 1st, 2018, 3:38 pm
Location: Mullholland Dr.

Re: Did "Grindlewald"'s Critics Watch the Same Movie I Did?

Post by Screen203 »

I thought it was terrible, but I hated the first one too.

The reveal about LeStrange came in way to late into the movie, in my opinion. But the story in general made absolutely no sense.
It's not destroying. It's making something new.

Image courtesy of -
https://nerdist.com/annihilation-shimmer-ending-explained/

User avatar
Shrykespeare
Site Admin
Posts: 14273
Joined: September 12th, 2009, 11:38 pm
Location: Glendale, AZ

Re: Did "Grindlewald"'s Critics Watch the Same Movie I Did?

Post by Shrykespeare »

I saw the first movie in theaters. My mistake was not rewatching it even once before seeing Part 2. As a result, I was completely lost for most of the movie. So was the wife.
Happy 60th birthday Jet Li! (4/26/23)

User avatar
Geezer
Axel Foley
Posts: 4967
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 11:22 am

Re: Did "Grindlewald"'s Critics Watch the Same Movie I Did?

Post by Geezer »

Thanks for this. Completely agree with your OP.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man. - The Dude

Post Reply