FANASTIC BEASTS PART 2: Grindelward wasn't doing the only crimes in this film.
So here as promised (whether you care or not) after many more drinks is my review for 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindelwald' and buckle yourselves in because it’s another rough one.
A bit of background, I’m a huge Harry Potter fan and grew up
like every other millennial surrounded by the books, story tapes and magical
movies. As a universe it had such a profound affect on my adolescence that it's
hard to imagine what it would be like without it.
I found the first FB film very enjoyable, with its explorative
insight into the history of JK Rowling’s world; The HP nerd in me was very
happy. However, like many other movie franchises these days (The Hobbit) the
one stand alone good film, probably should have been left there. The incessant
need for money driven sagas that bores the pants off audiences halfway
through an epic (read: lengthy) trilogy rather strips the joy from what makes
the original stories so compelling. JK Rowling, renowned for her fast paced
plots and pithy dialogue, is here reduced to dragged out story lines and
laborious CGI fight scenes (We get it, there are evil wizards with any number
of flourescent streams of magic erupting from their wands).
The big question for Harry Potter fans everywhere is
this: Do we bother to invest ourselves in yet another franchise when
we already know the formulas? Is it worth it for the inevitable
anticlimactic closure we now get?
My biggest issue with this film wasn’t the laboured delivery of
the lines many of the actors used to justify tension which was then
subsequently lost when ... they ... all ... talk ... like .... this ..... in
.... every .... scene.
It also wasn’t the incomprehensibly complicated plot with
several family trees colliding with little foundation or explanation and if
there was some sort of explanation I had probably zoned out at this point.
It wasn’t even the painfully obvious plot hole fillers to make
the sequel. IE Credence conveniently surviving being blown up in the the first
film thus allowing for exactly Same plot line for the
second. Where’s the obscurious?
Also they desperately needed the brilliant Dan Fogler back
so at the beginning he miraculously recovered from being obliviated as “it only
removed bad memories” ..... sure ... not convinced.
No it was none of these things, the biggest disappointment of
this movie for me was the vast difference between the kind of magic seen in the
first ever HP film and the ridiculous “epic magic” in 'Fantastic Beasts Part 2.'
In the first film all the magic used was small, intricate and
beautiful. Charming little spells that made objects fly, spoons stir and cats
transfigure into teachers (Yes I know she’s an animagus). This film however
just went way to big with huge blue and red fire dragons coming out of wands
and huge VR type WW2 landscapes which was just a bit too dramatic and un Harry
Potter like in my opinion.
I did like Jude Law’s sexy Dumbledore although I don’t know why
the powers that be felt the need to skirt the homosexual issue. Dumbledore and
Grindelwald should have kissed right? Are we really not ready for that?
After saying all this I’d love to at least pretend I’ve put it
to bed now, whilst inevitable and feverishly preparing to watch the next,
probably shocking installment.
I’d give this film 5.7/10
Next up as requested by Hebba I’ll give my review of Birdbox and
watch this space because it might be my first positive review. I do love Sandy
B.
I’ll also be adding my reviews to my new blog and I will
hopefully starting a Podcast/YouTube channel reviewing films with my friend Sam
Adamson, so keep an eye out for that.
I've been Christopher Whitmore, thanks for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment