Pokematic Reviews Fantastic Beast The Crimes of Grindelwald

There's a new movie in the Fantastic Beasts franchise. I went to see it, and it was an interesting experience.

If it's not a good game or Catholic...who do you call?...why Pokematic "hi."

If you didn't know, I'm a fan of the Harry Potter series (see Truth About Harry Potter, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 and Part 2 reviews, Everything Wrong With Cinemasins Harry Potter, and Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them review). I also really enjoy "world building stories" for franchises I enjoy; yes, the story of a boy wizard who has to take down the most evil wizard in the world is quite interesting, but we only ever really see the school with very brief glimpses at the world J.K. Rowling built. The whole "here's the world outside of Hogwarts" thing along with "here are skilled adult wizards who aren't still learning magic" thing is what made me really like the original Fantastic Beasts movie. So with this new entry in the Fantastic Beasts franchise, I was really interested, so lets see what was in store for us.

So with this movie, I'm very torn. Like, super SUPER torn as to if I like this or not. On one hand, I think it's a great world building film that showcases some familiar characters long before Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone with excellent world building, but on the other hand it's a real mess of a film. And this isn't just me saying "should I be a good critic and say it was bad, or should I be a good Harry Potter fanboy and say it was good?" No, I'm not about that; I give you my opinion and don't try to please a fan group whom I belong to by being disingenuous. No, I am really REALLY torn as to if I liked it or disliked it. So let me break this down.

As far as the like goes, I really liked the world building. As I said earlier, the Harry Potter books and movies are good, but they only really take place at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry (or forests if you're Deathly Hallows). We briefly see the world outside Hogwarts when they go to Diagon Alley, or the Ministry of Magic, or other single areas, but we don't really see what magical people do outside of going to school, or how they interact with Muggles/No Maj's. With Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, we see the adult world of Witchcraft and Wizardry, and it's great. In this movie, we get more of that. We're back with Newt Scamander, the eccentric wizard who has a real fondness for magical beasts, and his fantastic beasts and animals. He travels to various different real world locations (like France) to deal with the story's conflict. We also have a return of Jacob Kowalski, the American No Maj who befriended Newt and fell in love with Queenie, who provides some good comic relief and acts as the audience for the exposition of world building with how the different magical things work. So far all of this is really awesome. We also get duels between experienced adult wizards, which makes for some REALLY awesome fight scenes, because "they're experienced adults; these aren't kids yelling simple spells at each other that don't cause major damage." The stakes are much higher in this film compared to pretty much the first half of the Harry Potter series (and maybe all the way up to book/movie 6).

Now there's the call backs. I'm not spoiling anything when I say a younger Dumbledoor is in this movie (he's in the trailers). In the Harry Potter movies Dumbledoor is this old and powerful mentor figure to Harry who knows a great deal but doesn't really do much beyond imparting some words of wisdom at key points in Harry's learning (at least in the first 4 books/movies), and is rather distant in terms of his relationship with Harry (again, at least for the first 4-5 books/movies). With this Dumbledoor, while he doesn't do a whole lot either (side character, not main character), not only do we learn more about his past, we also see him in a "less super powerful" light. Yes, he still has this air of power, but it's not "I'm the head master of this school, I do whatever I want because my word is law." He's a friend of Newt, and they talk as equals. He disagrees with authority figures, and he's not really able to say "you have no power here, get lost." There are also brief mentions of his past that were only discussed in the books, which was a nice touch to the loyal fans. We also see at least 2 other familiar names, just either with a younger face or a face for the first time. We also see many major plot elements from Sorcerer's Stone show up as cameos. That was really cool.

Now for the bad, which SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
So this movie is about...I really don't know. It starts out as a story about tracking down the escaped criminal Grindelwald, who escaped in transport, and that lasts for a good 10 minutes. Then it changes focus to this "side show freak" (that's what his job was, he worked in a traveling side show as one of the displays) and what his past is, and if he's a "chosen one for evil" person with the Ministry of Magic going after him and trying to kill him. Then it starts going on about Leta Lastrange, who's marrying Newt's brother and Newt was her only friend back in Hogwarts and her story or something. An then it starts talking about Grindelwald and how he's not necessarily evil because he isn't shown hurting anyone maliciously, it's really the Ministry of Magic and Aorer's that are the bad guys. And about 2/3 of the way through the movie I just asked myself "what is going on?" Like, I'm generally really good at following stories, but I just reached a point where I'm just like "isn't this movie about Grindelwald?" Like, OK, I can buy that Voldemort doesn't do much in the Harry Potter series except for right at the ends, and the Harry Potter titles generally didn't do a whole lot with the entry as a whole (the sorcerer's stone was the end McGuffin, the goblet of fire was just something to aid in the tri-wizard tournament, the deathly hallows was a story in a book that gave some hints to what Voldemort was up to but not much, etc.), but to call this "the Crimes of Grindelwald" and have it open as it did was just a little confusing if you ask me. It just kind of goes in too many directions and tries to develop too many character stories if you ask me. It does somewhat come together but I just don't really get it.

SPOILERS OVER.

I don't know, maybe if I watch it again I'll be able to figure out what's going on. I might need to rent it when it comes out on home media. It's really hard for me to say "you should see this" or "you should pass on this." I guess if you're a "serious movie viewer with a critical eye," then you should probably pass on this one. I guess if you're a major fan of the Harry Potter universe you'll enjoy seeing familiar characters and an expanded world outside of Hogwarts and should see it. However, if you're somewhere inbetween, maybe wait for a rental or see a cheap matinee? I mean, I think I got my $5 worth. I don't know. What I do know, is it has been WAY too long since I've been to non-fathom movies. This has been Pokematic, signing off, and bu-bye.

Pokematic Reviews Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

If it's not a good game or catholic...who do you call?...why Pokematic "hi."

I recently saw Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, and let me say, it's an interesting adventure. Let me start by saying, this is not a "Harry Potter movie," this is "a movie that takes place in the Harry Potter universe." What does that mean you ask? Well this is the same wizarding universe that Harry lives in, but it has absolutely nothing to do with Harry. In fact, Harry isn't even born yet, or even his parents for that matter. This is a movie about Newt Scamander, the author of the text book "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" that Harry and his friends use in the books and movies, and his New York adventure.

So in this movie there are 2 main stories with 1 overarching sub-story. The first story is about Newt and his fantastic beasts. He's an English wizard that comes to New York for fantastic beasts. He has a magic suit case that is larger on the inside than it is on the outside (it's magic, roll with it), and within he has basically an entire zoo. After a run in with wizarding customs and a no-maj (aka "muggle"), he loses some of his creatures and he has to track them down. In addition to the general mayhem that magical creatures cause, there is an obscurous that is reeking havoc. An obscurous is a witch/wizard who is suppressing their powers normally because they are embarrassed of their magical powers, and their suppressed powers culminate into a dark force. Since Newt loves magical creatures, and an obscurous is sort of a creature, Newt gets involved with finding this obscurous. As for the sub-plot, there's this group calling themselves "New Salem" who believe witches live among them and must be destroyed. They're mostly conspiracy nuts, but with witches and wizards living among them, they're kind of a threat. In terms of story, it's pretty run of the mill. It's not an epic hero's journey like Harry Potter, but it's pretty good.

Then there are the characters. We have Newt, who is an eccentric magic creature lover. He kind of reminds me of Haggrid, except he lives in a time when people don't like magic creatures. It's kind of interesting how he has to prove to everyone the benefit of the fantastic beasts. Then there's Tina, the wizard customs official and former auror that joins Newt in his adventures with the fantastic beasts. She is kind of a love interest, but it's not a heavy love interest. Then there's Queenie, who is Tina's sister and can read minds. She just kind of comes along for the ride, and to deliver exposition. Since she can read minds, the exposition is delivered in a rather interesting way. Instead of her asking "who's the girl on your desk," she's just like "the girl on your desk, she was your best friend, wasn't she?"  It's kind of hard to explain. But then there's my favorite character, Jacob Kawalski, the "no-maj." I don't care who you are, Jacob is the most relatable character in the movie. Why? Because unlike other times no-maj/muggles appeared in the films, they show up for a minute and then get obvliviated if they learn about magic, or don't do anything. Kawalski on the other hand, sticks around for the movie with full knowledge of magic, and everything is new to him. As we see all these magical events happen before our eyes, Kawalski is expressing the same wonder that we are expressing. Sure, he doesn't do much in terms of aiding the story, but he captures what we feel.

So the story and characters are a little lacking. But what makes this good? 2 words, "world, building," and 3 more words, "suspension of disbelief." First lets start with the setting. All the other Harry Potter books and movies take place in the fictional wizarding world of Hogwarts, or in London and the forests of England. With the latter, eh, you see one forest you've seen them all, in my opinion, so it's not that exciting. As for London, well I've never been so as far as I'm concerned, "London, England" could be an elaborate rouse and doesn't actually exist since I've only ever seen it second hand. With the setting of New York on the other hand, I've been there; I've seen the Statue of Liberty, I've walked through Central Park, I drove down neighborhoods that still have the 1920s architecture. Plus, unlike the books and movies that primarily take place in the very distant wizarding world, this takes place primarily in New York. It really helps with the suspension of disbelief. The other thing is the time setting. Unlike the Harry Potter books that take place in contemporary time, with the wizarding world using medieval technology (because magic screws up electricity or something), this movie takes place in 1920s America. All the men wear casual suits, and all the women wear the flapper attire, and all the no-maj technology is stuff I've seen in history books, period piece movies, and museums. It's not like the "wizard robes" and "quill pens" that are common in Harry Potter that I can't relate too. I can go to a flee market and see what is seen in this movie (no-maj wise), so it's much easier for me to suspend my disbelief. Plus I've seen far more "physically realistic 1920s movies" than I have "physically realistic medieval movies," so again, easier to suspend disbelief. Oh, there's also the whole "no-maj" thing. I'm an American, we would say something like "no-maj" over "muggle." All the terms are "American," so it's easier for me to suspend my disbelief than with all the British slang in Harry Potter.

So what about world building? Well when I was a kid I couldn't really comprehend a "wizard world where everyone has jobs involving magic." All I could really imagine is "jobs at Hogwarts" or "jobs in Diagon ally where you sell things to magic children for Hogwarts." With this movie, I saw more of the adult wizarding world. It wasn't all "here's a boarding school, it's magic, but you don't see anything outside it often that isn't our no-maj/muggle world (the Dursleys)." With this movie on the other hand, we see magic customs, magic travelers, and what happens when magic is exposed to the no-maj world. It's really interesting. Then there's the fact that these are all experienced adult wizards. With the Harry Potter franchise, spells and magic got more complex as the characters got older, but it wasn't until the last books/movies did we really see what magic was capable of. This is to be expected since we watch the characters grow and mature in Harry Potter, but it doesn't do much for world building. However, since we're watching experienced wizards and witches, some of whom are experts in their craft, the magic is much more fast paced and epic. This leads to far more entertaining magic sequences. Then there are the fantastic beasts, a component of the Harry Potter franchise, but never fully explored until now, which really adds to what the wizarding world has to offer. And last of all, I NEED to talk about the execution. Now wizarding law and order was never completely avoided in Harry Potter (book/movie 3 is "The Prisoner of Azcaban"), but capital punishment wasn't explained from what I remember. I guess I never really thought about it, but if someone asked I would have guessed a quick "avada kadavra." I won't go into detail since this is REALLY a sight to behold, but this is probably the wizarding equivalent to "lethal injection." The movie is AMAZING world building.

So do I recommend this? Yes, yes I do. Fans of the Harry Potter franchise will enjoy the extra world building. New comers will enjoy the amazing world and easy to digest story (I saw this with my grandpa and he enjoyed it even though he's only seen maybe the first couple of movies). Seasoned critics may not enjoy it seeing that it really is just world building with simple stories, but that's perfectly fine for most people.

One thing I heard is that this is going to be a series of films. I'm not sure how I feel about that, or what that will mean. If it means "we're going to be adapting the story of other text books," I'm all over that. I'd love to see a "potions and herbology" move that showcases the start of potions and herbology, and all the cool things that come with that. Or even a "history of Hogwarts" movie since the brief bit we got in one of the main series books was quite interesting; Grifendore only wants the brave, Slytherin only wants the pure, Ravenclaw only wants the smart, and Hufflepuff wants everyone, and it's not like Grifendore was meant for heroes and Slytherin meant for villains, it just kind of worked that way. As for more adventures of Newt, ehhh, I think I've had enough of him. It's not that I don't like him, but he doesn't offer enough to carry a film franchise, at least from what I've seen so far. Oh well. We'll see. Well, this has been Pokematic, signing off, and bu-bye.