The issue with being a film critic is ultimately you run into that film that you enjoy that most people pan. For me, right now, that film is Fantastic Beasts: the Crimes of Grindelwald. Most reviews that I have seen for this film feature complaints about the tone, numerous subplots, and lack of a driving narrative. And all of those complaints are (somewhat) relevant. However, I don’t think Crimes of Grindelwald is as bad as people are making it appear.
First, a brief summary: Crimes of Grindelwald is the second film in an ongoing series in the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, a series that takes place about 65 years before the events of the beloved children’s series. The story follows Newt Scamander, an expert on magical beasts, as he navigates the tumultuous magical world overshadowed by the presence of Grindelwald, a pure-blood activist who believes that Wizards should rule over those without magic. This second story pits Newt directly against Grindelwald at the behest of Albus Dumbledore, with the help of the friends he made in the first film, as well as new faces from the British and French wizarding communities.
One of the major criticisms of the film is that it has too unnecessary detours and subplots, and, in my opinion this criticism holds the most validity. While the main story follows Grindelwald’s rise to power, we are also confronted by various subplots involving Lita Lestrange and Credence Barebone. Neither of these side narratives has any bearing on the ultimate outcome of this film, and so both end up feeling superfluous. The only defense I have for these plots is that they might be necessary introductions to later narratives as this film series is supposed to continue for another three films. It is (often) possible to rationalize seemly unnecessary subplots with the claim that they may be useful in the future, but that does not necessarily cover the sin that they become in the film as a standalone.
Other major criticisms of the film I find less substantial, in particular the question of tone. To delve further into this topic, I must first admit a personal perspective. I did not grow up watching the Harry Potter films. As such, I do not approach them with anywhere near the same level of nostalgia and fondness that many other have. Therefore, when I consider Crimes of Grindelwald, I am considering it as an entity to itself without drawing as many comparisons to the original series. While it is true the beauty of Harry Potter is the whimsical exploration of the magical world through a child’s eyes, I believe that the Fantastic Beasts series has a different aspect of that world to explore. Notably: this is a series that focuses mainly on the actions and difficulties of adults. While Harry did have to confront Voldemort each year, the driving force of the narrative was still that of a child learning and exploring at a unique school. As such, the characters tended to focus on juvenile problems, act in an immature manner, and justify poor behavior with “good” outcomes. In contrast, actions have dire consequences in the adult world of Fantastic Beasts. Laws that are broken result in actual punishments, not cheerful pats on the head and undeserved house points. History and society have a profound impact on the lives of the characters: a muggle and a witch are not allowed to marry in the American wizarding community because wizards have been deep underground since the Salem witch trials; both Newt and his brother have seen action in the wizarding world’s side of World War 1, and the entire series is overshadowed by the looming threat of both Grindelwald, and the Great Depression and World War 2. Obviously, the tone of this series is going to be darker than that which follows the story of a school child. In fact, I thought this film remarkably well balanced considering the dark elements. While the story takes itself seriously, it also allows itself moments of levity and whimsy. The moments when the story pauses to enjoy the titular magical beasts are heartwarming, as are a few nostalgic flashes of life at Hogwarts before and during the events of the story. Despite the narrative and structural issues with the story, the interspersed moments of levity help keep the story’s pacing solid and do a lot to keep the viewer interested until the end.
Having reviewed the criticisms, I want to also take a quick moment to talk about what the movie does well. This film has some really stellar visuals. The final fight, where Grindelwald singlehandedly takes on a large number of Aurors, and in which the main characters barely escape with their lives, is visually stunning, as are all of the interactions with the magical menagerie. More than the visuals, however, it is the acting that truly brings this film into its own. While I am not a big fan of Johnny Depp, he does an excellent job bringing to life the charismatic, silver-tongued Grindelwald, making it easy to see how a large portion of the wizarding world would be lured by his message of “freedom,” and “compassion.” Eddie Redmayne is again fantastic as Newt Scamander, and the supporting cast is solidly sympathetic. It is Jude Law’s performance of Albus Dumbledore that is standout, however. Law manages to keep the “fatherly mentor” aspects of the character, while also delving deeper into Dumbledore’s immense power, the complexity of his friendship with Grindelwald, and his hidden machinations as a manipulative schemer. His scenes are, without a doubt, the highlight of the movie, and I look forward to seeing more of his interpretation of the character in future films.
In all, while I understand many of the criticisms for Fantastic Beasts: the Crimes of Grindelwald, I personally found the film well worth seeing. The characters are dynamic and interesting, the visuals and magical beasts are stunningly conceived, and while the film struggles narratively, the good pacing helps make up for some of those deficiencies. However, for fans of the original Harry Potter series, who are looking for the whimsy and “magic” of the original, Crimes of Grindelwald is likely to disappoint as it fails to live up to nostalgic expectations.
Well, back to reality
