In 1926, wizard Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) arrives in New York after a global journey to locate and document a wide array of magical creatures. But after an encounter with No-Maj Jacob Kowalski (Dan Fogler), some of the creatures manage to escape from the magical case that holds them. With the beasts running loose, and tensions between the magical and No-Maj communities steadily rising because of the anti-magic cult The Second Salem, Newt joins with Kowalksi and the Goldstein sisters in an attempt to recover his beasts and keep magic hidden from the rest of the world.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is the much-anticipated return to the cinematic world of Harry Potter. Since Harry Potter was such an enormous part of my childhood, and I grew up with the films, I was excited to see more of the Wizarding World on-screen. With J.K. Rowling writing the screenplay, and the director of the final few Harry Potter movies returning, I was confident that this film would be able to capture the same magic of the original Harry Potter series (pun intended). Fantastic Beasts ended up being pretty much what I expected to be, and it certainly wasn't the best or the worst of the films in the Harry Potter universe. In terms of style and quality, the film is consistent with most of the rest of the series; this definitely feels like a Harry Potter film directed by David Yates. One of its greatest assets is that it isn't an adaptation of a book, so it's allowed to exist more as its own entity. I was very glad that there wasn't as much pandering to fans as I expected. The references to the Harry Potter series were fairly minimal, and while it definitely felt like the same world, it felt different enough that the film could stand on its own.
The most interesting aspect of the film is definitely the new elements that it adds to the Wizarding World. J.K. Rowling really took advantage of the different setting and time period; the state of the wizard community in America is much different than what we've seen in other films. The historical setting adds a unique layer of style to the story, and the film explores very interesting subtexts of what magic can represent. There was a variety of new spells and magical abilities introduced beyond simply magic from wands, and there were also (of course) a multitude of new creatures. The designs of most of the creatures weren't very creative - most are just 2 animals combined with some sort of unique physical attribute - but their powers and what personality they were given were creative. This film also presents more perspectives than I expected; we see how the world is perceived by a variety of both wizards and No-Majs, and there wasn't a single wasted character or moment. J.K. Rowling has added a lot to the Wizarding World, and having her write the screenplay was the best way to properly expand the world.
A very important part of this story is the characters, and J.K. Rowling did a very good job of making them all distinct and different. She very easily could have replicated the same dynamic that fans will be familiar with, but a new direction was the best way to go. Newt Scamander worked very well as a protagonist; he was an audience surrogate of sorts, experiencing the differences of the American wizard community as we did. Eddie Redmayne gave a performance that's about as good as any Eddie Redmayne performance; he was quiet, awkward, and somewhat charming. Still, Redmayne portrayed a disconnect with humanity and a deep connection with his beasts very well, and Newt's love for the creatures he's studying is clear. Dan Fogler was fantastic, balancing comedy relief with heartwarming moments of wonder, and managing to make all of it hit home. Colin Farrell gave a very good performance as well, and gave off a real vibe of quiet menace. The Goldstein sisters - Katherine Waterston, Alison Sudol - didn't give performances that were particularly impressive, but the personalities and backstories of their characters elevated them somewhat. The performance that surprised me was Ezra Miller as Credence Barebone (the Harry Potter-iest name ever created). I never know quite what to expect from Miller, but he delivered a very effective portrayal of a damaged, unsettled man.
While I never thought that the story was necessarily bad, it was just never extremely compelling. The plot appeared at first to simply be Newt and his friends hunting down and re-capturing the beasts, but as more layers and sub-plots appeared, they were never introduced in a unique way. Things just kind of happened; most of the character introductions and new locations were very flat, and the way that the story moved felt rushed at times. The details and lore of the world were far more interesting than the actual story, and I think it's a problem that I was more interested in thinking about how the world operated and the stories of different magical elements than the actual story being told. The climax and ending of the film were awkwardly handled, and while the film had one twist that really hit home, the final moment that's really supposed to deliver a shock didn't work at all. The ending of the film fell fairly flat, and didn't manage to nail the feeling of accomplishment that it was going for.
The tone was certainly interesting, sometimes awkwardly switching from light-hearted to fairly dark. It's definitely not a kids movie - as I would classify the early Harry Potter films - because kids might not understand a lot of the things that happen in the film. That's likely a symptom of the film appealing to the same audience that consumed Harry Potter so ravenously, and now that that generation is grown up, the content of the films are a bit more adult. Still, there's enough in this film to appeal to everyone, even if the changes in tone are so sudden that they could give you whiplash. The visual effects were also very inconsistent, ranging from intricate and unique to cartoonish and awkward. Whenever Newt is interacting with a magical creature, there's an obvious disconnect. While the magic in the film looked great, the beasts themselves didn't really hold up.
In the end, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is a perfectly fine movie, and there's not much more to say. It generally hits the right beats emotionally and narratively, but doesn't really excel in any way. It is a worthy addition to the Harry Potter canon, even if it doesn't ascend to the top of the list. Its inconsistencies and shortcomings lead me to believe that there's room for improvement in future sequels, of which there are (for some reason) 4 more planned. J.K. Rowling is clearly capable of crafting a compelling world filled with charming characters, and the opportunity that she now has to flesh out her world is one that has me very excited, Fantastic Beasts proves that the Wizarding World is still alive and well, and still has a lot of stories to tell. What remains to be seen is whether those future stories can live up to the Harry Potter legacy.
The most interesting aspect of the film is definitely the new elements that it adds to the Wizarding World. J.K. Rowling really took advantage of the different setting and time period; the state of the wizard community in America is much different than what we've seen in other films. The historical setting adds a unique layer of style to the story, and the film explores very interesting subtexts of what magic can represent. There was a variety of new spells and magical abilities introduced beyond simply magic from wands, and there were also (of course) a multitude of new creatures. The designs of most of the creatures weren't very creative - most are just 2 animals combined with some sort of unique physical attribute - but their powers and what personality they were given were creative. This film also presents more perspectives than I expected; we see how the world is perceived by a variety of both wizards and No-Majs, and there wasn't a single wasted character or moment. J.K. Rowling has added a lot to the Wizarding World, and having her write the screenplay was the best way to properly expand the world.
A very important part of this story is the characters, and J.K. Rowling did a very good job of making them all distinct and different. She very easily could have replicated the same dynamic that fans will be familiar with, but a new direction was the best way to go. Newt Scamander worked very well as a protagonist; he was an audience surrogate of sorts, experiencing the differences of the American wizard community as we did. Eddie Redmayne gave a performance that's about as good as any Eddie Redmayne performance; he was quiet, awkward, and somewhat charming. Still, Redmayne portrayed a disconnect with humanity and a deep connection with his beasts very well, and Newt's love for the creatures he's studying is clear. Dan Fogler was fantastic, balancing comedy relief with heartwarming moments of wonder, and managing to make all of it hit home. Colin Farrell gave a very good performance as well, and gave off a real vibe of quiet menace. The Goldstein sisters - Katherine Waterston, Alison Sudol - didn't give performances that were particularly impressive, but the personalities and backstories of their characters elevated them somewhat. The performance that surprised me was Ezra Miller as Credence Barebone (the Harry Potter-iest name ever created). I never know quite what to expect from Miller, but he delivered a very effective portrayal of a damaged, unsettled man.
While I never thought that the story was necessarily bad, it was just never extremely compelling. The plot appeared at first to simply be Newt and his friends hunting down and re-capturing the beasts, but as more layers and sub-plots appeared, they were never introduced in a unique way. Things just kind of happened; most of the character introductions and new locations were very flat, and the way that the story moved felt rushed at times. The details and lore of the world were far more interesting than the actual story, and I think it's a problem that I was more interested in thinking about how the world operated and the stories of different magical elements than the actual story being told. The climax and ending of the film were awkwardly handled, and while the film had one twist that really hit home, the final moment that's really supposed to deliver a shock didn't work at all. The ending of the film fell fairly flat, and didn't manage to nail the feeling of accomplishment that it was going for.
The tone was certainly interesting, sometimes awkwardly switching from light-hearted to fairly dark. It's definitely not a kids movie - as I would classify the early Harry Potter films - because kids might not understand a lot of the things that happen in the film. That's likely a symptom of the film appealing to the same audience that consumed Harry Potter so ravenously, and now that that generation is grown up, the content of the films are a bit more adult. Still, there's enough in this film to appeal to everyone, even if the changes in tone are so sudden that they could give you whiplash. The visual effects were also very inconsistent, ranging from intricate and unique to cartoonish and awkward. Whenever Newt is interacting with a magical creature, there's an obvious disconnect. While the magic in the film looked great, the beasts themselves didn't really hold up.
In the end, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is a perfectly fine movie, and there's not much more to say. It generally hits the right beats emotionally and narratively, but doesn't really excel in any way. It is a worthy addition to the Harry Potter canon, even if it doesn't ascend to the top of the list. Its inconsistencies and shortcomings lead me to believe that there's room for improvement in future sequels, of which there are (for some reason) 4 more planned. J.K. Rowling is clearly capable of crafting a compelling world filled with charming characters, and the opportunity that she now has to flesh out her world is one that has me very excited, Fantastic Beasts proves that the Wizarding World is still alive and well, and still has a lot of stories to tell. What remains to be seen is whether those future stories can live up to the Harry Potter legacy.
Comments
Post a Comment