Score: B-
Directed by David Yates
Starring Eddie Redmayne, Johnny Depp, Jude Law, Ezra Miller, et. al.
Running time:
Rated PG-13
Long Story Short: The Crimes of Grindelwald continues the new Harry Potter-universe saga begun in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. The introductions of Johnny Depp and Jude Law are a double-edged wand: while great presences in themselves, they also herald the full transformation to all-out wizarding war. Redmayne's Newt is still an awkward fit for the story arc, and though there are other interesting characters and dynamite action aplenty, it's too much and too familiar. Worth it if you're a big Potter fan or need a shot of action, skip it if not.
The dangerous dark wizard Grindelwald (Depp) is on the loose once more. The magical authorities of the world are distressed that he is rapidly gaining followers as he demands that wizards stop hiding from Muggles (non-wizards) and take control of the world. Newt Scamander (Redmayne), who helped stop Grindelwald last time, has little interest in these politics, yet he is being confined to England unless he agrees to help the search for a mysterious young man called Credence (Miller). So Newt, along with his American friends Queenie (Sudol) and Jacob (Fogler), head to Paris, along with an array of other interested parties. Much depends on the hunt for Credence, an outsider: his past holds answers to dark wizarding secrets, and his future could determine the fate of the world.
The Crimes of Grindelwald has quite a large cast, returning most of the characters from the first film and adding some major new players, too. Eddie Redmayne is once again the lead as Newt Scamander, a shy wizard who prefers the company of magical animals - and once again shows that the character is a questionable choice for the role. Redmayne's performance is fine, although he's forced to dispense with much of the fun quirkiness from the first film. However, the character is just swallowed up by the serious, foreboding nature of the plots. While Newt gets the most screen time, everyone else fights for supporting roles to varying degrees. Newcomers Depp (technically not new, but had only a cameo last time) and Law are great for their roles as the two most powerful wizards, Grindelwald and Dumbledore. Law in particular captures his famous character's charm and slight mischievousness, along with the arrogance of a younger man. Zoe Kravitz also does well as a new character with a familiar last name - Lestrange - who gets just enough to become interesting but could have used more. Of Newt's three returning friends, Alison Sudol's Queenie gets the biggest part, an interesting turn which should be more fully explored in future chapters. Dan Fogler and Katherine Waterston are essentially reduced to cameos, unfortunately. And while everyone and the plot is so focused on Credence, Ezra Miller himself doesn't actually get a lot of screen time, nor a chance to convey change during this pivotal time for the character.
The Crimes of Grindelwald is an entertaining movie with top-notch production values and some neat characters; unfortunately, it's also overstuffed and accelerating the blurring of a franchise. The second in a five-film series, this film wastes little time in moving past the relative "frivolities" of the first and honing in directly on what is sure to be the main theme of the series, the war against Grindelwald. The set up recalls both the X-Men franchise, in having an angry group of "others" wanting to rise up and rule over all, as well as Star Wars, in having a powerful yet naive individual torn between a good, if untrustworthy, establishment and a bad outfit that promises him freedom. Combined with constant callback to the Potter-verse's own canon, it's all a little too familiar even if the faces are new. There are plenty of side elements present to potentially deepen the narrative and its characters, from Leta Lestrange's school past with Newt to Queenie and Jacob's odd but adventurous future, from Nagini's mysterious past as a "freak" to Tina's achieving her potential as an auror. But there are too many interesting strands that get started, and ultimately washed out by the main action. That action, it should be said, is often quite thrilling, though. Grindelwald's escape at the beginning is particularly exciting, thanks to an attention to detail and brought to life through astounding CGI. The "Beasts" in the title - whose exploits were the highlight of the action in the first - are given only a token role here, but digital magic does provide a useful visual role in the climactic showdown, and choosing of sides, between Grindelwald and the Ministry (good guys).
***
Fantastic Beasts, part two, is a finely made, entertaining film, but still a disappointment, both as a single film and as a signal of what the rest of the series is likely to be. While the original Harry Potter eventually built up to the same level of bombast, the fact that the children and their school remained at the core kept its heart and its grounding. Newt is undoubtedly to be the unlikely hero type, to go with his friendships with Tina, Queenie and particularly Muggle/No-Maj Jacob, but at least so far it is a hollow replacement for Hogwarts. We don't need another epic series within the Harry Potter universe. If I was in charge, I would instead release unrelated, one-and-done films that live within that universe. It would allow for so much freedom, although they should skew to the lighter, yet still emotionally resonant, side. It would keep the franchise fresh, and with so much lore, you could still callback to interesting elements here and there to have fun tie-ins. Anyway, we have what we have - if you're a HP fan and you want some blockbuster fun at the theater, go for it. If not, there will surely be better options this holiday season.
By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=58960320
No comments:
Post a Comment