New ‘Fantastic Beasts’ has magic but lacks polish

    JK Rowling’s latest entry into her “Wizarding World” franchise hit theaters a few weeks back, and immediately the reviews were mixed at best. I saw “Fantastic Beasts” upon its debut in theaters two years ago and was mildly disappointed. However, after a subsequent viewing, it has moved up to the prestigious ranking of “fine.” So going into “Crimes of Grindelwald,” my expectations were minimal.
    The story picks up a few months after the previous film with Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) still under arrest within the Magical Congress of the United States of America and being transferred to the British Ministry of Magic’s custody. During the prisoner transfer, Grindelwald is aided in his escape by a disguised MACUSA employee.
    Four months after that, Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) is requesting the ban on his international travel be lifted, but the Ministry only will allow it if he agrees to become an Auror (magic federal agent, essentially). He refuses as he feels their opinion on magical creatures and anything unknown is to shoot first and ask questions later. Also there’s something about his brother’s fiancé being in love with him from childhood in there too, which makes Tina (Katherine Waterson) upset because she’s crushing on him pretty hard.
    Jacob (Dan Folger) and Queenie (Alison Sudol) are back as well, and she’s very unhappy at the societal opposition to wizards and NoMags (non-magical people or Muggles as they’re known in Britain) marrying. There are a couple more storylines to follow as well, but they’re somewhat spoilers.
    It’s a lot to unpack.
    Here’s what’s good about it: Jude Law as Dumbledore. Didn’t know I wanted to see a young Dumbledore, but I have and it was delightful. There are a couple magical creatures that are cool, but for a film called “Fantastic Beasts,” there sure weren’t enough of them. The magic is also pretty exciting, but we’re getting further and further away from the magic we learned from the books and original films, and now it’s just turning into “we can do anything because we’re wizards.” Which is fine, but it goes against the lore Rowling established in the Harry Potter books/films.

The full article is available in our e-Edition. Click here to subscribe.