Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them Spoiler Free and Spoiler Review

The Wizarding World of Harry Potter returns with a spin-off that's a prequel? Hmm, let's hope it doesn't end up like George Lucas's prequels. Welcome on this fine day to Dallin: Film Fanatic as I review Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. As with all my past reviews, this will be both a spoiler free and spoiler review. If you're new here, let me explain how this process works. I will give you my thoughts on the film that have no spoilers in it, but then I will give you a warning before I go in depth on the film as we talk SPOILERS! In the spoiler portion, I'll talk about all the main characters, the magic, the score, and since this film is called Fantastic Beasts, I'll most definitely talk about the beasts in the film, or at least my favorite. I'll also give you a recommendation on whether or not you should see the film and, if so, I'll also give you my opinion on whether or nor you should see it in 3D. I'll try not to be as long as my Doctor Strange review, but I will cover all the things that I need to talk about in this review. Before we begin, here's the trailer, which is below, to give you a taste of what the film is about. After that, we'll get cracking on the non-spoiler review.



Non-Spoiler Review

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is an amazing movie. Not perfect, but still amazing. It's an exciting and magical film that minus a few problems is a worthy continuation of the Wizarding World that Harry Potter started. But beyond that, you can't really compare this film to any of the Harry Potter films. Why? Because where the Harry Potter films were burdened by the fact that they had to translate the story from the page to the screen, Fantastic Beasts doesn't. It's based on a manuscript that is written by our lead character in this film as he divulges information about all the magical beasts that he's encountered, but that's it. There's no story, no character elements needed, it's just about a bunch of facts about the animals. So the film is really liberated by not having that same set of problems that the Harry Potter films had. It creates its own story full of its own characters, minus a few continuity necessities. Now a lot of critics have basically classified this film as Harry Potter for adults. Is that true? Yes, to some extent. It focuses on adult characters and has really dark themes. Like really dark. Some parts were almost like they were straight out of a horror film. But beyond that, it still has that wondrous element that still makes you remember why you fell in love with the Wizarding World in the first place. The actors did a great job with their respective characters. Some more than others I have to say. In full honesty though, I think that this had a big cast and some characters didn't get the necessary screen time to develop. But David Yates, who did the last four Harry Potter films returns here and picks up right where he left off. J.K Rowling wrote the script herself and she did her job in spectacular fashion, although a few tweaks needed here and there. Now should you see this film? If you're a hardcore Harry Potter fan, of course you should see it, but if you're a casual Harry Potter viewer and/or reader or if you are new to the Wizarding World, then, to be honest, this is gonna be foreign to you at points. The filmmakers made this film assuming you at least saw the eight Harry Potter films before this so if you haven't read the books or seen any of the films, you have to make sure you do those things and catch up before you see this film. Also, should you see this in 3D? Aside from one or two shots in the film, it doesn't seem like the 3D is necessary. If you want to do it, do it, but I don't think it's needed for this film. It's not like Doctor Strange, where you have to see it in 3D.

So go and see Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Have a great time. We're now entering the SPOILER portion of this review now, so this your last chance to bow out and save yourself that way I don't spoil this movie for you. We're gonna go character by character and then we'll go from there, but I warned you so "CONTINUE AT SPOILER RISK!"

Eddie Redmayne as Newt Scamander

I really liked Newt. He was a really great lead for this film. It was a little hard to understand what he was saying, because he doesn't talk very clearly and he's a little like Matthew McConaughey, where he takes these gaps in his sentences for a while and he completes them a little later. Other than that, I really liked his British accent, I thought that was really well done. I appreciated that he cared deeply about these creatures that he was carrying in the case, although they were dangerous. I mean, take a look at Jacob's neck. I liked his interactions with the beasts though. I laughed at the way he caught them, but the part where he was trying to catch the Erumpent was really bizarre. I was weirded out with that scene. The inside of his case was AMAZING! I loved that it had different climates and habitats for all the different creatures he collects. His little workspace with all his books and vials for different medicines were great and they were well used. He also knew his stuff and put it to effective use. He was really resourceful. I'm glad that they acknowledged the existence of the book by having Newt go off and starting to write it. I thought that was a fun easter egg to include in the film. I know that he'll return for the sequel though, but part of me feels like he doesn't need too. We met him, we got to know him a bit, I don't see where else they can take the character, although they could flesh him out more. I'm curious to see where they'll take this character for the sequel.

Dan Fogler as Jacob Kowalski

Jacob was my favorite character in the entire film. In a film full of wizards, witches, and beasts, I can't believe that it was this Muggle, not No-Maj, I prefer Muggle to No-Maj, that stood out from the crowd. Jacob was a great guy. I loved his bakery. The way that even though he had been obliviated, which kinda ticked me off by the way, he remembered the beasts that he'd encountered throughout the film and he designed his pastries the way the beasts looked. That was great. I thought that his reasons for wanting to open a bakery were very good. He wanted to bring warmth and heart to a world that was becoming more mechanical. It's like today where the world is becoming more technology centric. Also, if he needs any employees, he can hire me. I'm a good pastry maker. Beyond that, he was really funny. The way he was in awe every time someone cast a spell, I loved the face he made. Oh man, I hear you. I want to be a wizard too. The romance that he had with Queenie was ok. It worked. There's really nothing to say about it. It's interesting though that in this time, social relationships between wizards/witches and muggles are banned. Romantic and non-romantic. They touched upon in the film that the wizarding community in the US is nothing like the UK and I would like that to be explored upon and maybe those restrictions are lifted at the end of all this. I'm fine if the romance continues, as long as Jacob comes back for the future films, I'm okay. But though obloviated, it looks like his memories had returned at the end when Queenie visits him at his bakery so I want to see if that's true. Maybe he can become a wizard.

Katherine Waterston and Alison Sudol as Porpentina "Tina" and Queenie Goldstein

I had mixed feelings about the Goldstein sisters. Let's start with Porpentina. I didn't like her in the beginning of the film. She was so quick to turn Newt in, when he's clearly new to New York, he doesn't know all the rules, and he's trying to make sure that his creatures don't make a big mess of things, although, in her defense, Newt wasn't doing a good job of that. But she was basically stalking him, waiting for him to screw up and make a mistake. Granted she was doing her job, wait she wasn't, because she was demoted and is no longer an Auror at the beginning of the film. I didn't like the shoot first, ask questions later problem that the people that run MACUSA apparently have. Everyone was so quick to accuse Newt and didn't bother to hear him out. It was really not smart of them. But as the film progressed, I began to like Porpentina, or Tina for short, as the film went on. She wasn't my favorite character or anything, but she was good. As for Queenie, she was okay, but I had a few problems with her in different parts of the film. Her romance with Jacob, as I said, was ok. It wasn't spotlighted a ton and that was because there were a ton of things that were going on and they couldn't focus on all of them, but for what they did with it, was done well I have to say.

Colin Farrell as Percival Graves

First of all, we have to talk about the fact that Graves is actually Grindelwald in disguise. I was so surprised to find that out. Did you see that coming? I didn't. I was told by my brother that he saw that coming a mile away, but at times I doubted that. Apparently, Johnny Depp is the actor that's going to be playing Grindelwald and I didn't think that was a great idea both creatively and business wise. Johnny Depp isn't exactly an actor that is well received nowadays and for David Yates and company to cast him in this type of role, it's just a weird decision. I would've thought that J.K Rowling would've chosen another actor. She doesn't seem like she would cast an actor like Johnny Deep in one of the roles. A pivotal one no less. Especially since she was so particular about which actor she wanted as one of her characters in the Harry Potter films. Although here's something to figure out. I wonder why he gave Credence that Deathly Hallows necklace. Maybe it has something to do with Dumbledore. After all, Dumbledore's wand is a Deathly Hallow. We'll see what happens with that. As Graves though, he was a bit like Newt, in that he talked very slowly and sometimes stopped in the middle of a sentence and waited a bit to complete it. He talked very quietly at points so there were times where it was difficult to hear him. But he was really good. I liked him as the villain. The scene where he was interrogating Newt was awesome. I liked the magic he conjured. I was really surprised that he could conduct lightning. He was really menacing throughout the film, which you expect from a villain. For him to then turn into Grindelwald, I got even more excited, because we've barely scratched the surface of how menacing he could get. Although, if Grindelwald posed as Graves, is there a real Graves out there? If you recall, when Barty Crouch posed as Mad-Eye Moody, there was a really Mad-Eye Moody, so does the same go for Graves? Although, Grindelwald doesn't seem like the person to make a mistake like that. He probably killed the real Graves and just assumed his identity. I don't know, we'll probably find out in the future films.

Ezra Miller as Credence Barebone

I really liked Credence in the film. He was horribly mistreated by his "mother." She brutally tortured him and I felt very sad for him. I don't know why he stayed though. Probably because he had nowhere else to go. I questioned the guys existence at first. He didn't really do much, except to be the silent guy who was continually dumped on. He was not only mistreated by his "mother," but by everyone else. I was just waiting for him to do something that helps the story and what do you know, he did. I was so surprised that he was the obscurus and not the freaky little girl. That's where my horror move element come from. The song that girl was signing was FREAKY! Speaking of the obscurus, I loved the idea of an obscurus. The idea of suppressing your human form and becoming this full on black cloud of destructive magic was a great idea. I just liked his raw power as that being and his rampaging through New York was kinda cool. I was kinda disappointed that MACUSA killed Credence. They didn't try to talk him down or arrest him or find some way to change him back, they just killed him, although I don't believe that he's dead. Why would Ezra Miller, who's a huge fan of Harry Potter, get so excited about being a part of the Wizarding World, only for his character to die in the first movie? No, I think he'll be back for more eventually. He'll most certainly be back.

MACUSA aka Magical Congress of the United States of America

I didn't like the way that MACUSA was portrayed in the film. It looked so great with the moving paintings, the clock that tells what's going on, the building or headquarters looked amazing. But I didn't like the people running it. Seraphina Picquery was, with all due respect, a terrible president. She didn't ask any follow up questions, she was like "Get out of here Tina!" and didn't ask why she was there or anything. It also very clear that an employee can just sentence two people to death without the president approving it or let alone even knowing about it. She then of course, along with her employees, killed Credence without any questions or anything. It was just like "Oh there's something dangerous, let's destroy it." With the state of MACUSA right now, of course Grindelwald is going to easily break out and escape. I hope they fix that in the future.

The Beasts

I loved the look of the beasts in this film. They looked breathtaking. In the film, some of the beasts were better than others. The three that I liked and the ones that were the standouts were, for me, the Niffler, the Bowtruckle, and the Thunderbird. The Niffler and the Bowtruckle looked adorable. Despite being a frequent thief, the Niffler was hilarious when it was stealing all the jewels in the jewelry store. With Newt chasing him and making an even bigger mess and the Niffler giving his mischievous look and knowing what Newt was going to do and disappearing at the last moment to avoid its capture, it was all hilarious. I loved every scene the Niffler was in. As for the Bowtruckle, it was so innocent, I sympathize with it when it got mad at Newt for trying to sell it to the Goblin guy at that bar, because who would want to sell something like that? It was just so cute in the film, it became one of my favorite creatures in the film. Now the Thunderbird, I laughed when it was going to be set free in Arizona. You would think that an animal like that would go to a different environment, but no, it prefers Arizona. The other beasts weren't memorable. They were there for one scene and then gone. I was pleased with their unique looks and when you look at them, Jacob did do a good job with making their pastry counterparts.

Score
Composed by James Newton Howard

The score was really good. It had a few bits and pieces of the original John Williams score, but beside that, what James Newton Howard did was very unique. It's got that period fell for which the film is set in. It also features the darker tone. Prominently, might I add. It also has the wonder part that tie in with the Beasts presence in the film. I was fine with a few pieces of the original theme being in it. It worked. Especially since that they did a play of the Harry Potter opening with their own logo, which made me smile. It and the entire score was magical! (pun intended)

Conclusion

So that's my review of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. What did you think? What was your reaction to the film? Write those thoughts down in the comments section below as well as what you would like to see done on this blog. I've got more posts planned that are going to come very soon so you can look forward to that. Thanks for reading, I'm the film fanatic, bye-bye.