Movie Review: The Crimes of Grindelwald

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

Director: David Yates

Starring:
Eddie Redmayne, Katherine Waterston, Dan Fogler, Alison Sudol, Ezra Miller, Zoë Kravitz, Callum Turner, Carmen Ejogo, Claudia Kim, William Nadylam, Kevin Guthrie, Jude Law, Johnny Depp

Rating: PG-13

Runtime: 134 minutes

With hesitance, I step back into the Wizarding World. Going into franchise films, I have a rule that helps keep critiques in line for debating nerd stuff later on. Can a movie stand on its own without the need of a prequel or sequel to explain what’s happening in it? A person shouldn’t need to see another movie to understand what’s going on. Instead, the movie can reward those who see other entries without alienating new viewers. Luckily, Crimes of Grindelwald passes the test. The events of the last film merely inform a cohesive story, but they don’t predicate it. This was an enjoyable watch with a few surprises I hadn’t predicted.

It’s always fun to see how the studio portrays magic, especially in Fantastic Beasts since they save their budget for the animal CGI. Yes, there’s the flashy wand blasts we know and love, but the monsters are where it shines. My absolute favorite has to be the dragon based on the Chinese New Year dragon dances. It’s just such a wonderful design, and it moves as if people are performing underneath it. There isn’t much left to praise as the animal scenes are few and far between, clearly pushed aside in favor of lighter conflict.

The writing favors personal drama over epic battles, and it falls a bit flat. The story itself doesn’t require Depp’s Grindelwald; he’s more there as a kingpin having set events in motion. I don’t believe anything he set up would have worked, but suspending disbelief is pretty easy with magic around you. Grindelwald could have been held for a later movie. Law’s Dumbledore is similar in that he doesn’t really need to be in the movie, but the seeds are sewn for their conflict. Meanwhile, anything Redmayne does after Jupiter Ascending makes me happy, for the sheer fact, it reminds me he can act.

I did enjoy certain character pieces though. There’s a moment between Kravitz’ Leta Lestrange and Redmayne’s Newt Scamander that broke me for a second. The movie’s family drama involves Lestrange and dances around her past. Towards the end, this leaves the audience trying to piece together Lestrange’s motivations. When we finally see them, Newt extends a branch, acting as the audience’s sympathy. In return, Kravitz delivers the most heartbreaking line of the movie, “Newt, you never met a monster you couldn’t love.” It’s biting and reflective, something I hoped to see more of with the cast.

I cannot say this enough, Kim’s Nagini is underused. I get why it plays out this way in the film. Though with all the marketing, the constant fan theories/what-ifs, and such excellent casting, the movie fails to use Nagini in a meaningful manner. She’s just a tagalong to Miller’s Credence throughout the film, and it’s devastating. She is in place for a larger role in future films, but what a waste of a perfect storm. I would have preferred waiting for a proper introduction than to just toss her in with a few lines and minor characterization.

Those searching for Harry Potter-like wonder are going to find fault in this movie. That’s not what Fantastic Beasts is. Its set in the same world but has a different feel to it. Focus on societal cracks, and family drama takes precedence here instead of exploring our amazement and awe. Overall, it’s a good movie with a lot of fun to it. If you’re looking for an expansion of the Wizarding World, check it out.