This is overall a whimsical and often magical starter to a series that stands on its own without even trying to better its predecessor.

Rating: 7/10 (21 December 2016)

Fifteen years after the release of the Philosopher's Stone and five years after Deathly Hallows: Part 2, the prequel/spin off cycle of beloved franchises has continued with the Harry Potter franchise, and its finally one done right. Since the news of J.K. Rowling developing a spin off in 2013, I've had huge speculation on what it would be. Three years later, "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" is upon us and it's safe to say that the magic is back and it's untouched.
The risk about a spin-off is whether it is rich like the products that spawned them, but there is no sign of that here because this is written by Rowling herself. As the creator of this universe, she writes with passion and almost perfect understanding of what fans want. You can tell through every line of dialogue, set piece and character that she has her fingerprints trademarked all over them. Instead of setting another story in Hogwarts, she makes the fresh decision to set it in 1920s New York.
Here we meet Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) whose visiting the city with a suitcase full of magical creatures. The community has strict guidelines and does not allow creatures in it. His problem starts when his creatures suddenly start to escape and cause havoc across the city. He has to make the challenge of trying to find them.
Redmayne shines as Newt, having the quirkiness and maddening cheerfulness of Matt Smith's Doctor Who. He's often funny and charismatic, a different hero from Daniel Radcliffe's dive at the main man of the story. Him and Rowling have done a nice job at crafting a perfect protagonist for the next big fantasy series.
Colin Farrell plays Graves whose in charge of the Magical Security in the city. He's fairly good, relying on lead villain territory heavily and never collapsing into cliché as much. Dan Folger plays Newt's sidekick Jacob Kowalski whose a surprisingly likable supporting character. He's charming and full of interest like his leader. Katherine Waterston and Alison Sudol are spellbinding too as sisters Tina and Queenie who help Newt on his quest.
David Yates does just about a good job at directing this as he did with the last four Potter films, but due to the alterations of the universe, it feels seamless. This is because he's kept to his rules of bringing this world to life with real sets and impressive CGI. His directness has a Tim Burton-like feel that really makes the film extraordinary but different. The action scenes under his wing are impressive but not necessarily more effective than anything we've seen before. He'll be directing the next four films in this series so there's a guarantee that he will do justice again.
"Fantastic Beasts" isn't quite as fantastic as it thinks it is. While the plot is surprisingly original, it feels occasionally thin when it comes down to Newt and Kowalski trying to capture the creatures over the city. It sometimes feels like video game montage than your average fantasy quest. Also as this is the first part of the series, there's a lot of heavy world-building exposition to be done, which sometimes overlaps and wobbles the pace a little bit.
Now that the setup has surfaced, Rowling and Yates can now do more of whatever they want next time round. While it isn't as intelligent as the best Potter films, it kindly resolves the problems of the more average entries of the series. It's one of the biggest pleasures of the year, like what Star Wars: The Force Awakens was in 2015. This could be the benchmark for all spin-offs to come: fresh and pretty much its own thing.