Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them 2

Plot synopsis:
In 1926 the British wizard and "magizoologist" Newt Scamander arrives by ship to New York en route to Arizona. He encounters Mary Lou Barebone, a non-magical woman ("No-Maj" or "Muggle") who heads the New Salem Philanthropic Society, which claims that witches and wizards are real and dangerous. As Newt listens to her speech, a Niffler (a small platypus-like creature obsessed with hoarding shiny objects) escapes from his magically expanded suitcase, which houses multiple magical creatures. As Newt attempts to capture the Niffler, he meets No-Maj cannery worker and aspiring baker Jacob Kowalski, and they accidentally swap suitcases. Demoted Auror (a hunter of dark wizards) Tina Goldstein arrests Newt for being an unregistered wizard and takes him to the Magical Congress of the United States of America (MACUSA) headquarters, hoping to regain her former position. However, as Jacob's suitcase contains only baked goods, Newt is released. At Jacob's tenement apartment, several creatures escape from Newt's suitcase.
After Tina and Newt find Jacob and the suitcase, Tina takes them to her apartment and introduces them to Queenie, her Legilimens sister. Queenie and Jacob are mutually attracted, though American wizards are forbidden to marry or even socially interact with No-Majs. Newt takes Jacob inside his magically expanded suitcase, where Jacob encounters a contained Obscurus, a dark, destructive parasite that develops inside magically gifted children if they suppress their magical abilities. Newt extracted it from a young girl who died, those afflicted rarely living past the age of ten. Newt persuades Jacob to help search for the missing creatures. After re-capturing two of the three escaped beasts, they re-enter the suitcase, which Tina takes to MACUSA. Officials arrest them, believing one of Newt's beasts is responsible for killing Senator Henry Shaw Jr. They decide to destroy Newt's suitcase and erase Jacob's recent memories. Director of Magical Security Percival Graves accuses Newt of conspiring with the infamous dark wizard Gellert Grindelwald. Newt and Tina are sentenced to immediate death but Queenie and Jacob rescue them and they escape. Thanks to the help of Goblin gangster Gnarlack, Tina's old informant, the foursome then find and re-capture the last of the creatures.
Meanwhile, Percival Graves approaches Credence Barebone, Mary Lou's adopted son, and offers to free him from his abusive mother. In exchange, he wants Credence to find an Obscurus. Graves believes it has caused the mysterious destructive incidents around the city. Credence finds a wand under his adopted sister Modesty's bed. Mary Lou assumes it is Credence's wand, but Modesty claims it is hers. When she is about to be punished, the Obscurial is unleashed, killing everyone except Modesty and Credence. Graves arrives and dismisses Credence as being a Squib (a non-magical person of wizard ancestry), and refuses to teach him magic. Credence reveals he is the Obscurus's host, having lived longer than any other host due to the intensity of his magic. In a rage, he unleashes the Obscurus upon the city.
Newt finds Credence hiding in a subway tunnel, but he is attacked by Graves. Tina, who knows Credence, arrives and attempts to calm him, while Graves tries to convince Credence to listen to him. As Credence begins to settle into human form Aurors arrive. They apparently disintegrate him to protect the magical society, but a tiny Obscurus fragment escapes. Graves admits to unleashing the Obscurus to expose the magical community to the No-Majs, and angrily claims that MACUSA protects the No-Majs more than themselves. After being subdued by one of Newt's beasts, he is revealed as Grindelwald in disguise and is taken into custody by MACUSA.
MACUSA fears their secret world has been exposed, but Newt releases his Thunderbird to disperse a poultice as rainfall over the city that erases all New Yorkers' recent memories as MACUSA wizards repair the destruction. Queenie kisses Jacob goodbye as the rain erases his memories. Newt departs for Europe, but promises to return and visit Tina when his book is finished; he also anonymously leaves Jacob a case of silver Occamy eggshells to fund his bakery. His breads and pastries are unknowingly inspired by Newt's creatures, and as Queenie visits his store, he smiles back at her, revealing that he has not lost his entire memory.

Tags: murder

Review:
Let me start off by saying that I am a big Harry Potter fan; I loved all 8 HP movies, and really liked the 1st installment of Newt's adventures as well.
And as many other people have mentioned, as a Harry Potter fan, you just can't hate this movie.
Where Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them only contained a handful amount of references to the Harry Potter series, The Crimes of Grindelwald has tonnes.
Enough to hype up any Harry Potter fan.The problem this movie had for me was its plot, or rather, its almost nonexisting plot.
All in all, all this dialogue about characters made it extra confusing to know what the movie was about, in addition to it lacking much of a plot to begin with.This movie is definitely not a waste of money or anything, you could just buy a ticket for the stunning scenes and you'd be satisfied.
It's just that this movie was quite a disappointment compared to many people's expectations I think, seeing as it basically is just a setup for the upcoming movies, which lacks a good plot..
The arch-criminal wizard Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) is being tortured in 'Trump Tower', but manages to escape and flees to Paris in pursuit of a mysterious circus performer called Credence (Ezra Miller) and his bewitched companion Nagini (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) played fetchingly by Claudia Kim. Someone needs to stop him, and all eyes are on Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law).
which suits him just fine since his love Tina (Katherine Waterston) is working for the ministry there, and the couple are currently estranged due to a (topical) bout of 'Fake News'.Throw in a potential love triangle between Newt, his brother Theseus (Callum Turner) and old Hogwart's schoolmate Leta Lestrange (Zoë Kravitz) and about a half dozen other sub-plots and you have...
Redmayne replays his Newt-act effectively but once again (and I see I made the same comments in my "Fantastic Beasts" review) his character mumbles again so much that many of his lines are unintelligible.I also complained last time that the excellent actress Katherine Waterston was criminally underused as the tentative love interest Tina.
you'll struggle afterwards to write down what she actually did in this film.Jacob (Dan Fogler) and Queenie (Alison Sudol, looking for all the world in some scenes like Rachel Weisz) reprise their roles in a sub-plot that goes nowhere in particular.Of the newcomers, Jude Law as Dumbledore is a class-act but has very little screen time: hopefully he will get more to do next time around.
While the visuals are as magical as ever, it's clear that the filmmakers are so distracted by trying to build a franchise that they're forgetting to actually tell a good story!
Huge and important elements of the story were left for us only to assume what had happened when discussing the one year time jump between the two films (like the Jacob/Queenie relationship, Jacobs memory, etc.).
It also seemed as if they were only adding in twists that would surely get a reaction from viewers despite the fact that they not only discredited the original Harry Potter films, but just felt like unrealistic and a little too convenient!
In short, as a huge fan of the Harry Potter Universe, I was disappointed, upset and felt really let down, and as a film goer, I was confused with the plot and frustrated with the lack of character connection and development!
The only reason I have given a 4/10 instead of a 1 is for Eddie Redmayne's perfect execution of the shy, socially awkward but loveable and charming Newt Scamander and for the alluring performance from Jude Law's Dumbledore who leaves us wanting to know more of his history!
I LOVE Harry Potter, but man, I hate this movie so much..
These two things have nothing to do with each other.In my opinion the faults of this movie date back to the first film, where we had the compelling story of a young wizard named David Attenborough whose animals escaped in New York and he had to find them.
The visual effects looked great except for the times they looked awful, especially in the Hogwarts scenes which was where the film took a nose dive, never to recover.The rest of the (far too numerous) supporting cast range from average to terrible.
If this movie did not have the Harry Potter fans it would have been a complete flop.
Having said that, this movie is much like Deathly Hallows Part 1 in the sense that it does not stand out when watched in isolation but understandable in the greater scheme of things, as it sets up the future movies perfectly without offering much on its own.
The entire movie is a history/explanation of Harry Potter characters instead of focusing on Newt and his beasts.
The rest of the time is just a complete transport track to the end.Even more unpersonal soul-lacking random CGI-creatures than the first movie just for the heck of it.I have no idea what I really saw, since there was basically no plot.Stay away and save your time and money..
I felt like I was binge watching 10 episodes of TV show, but couldn't fast forward boring story plots, fillers and flashbacks.
For a movie about magic the script is very unimaginative.This script has the same block buster problems that are money focused rather than than wanting to tell a good and exciting story.
And I would say that I am not worried at all, but Cursed Child made plenty of mistakes in terms of plot direction that cheapened or poked holes in the Potterverse.I actually like Grindelwald movie version more than Voldemort movie version (book version is a different story), he seems more sophisticated and his motives more reasonable.Overall, I liked the tone.
This movies intent was solely to set up a bigger money making franchise and forgets to tell a story on its own..
I wanted to like this movie, but I ended up walking out feeling disappointed..
The second sequel in the fledgling spinoff follows a familiar pattern, but too many characters and too many storylines rob it of its most enduring charmsEven magic takes a little bit of planning, and in David Yates' "Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald," both are in short supply.
In it second outing, the cracks are starting to show in J.K. Rowling's much-hyped followup series to "Harry Potter," a franchise that is at the mercy of slapdash planning (these films are cobbled together from various pieces of "Wizarding World" material, not single novels) and the kind of higher-up decree that promised five films (five!) before the first one hit theaters.
It's a lot of time to fill, and while the second film in the franchise nudges its narrative forward, it's at the expense of a bloated, unfocused screenplay.Mostly, "The Crimes of Grindelwald" is hampered by the unwieldy meshing together of disparate plots that could service their own films (some of them surely better than others).
Newt's ditzy charm grounded the first film; and when he's allowed to lead this second story, it's as whimsical and good-hearted as any in the franchise.It's all the other subplots that damage that notion, from a charisma-free Johnny Depp taking over the role of evil Wizard Gellert Grindelwald to a convoluted section all about the family tree of Credence Barebone (Ezra Miller).
Too much open, no closed arcs, and an information bomb.So if you're not a Potterhead, expect to be confused during the movie.The cast is spectacular, especially Jude Law, Eddie Redmayne, Dan Fogler, and my future husband Callum Turner.
Of course, I wanted to say the same thing about Ezra Miller, who had incredible potential but almost disappears in what the script proposes.The animals keep showing up for a future Newt book, and that makes me happy to see that the name of the franchise remains consistent with the story, even if it's in the background.The CGI and 3D are impeccable, it pays to spend a little more and go in an IMAX 3D session.Thinking of Fantastic Animals as a franchise in small episodes, it's great.
Like a continuation movie, it has its flaws and does not close any arches that open in the beginning.By the proposal, we know that the film does better than the first and opens a range of possibilities for the future of the franchise.
A few scenes could have been shortened or written differently but overall this movie sets up an epic story that I'm sure WB will build on.The beasts did not disappoint either.
Did not like Zoe's character arc and either a lot of wasted potential on a few other characters or just left open for the next 3 movies to come.The young and charismatic Dumbledore played by Jude Law was my favourite and he added so much more depth to the character while staying true to the Dumbledore portrayed in Harry Potter .A healthy dose of magical spells and a dash of misunderstood beasts kept me hooked to this incredible little universe that I'll re-live in my imagination forever..
So if you are not an invested Harry Potter fan you probably will not love this movie.
The storyline is great, the villain is interesting, the special effects were amazing, and the history and lore for the Harry Potter series is rich and enjoyable.
I was a little afraid to be disappointed with the plot because of the critics BUT like always, the critics love to hate sequels and prequels.
Very anxious to see it develop.Conclusion: a very good movie, exceptional acting, especially Johnny Depp & Jude Law were amazing, colourful, darker, intenser.
I just saw the first fantastic beasts movie and the second one back to back and the differences really caught my eye here, while not being exactly bad, the sequel feels like just a part of the whole 5-part franchise yet to come, there are so many sub-plots introduced that it just gets confusing, and where the first movie was great by having the simple plot of gathering all the lost beasts, this one just suddenly ends and you will just have to wait and see what it will lead up to, as a huge Potterverse fan I have to say that there are some really good references hidden in this movie that fans will surely appreciate and all of the actors from the first movie were amazing..
I consider myself a series and movie fantast, I re-watched all the Harry Potters, Lord of the rings countless times.
I do not know what they are thinking, if they think people are so amazed at the Harry Potter success that we will watch just anything.Well No more I tell you JK Rowling and Warner Brothers.This movie had no red thread, no meaning, no story, no substance, It was complete lack of action and meaning.
This feels like someone made a freaking parody of the Harry potter world and JUDE LAW as dumledore.
Is this movie about Grindelwald and Dumbledore or Newt and beasts or Credence or American aurors?
The thing is that Jacob, the Muggle was the best character and that is just sad for movie about magic.
If this movie isn't about the fans of HP than there should be no Grindelwald as he is a book character.
Then make a movie about him and Dumbledore, how they met,how they went separate ways, how Dumbledore changed, the story about Ariana, the history of main characters..
Absolute piece of rubbish, I'm a massive Harry Potter fan but this just seemed like it was lacking in story as a film in its own right, its enjoyable as far as special effects go and to expand the lore of the Harry Potter franchise but that's it.
This film felt like it was setting it self up for the next movie, some the scenes just don't make any sense.
Not as good as the first movie and unlike the original Harry Potter movies ( I'm no crazy fan) feels unoriginal and lazy.
The only way I can think to describe this movie is if you've ever watched a long-running series that has 'filler episodes' where nothing really happens but it's setting up for something big-that's what this movie is.
I found the film tedious and poorly written with lots of plot holes - and this is coming from the biggest Harry Potter fan.
This film definitely feels like an attempt to make more money off the back of the Harry Potter world rather than a story in its own right.
Rowling tried to go all political in this new Harry Potter movie but just ended up creating a huge mess with too many subplots.
Jude Law is a great Dumbledore, hopefully we will se more of him in the next one though.After watching it a 3rd time i can understand why many people may be confused about this movie.
I'm not a huge Harry Potter fan and haven't seen all of the films but I thought this would be a good movie to watch with a friend who grew up loving the series.Nevertheless, we go into the theatre and commence to wasting two hours of our time.This movie made no sense at all.
No need for some of the things they did to show how awful Grindelwald was, i think anyone reading this who has watched the film will know what i am referencing without me having to give away any spoilers.
Rowling trades in complex characters and great story for visuals and filler.
The development of the most important characters was good, and Newt Scamander ranks up there with some of the classic Harry Potter characters after this movie.
The first film succeeded by adding to the Harry Potter universe without detracting from the magic of the originals; this one went out of its way to taint their good name.
It's sad watching a potential good story ruined by the necessity of making endless amount of movie from a story that (until now) looks like could fit on a single one...
It feels like a waste of energy, especially knowing that there are plenty of people out there who genuinely enjoy this film series, but I'm just not one of them.
I LOVE the Harry Potter movies and grew up with those 8 films, but I've never felt the connection to the Fantastic Beasts series that I did to Potter.
Which means it's about a lot of different characters some who are boring, some who don't really matter at all and yes also about some who are interesting and matter, but when the movie gets to them it has previously wasted time on several side characters or plot lines that go nowhere.
Which means it drags and feels unbelievably boring far too often(I can't believe I am saying this about technically a HP movie!) and while I get this period is supposed to be rough and not a joyride for the characters and the world at large, but it's utterly bleak and while there is humor, it has a distinct lack of joy!.
Visually stunning for sure but the forced characters, the pointless yes no yes no love story, the lack of fantastic beast (more or less), the lack of Grindelwald's crimes.
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix Chapter 15"How long have you been teaching at Hogwarts?" Professor Umbridge asked"Thirty-nine years this December", said Professor McGonagallIt is all you need to know about Rowling's attitude towards this film.
The series is filled with solid actors who you can love and admire.The second movie is crammed full of scenes, story, characters and art.
Yes, this movie have so many layers, very JK Rowling, but i love it!.
I love the Harry Potter franchise, but unfortunately this particular branch is not to my liking.
Rowling has already embellished in her memoirs a little too often concerning her beloved characters, but this movie basically steps on several aspects that we have come to know as canon from the Harry Potter universe.
A Fantastic Harry Potter world related movie.
The movie is good, it's bring both of fantastic beast vibe and harry potter vibe..
These films set the ground for what was an outstanding finish to the Harry Potter story and I can see Rowling doing exactly the same here.
Good story telling, visual affects, casting of characters, character development (in the short time they had), and plot development.
While I think there are always things that could have been done better or differently, it wasn't my story to tell and I just try to enjoy what I watch without too much expectation.
One of the BEST Harry Potter films.
The movie itself is quite good, a bit convoluted with to many subplots, but structured better than the first film.
I will be going to watch it again just so the story connects so well with the Harry Potter so differently..
But for non-fans of Harry Potter, i think it might be a bit confusing and many things at once..
I was so disappointed in first Fantastic beasts movie.
But let me tell you one thing THE CRIMES OF GRINDELWALD is a perfect prequel to Harry Potter movies.
As a HUGE Harry Potter fan, this movie was beyond my expectations.
It was by far the best movie I have seen in many years (since Harry Potter years).
Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is another amazing magical journey through the wizarding world of J.
Jude Law is probably the best Dumbledore yet, at least on par with the first and way better than the second of the Harry Potter series.
I am a Potterhead, so for me this movie and it's prequel is a salvation, so I would like it anyway.The plot is amazing, it tells so much, it says a lot about what happened and gives hints, what awaits us.
The movie relates to Harry Potter world in a much better way than the first part.
With scenes of Hogwarts and glimpses of classes, its a much watch of harry Potter fans...