• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

LTTP: Fantastic beasts and where to find them (spoilers)

This was a weird watch for me. I enjoyed elements of it separately, but the final product didn't really draw me in. The costuming and set design were spectacular. Absolutely adored the world they set up. And the supporting cast all did wonderful jobs. But I didn't find Newt particularly compelling, and the 3rd act (surprise) being a city destroying smoke monster is when my eyes glazed over.

Probably would've appreciated the movie more if it was a little smaller in scope and just explored this world and searched for more of the beasts.

I was also massively disappointed when they traded out Colin Farrell for Johnny Depp. Huge downgrade if you ask me.

Overall I really enjoyed it but I wish they would have fleshed out some the characters more. I feel like we know next to nothing about Newt. Everybody in the film felt really shallow. On the other hand I really like the universe/world they are building. I just need some compelling character development too.
For people that dislike Newt, you should watch this

It might change your mind about him

https://youtu.be/C4kuR1gyOeQ
 
I absolutely fucking hated every second of this blander-than-bland CGI prequel-fest that makes the Star Wars prequels look imaginative, engaging, and fun. And that is an achievement.

However, the actual reason for it has not too much to do with the story on a surface level.

But it's a hollow shell of nothingness while pretending to be vibrant and living. It's a literal undead movie, and that is what I loathed it for. It pretends that you're a cat and that showing some shiny object - "ooh, look at this! Isn't it cute and adorable?" No movie, it isn't- is going to make it okay.

I wanted to make a thread on that CGI aspect of it though, because it's not the story or actors itself that bother me so much about this. I had a precursor to the feeling while watching Doctor Strange too, which felt equally held together by soulless CG strings until Mr Cape finally inserts something with character into it.

But then at least Strange has mildly more engaging sequels planned, whereas I don't want to see another second of any of the six -SIX!!!- more "planned" sequels on this crap.
Just let it die.


edit: oh, and speaking of dying, they traded Farrell for Depp just as his career appears to be diving of the cliffs of mortality, so at least that is going to give me some mild entertainment as the producers go 'oh fuck why did we do that'.
 

zeemumu

Member
Yeah I think Colin pulled off the Grindelwald thing a lot better too. That scene where's combating several Aurors by himself was nuts

I honestly thought I'd hate the Jacob Kowalski character going in. I thought it'd be another "normal stick in the mud guy tagging along and doesn't know what's going on" performance, but he was probably my favorite character in the movie. Even while all the magic stuff was going on, in the back of my mind I was thinking "man, I hope Jacob gets the loan for the bakery."
 
Yeah I think Colin pulled off the Grindelwald thing a lot better too. That scene where's combating several Aurors by himself was nuts

I honestly thought I'd hate the Jacob Kowalski character going in. I thought it'd be another "normal stick in the mud guy tagging along and doesn't know what's going on" performance, but he was probably my favorite character in the movie. Even while all the magic stuff was going on, in the back of my mind I was thinking "man, I hope Jacob gets the loan for the bakery."

Agreed. I also thought it'd be kinda annoying but it wasn't at all, and the resolution to his arc was great. Really nice character. Loved the mind reader too.
 

sobaka770

Banned
I absolutely fucking hated every second of this blander-than-bland CGI prequel-fest that makes the Star Wars prequels look imaginative, engaging, and fun. And that is an achievement.

However, the actual reason for it has not too much to do with the story on a surface level.

But it's a hollow shell of nothingness while pretending to be vibrant and living. It's a literal undead movie, and that is what I loathed it for. It pretends that you're a cat and that showing some shiny object - "ooh, look at this! Isn't it cute and adorable?" No movie, it isn't- is going to make it okay.

I wanted to make a thread on that CGI aspect of it though, because it's not the story or actors itself that bother me so much about this. I had a precursor to the feeling while watching Doctor Strange too, which felt equally held together by soulless CG strings until Mr Cape finally inserts something with character into it.

But then at least Strange has mildly more engaging sequels planned, whereas I don't want to see another second of any of the six -SIX!!!- more "planned" sequels on this crap.
Just let it die.


edit: oh, and speaking of dying, they traded Farrell for Depp just as his career appears to be diving of the cliffs of mortality, so at least that is going to give me some mild entertainment as the producers go 'oh fuck why did we do that'.

Preach, brother.

This movie was garbage. I will go even further and say all Yates directed movies lack soul and wit. They are expensive looking with good production values but they make me feel nothing in the end.

This movie is the worst out of all Harry Potter since it has no storyline, characters are not interesting, and the whole endeavor really doesn't feel like it's an artistic creation rather than a petty money grab. It's probably at the Hobbit level of pointlessness, only the Hobbit actually was a better movie.

Hey, at least we get Avatar sequels... Hahahaha!
 
wrong movie, haha

edit:
actually, people really down on this? I've seen it 3 times with my nephew now and he thinks it's the best Potter movie. Maybe it's because it's not tied to a book, but hes much more enchanted by this series than the ones based on the Harry adventures.
 

golem

Member
I mean, for a movie that had a subplot as dark as the one presented here, i really don't know how you could make it less gloomy and lifeless. I mean, the scenes that were colourful and magical (like the intro to the creatures) were really well made so the problem clearly wasn't there.

I kind understand the Yates criticism but on the same time don't know how it could be presented differently, and this applies to the last harry potter movies too, that dealt with violence and death in a more prominent way.

Its the directors prerogative to set the tone of the movie and interpret/change the script where necessary. The movie just felt so blah most of the time when imo we should have been treated to the adventure of exploring a new world of wizarding, actually spending some quality time with these fantastic beasts, and discovering some new characters we actually want to root for since they'll probably be sticking around for a few movies. Yes, darkness has always pervaded the series but even in the original Harry Potter movies the Dursleys were played often for laughs and the Umbridge scenes were partially whimsical as well. I can only assume the whole low energy dreariness of the movie was an intentional choice, just not one I was looking for in a HP movie.
 

Sami+

Member
It was okay. Competent I guess. The CGI monsters sucked.

To it's credit I wanna say I laughed a few times from the normal guy but I don't remember much.
 

J_Viper

Member
I was kinda into it until I hit the scene where Redmayne is trying to lure the Rhino at the zoo, then I noped the fuck out of there. What the fuck were they thinking?

That gave off some serious Phantom Menace vibes.
 
It was pretty mediocre. Collin Farrel actually being Grindelwald who was played by Johnny Depp was straight up laughable too and left a bad aftertaste.
 
Top Bottom