Movierulz
Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore is the perfect example of how a movie can hide a good part and another so-so. And it is hardly understandable that J.K. Rowling, so focused on her original books (I mean the Harry Potter saga), writes scripts as vague as the ones she is giving us in this new franchise.
I liked it? Quite, everything must be said; but it has also disappointed me because I do not see the change that was predicted anywhere.
The Real Trouble in Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore
"Fantastic Beasts" and "The Secrets of Dumbledore" are really two completely different movies: the first is a compendium of hackneyed jokes already seen in previous installments about Newt Scamander and his fellow adventurers. The second is an intense drama about an impossible love that causes very dangerous tensions in the future.
Why does Warner Bros. insist on calling this franchise 'Fantastic Beasts' when it has become clear that it is a name that has no pull? What's more, with The Secrets of Dumbledore, those magical beasts almost completely disappear, and only towards the end does a specific species take center stage that I won't reveal for obvious reasons.
It was the perfect opportunity to release independent movies without trying to sneak in Newt and his friends; because with this third installment it is clear that they are trying to be a common thread when we are all trying to see what happens next between Grindelwald and Dumbledore.
This mixture results in a movie 'by pieces': at times, we are super into what happens to Credence and Grindelwald, what his relationship with Dumbledore is like, or how the future headmaster of Hogwarts is desperately looking for a way to avoid direct conflict. On the other hand, we have a feature film closer to the second, in which the real protagonists (Newt and his brother, for example) bother more than help.
The Magic of Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore
Luckily, there are wonderful moments in Fantastic Beasts 3, which is why I ended up raising the grade several integers. In particular, the few magic scenes that appear (there are not as many as anticipated) are among the best in the entire franchise and show that David Yates has found again that spark that he lost for a time.
I also highlight in a very positive way the chemistry between Grindelwald and Dumbledore, and here I open a debate for which many will kill me. Would it have been possible for Johnny Depp to create this intimate relationship between his character and Jude Law?
Because I think the villain has improved a lot thanks to Mads Mikkelsen by giving us a less egocentric and eccentric version than the one played by the actor from Pirates of the Caribbean. I know that many of you idolize him, but Grindelwald needed a very different touch from the one we saw in the second installment, and here it has finally been achieved.
Finally, magical beasts continue to play a role in the saga, but here they lose importance to the detriment of the story that interests us most (that of Grindelwald and Dumbledore). However, when they appear, they remain in the background (except towards the end) being mere tools to make the viewer smile. As if Warner Bros. Pictures wanted to sell us the merchandise by force.
It is not the film we wanted, but a kind of 'transition 2.0'
Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore is a transitional movie towards a possible ending. And I say possible because The Crimes of Grindelwald was also transitional. Will there be a time when the saga leaves us in tension at all times? Or will subframes continue to be created one after another? Because when I left the cinema, I had the feeling that absolutely nothing has happened in the seven and a half hours of the franchise that we had.
Luckily, it's still an entertaining movie, which I quite liked despite everything I've said, and which has given us two of J.K.'s best characters. Rowling: Grindelwald and Dumbledore.