The team of "Fantastic Animals: the Crimes of Grindelwald" throws a lot on the screen during this two hour diversion, the last episode of J.K. Rowling-verse. As often happens in a Rowling production, evil is ascending, flowing through the human and magical realms as poisonous gas.
Mainly, however, because Rowling builds worlds, what "Grindelwald" has is a great story. The film is full of things: titular creatures (if not nearly enough), attractive people, flashy extras, attention-grabbing places, tragic flashbacks, tearful confessions and largely ruthless and spectacular violence. It is an embarrassment for riches and suffocates.
[ Read our review of "Fantastic animals and where to find them" ]
Not much has happened since the last film; mostly people and parts have been moved in preparation for the next big narrative forward. Once again, Newt is hurrying while the nefarious actions take place in separate plots. One is dominated by Gellert Grindelwald (a perfectly unimaginable Johnny Depp), an evil wizard who seems to have been dipped in flour (and which appeared for the last time in the most flattering form of Colin Farrell). Grindelwald is consolidating its power and has big plans. These have become more transparent as fascism has crept into history, the threat of totalitarianism is giving more and more obscure meaning to all the violence and ugly phrases like "pure blood".
Rowling is a literary magpie and synthesizer of first order, and her inspirations for the Harry Potter books range from classical mythology to Jane Austen. Traces of the Bible, Shakespeare, Tolkien and other Western staples are scattered throughout the series and therefore also this one. Although intentional, they are part of a cultural database, which is as intelligent as it is attractive. (The influences flatter but do not overwhelm the readers and offer different interpretive portals in the story.) Given some of these influences, it is not surprising that the series is touched by death; given the span of history, it is not surprising that it has turned into a history of apocalyptic war.
A bleak, violent end – and the heading of a world cataclysm – looms from the very first scene of "The Crimes of Grindelwald". "Directed by David Yates and written by Rowling, the film opens with a ferocious, visually chaotic prison break that flows into Grindelwald and puts the angry mood in. Bad times are intertwined with assorted criminals leading to a escalation of violence.When Newt materializes with his magical suitcase, where he often keeps his menagerie and scrutinizing (mostly, at times) closed, the film already looks like a series finale. that even the aspiring whim seems leaden.
Darkness makes a striking contrast to the first film, which mainly involved a lot of narrative settings, including all the fun beastly introductions. she's back, including Tina (Katherine Waterston), a kind of law and order called the Auror and the soft romantic sheet of Newt One of the delusions of the movie "Fantastic Animals" was the merger, which has little of talent and t power aloft that supported the Harry Potter series. Redmayne may be a delicate presence, but when it is not well directed, its fluttering and darting looks quickly creep into a catching momentum. If Newt has a depth, it seems unlikely that a trembling trembling red touches him.
Even the fact that the contents of Newt's suitcase is always more interesting than him remains a problem. Rowling keeps trying to make him and the mysterious Credence (Ezra Miller) the twin center of fiction. Yet your attention continues to return, almost with nostalgia, to the funniest, most fascinating supporters of the film, in particular Queenie (a delicious Alison Sudol) and Jacob (the equally attractive Dan Fogler). They do not share Newt's pedigree or the menacing threat of Credence; they are contours. But they have the fascinating idiosyncrasies and human frailties of Rowling's best creations, and prove to be the ones you care about most.
On the page, Rowling is a master narrator, creating such densely populated and densely structured worlds that you can easily evade in your mind without ever having seen a single adaptation of your work. What is urged on from time to time is the structure of the plot – the arrangement of all its attractive and swirling parts. Steve Kloves, who has written all but one of the Harry Potter films, has been given filmmaking to Rowling's ever-growing novels, with all their diversions and salty details. Here, however, Rowling surrendered to her maximalist tendencies and thus cluttered the story that she spent too much time untangling who did what to whom and why.
His pedigree and talent behind the scenes ensure that "The Crimes of Grindelwald" is littered with minor, mostly ornamental pleasures – the brassica filigree that summons ancient worlds, the wandering elf reminiscent of past adventures . There is also the Zouwu, a charming monster with a cat face and a long body that spins like a Chinese New Year's dragon, overshadowing anyone who shares the screen with it. Yet when Rowling has assembled all her narrative lines and a sleepy Zoë Kravitz, like Leta Lestrange, she is guiding you through another digression, the film has relaxed your grip on you. This only stiffens when the story moves alluringly towards Hogwarts, where Dumbledore, the good memories and the promise of better stories await.