Directed by:
David YatesScreenplay:
J. K. RowlingCinematography:
Philippe RousselotComposer:
James Newton HowardCast:
Eddie Redmayne, Dan Fogler, Colin Farrell, Katherine Waterston, Alison Sudol, Ezra Miller, Samantha Morton, Jenn Murray, Jon Voight, Gemma Chan, Carmen Ejogo (more)VOD (4)
Plots(1)
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them opens in 1926 as Newt Scamander has just completed a global excursion to find and document an extraordinary array of magical creatures. Arriving in New York for a brief stopover, he might have come and gone without incident... were it not for a No-Maj (American for Muggle) named Jacob, a misplaced magical case, and the escape of some of Newt's fantastic beasts, which could spell trouble for both the wizarding and No-Maj worlds. (Warner Bros. US)
(more)Videos (24)
Reviews (14)
In general, I appreciate the excessive patience of Potter fans who wait until you know who turns into you know who, but I don't suffer from such a lack of imagination that I can't imagine thousands of better ways to waste 134 minutes of my life. Yes, the film is as long and self-serving as the previous sentence. And it has a nice soundtrack. Your Universal Platypus.
()
This movie is a two-hour shapeless glob of spittle, that someone spat out and left lying on the ground, just because Rowling wrote it, and Potter aficionados have to lap up anything connected to that world. If it was not a cult brand or, god-forbid, a completely independent work, it would most certainly have received a similar beating that The Last Airbender got. However, as symbolic as Potter is for a whole generation, they could afford to play on nostalgia, and, without hesitation, indulge the audience with a ton of kitsch, because the audience would surely forgive the movie for its many shortcomings. And then, if that is not enough for you, the pacing and atmosphere are completely dead, and the characters are indistinguishable. The scenes themselves are meaningless, put there just to show off the visual effects, and then there are the fast blurry action scenes, that appear lavish on the surface, but lack any real ideas on a deeper level. However, the movie suffers most from the impotence of its story - basically, nothing happens during the first hour and a half (!). Then, only in the last half hour do we get away from the long introduction to somewhere else. Rowling should have simply stuck to writing books and not tried to write screenplays, because she obviously has no feeling for writing movie discourses at all. She could have brought a more experienced screenwriter to the team, as she had already taken the position of movie producer. Although I still like the original book and its movie series out of nostalgia, this two-hour show of tedium almost bored me to death, and I can hardly remember the last time I was so distracted from what was going on in the story, by what was on-screen visually. For the last half hour, I will give it 1 star.
()
Fantastic Beasts and Why Go to See Them? Because they really are fantastic, cute, and I bet I won't be the only one who would like to have some of them at home. Another pretty good reason to see the movie is Eddie. To me, he's a supernatural character himself, so he fit in here quite incredibly. I don't want to compare him to Harry, but I have no choice because watching him just gave me that divine feeling. The butterflies in my stomach, the goosebumps, the tears of excitement... you know the drill. Rowling did not disappoint and I want to live in her head. :))
()
Nice surprise. The collaboration between David Yates and J.K. Rowling turned out great again. The film has only details in common with Harry Potter (the opening soundtrack, the orcs, the newspaper with the video, the names of the spells and the magical effect after the clash of wands), but in any case the film has a similar atmosphere of mini references as The Hobbit films. Eddie Redmayne is really a class act, at first I found his speech strange, yet he shows that he has his acting qualities, the two cute little sisters and the hilarious Dan Fogler were also great. I liked the whole concept of catching monsters in a trunk throughout New York, I wonder if there will be a different city in the next installment. The creatures are filmed brilliantly and are something to watch. Colin Farrell as the bad guy is also decent. Story 8/10, Atmosphere 9/10, Gore 0/10, Visuals 9/10, Action 8/10, Suspense 7/10, Humor 6/10. Entertainment 8/10, Scares 0/10. I'm glad to see the start of a decent series again, all the good ones are over. 85%.
()
Really pleasant. Not a sequel to Harry Potter, or anything like that. There are big names are thrown into the equation, but not as forcefully as I was afraid it would be. Fantastic Beasts are solving their own problems at a time, when Harry Potter’s dad wasn’t even in diapers. For the first time in his career, Redmayne actually plays a truly nice guy, who knows how wave a magic wand when necessary. The Beasts themselves are nice. The Bowtruckle and the kleptomaniac mole are easily the best. Rowling handles the story very well, functional mystery/detective story is gripping to the end. Collin Farrell’s performance is effortless, but the heart of the movie is Dan Fogler. The non-magician’s perception of the world of magic is a great idea. His resigned acceptance of everything that’s happening is magical in his delivery. At first I was worried little wary, but now I can’t wait for sequel. The music is a subtle tribute to Williamson, the main theme is truly well composed. P.S.: Let Fassbender play Dumbledore next time.
()
Ads