Directed by: David Yates
Written by: J.K. Rowling
Year: 2016
The Harry Potter franchise holds a special place in my heart. I grew up watching the films as they came out and I feel it is one of the strongest franchises out there. So when a spinoff was announced, I was excited. The trailers were appropriately mysterious and piqued interest. Can this spinoff recapture the magic, or does it spell out disaster?
Seventy years prior to the events of the Harry Potter series, a young wizard by the name of Newt Scamander enters New York with a suitcase filled with magical creatures. However, the creatures get loose and now it is up to Scamander and his newfound American friends to help return them to their case.
Eddie Redmayne is the main star of this picture, playing Newt Scamander, a young wizard who loves magical creatures. Redmayne is phenomenal and fits the universe incredibly well. He nails the big moments, but he truly shines in the smaller scenes, employing little ticks and quirks that strengthen the character. For instance, when around other people, he will often avoid direct eye contact and begin to mumble, occupying the corners of rooms, which distances him from the other characters. This signifies his general discomfort around other humans. But when he is around the titular beasts, he instantly lights up, devoting his full attention to them. Through these tactics, Redmayne modestly commands the screen.
Dan Fogler plays the No-Maj named Jacob Kowalski, and is quite a compelling character. Kowalski is a simple everyman, and Fogler emphasizes this aspect of the character to comedic effect. Though there is one running joke that is a bit overplayed, Fogler is a riot and even sells the more emotional scenes. Katherine Waterson portrays Tina, a former Auror who is seeking redemption as a sort of rogue police officer. Waterson is very good, but at a disadvantage when acting against Redmayne. Her character is not granted the biggest range of feelings, but Waterson makes it work. Alison Sudol's character, Queenie, could have easily been an annoying pest, but Sudol manages to turn her into a charming and comical personality.
Ezra Miller's performance as Creedence can only be described as painfully awkward. Creedence has a tragic backstory and I can see what the filmmakers were going for, but Miller oversells it. As such, his performance resembles more a farce than a tragedy. Colin Farrell appears as the intimidating Percival Graves (wonderful name by the way). Farrell is effectively understated as a villain of sorts. His stern composure and immense gravitas make his appearances very memorable. As for the character, I feel he was misused and could have been utilized in a different manner. His relationship with Creedence is too convoluted and eventually his presence as an antagonist is completely overshadowed by another character.
The main plot involves our band of heroes tracking down the escaped creatures and returning them to the magical suitcase. This plot thread works excellently, giving the characters room to breathe and for the creatures to be established. Hunting the creatures down, figuring out their properties, and getting attached to these characters makes for an exhilarating experience. One of the greatest sequences in the film involves all of the characters going inside the case, which is very much like the TARDIS from Doctor Who. The variety of creatures we see is staggering and the imagination is on full display. All of the beasts have a unique personality that makes them easily identifiable beyond their appearances.
Notice how I said "main plot," though. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is more complicated than it looks. There are numerous sub-plots thrown into the mix to heighten the tension and make the story more important to the Harry Potter mythos. Unfortunately, it is too complicated for its own good. The multiple storylines actually get in the way of the main plot. There is a narrative involving a No-Maj cult that believes witches to be real. Within this story is a sub-plot revolving around Creedence being beaten by his mother and his affiliations with Graves. But then there is another scenario that focuses on something known as an Obscurus, an entity that forms when a wizard/witch represses his/her magical abilities. There are too many moving parts for this machine to function properly.
If the plot were relegated solely to the chasing of the fantastic beasts, the movie would have run much smoother. But piling all of these extra and unnecessary storylines really bogs this film down. The sub-plots are not bad, but just feel clumsy and shoe-horned. What is bad is what the film becomes in the third act. Brace yourselves, because we have another end-of-the-world situation. Why can't a film in a major franchise not be about some big overblown story? The first half of this movie is marvelous because of how humble and quaint the idea behind it is. But once the movie arrives at this dire situation, it betrays the foundation on which it is based.
The visual effects incorporated in this movie are impeccable. The magical spells and their effects look as great as ever, but that is not what you want to hear. You want to hear about the creatures. Well, I am happy to report that the beasts are heavily featured and look magnificent. They all have a singular look that makes them easily distinguishable and the textures are given extraordinary detail. You actually believe that the characters are interacting with something tangible. In addition, there is a motion capture goblin played by Ron Perlman. Not only is Perlman perfect in the role, but the effects are seamless. Also great is the production design. The 1920s New York setting is organic and lived-in, which makes for a great backdrop for this adventure. The aesthetic matches the scope and scale of the story.
Working congruently with this is David Yates' direction. Yates directed the previous four Harry Potter films and he proves to be a capable craftsman once more. He knows the best way to film action for the series as well as the quieter character moments. Perhaps the most astounding aspect of his direction is the tone he took. Fantastic Beasts, though it fits well within the Harry Potter universe, carries a different air about it. This is a refreshing change that simultaneously unifies the Harry Potter diegesis while also setting this film apart as its own creation.
The music is nowhere near as memorable as that of the original franchise, but it does manage to leave an impression. James Newton Howard's score barely relies on familiar motifs and notes to win the audience over, admirably so. He has composed a wholly distinct musical score that accompanies the film well. Will you be humming any of the tunes as you walk out of the theatre? Probably not. But the music does underscore the film successfully.
This movie does offer a surprising amount of emotional heft, especially near the conclusion. Despite the issues with the plot, the characters are all likable, which means the audience gets easily attached to them. By the end, all the protagonists have to go through some sort of difficulty that definitely draws on the viewers' sympathy. Kowalski in particular has a satisfying but tear-jerking resolution.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them presents a worthy return to the Wizarding World that we fell in love with many years ago. Redmayne is on top-form with a solid supporting cast to back him; the main story is gripping and exciting; the visual effects are stunning; and the magical beasts are one of the standout features. The second half of the film begins to lose focus in a jumbled mess and the third act conforms to contemporary tradition with negative results. Overall, Fantastic Beasts is sure to make Potterheads happy, and even casual fans should have a fun time. Though not the strongest entry of the series, the emotional beats are present and there are more than enough positives to merit its being included among the other pictures in the Harry Potter franchise.
Grade: B+
No comments:
Post a Comment