Hey Guys, I hope you liked today's video. If you want to support me in creating these essays then please consider supporting me on patreon. You'll find a bunch of cool rewards there like early access to my videos and a patron exclusive discord where I'm very active and we can chat rubbish about movies. There's a link in the description. I look forward to seeing you there :) Have a great day, - Henry

At the end, the movie left me asking a very important question: What were the crimes of Grindelwald?

Why couldn't this have just been a comfy series about taming and caring for Fantastic Beasts? the main cast is so good too but it feels like they're wasted. The whole Grindelwald thing could have been a completely separate prequel movie.

Honestly the thing that pissed me off most about this movie is that they changed Newt's coat from that nice royal blue peacock colour to grey.

Those hogwarts scenes were "LOOK! HOGWARTS! You remember this from harry potter right? This is to do with Harry Potter! Look! By the merch!"

I didn't like "The Crimes of Grindelwald" because it wasn't about the crimes of Grindelwald.

ACT 1: Explain the common structure of storytelling ACT 2: Apply that Structure to the film in question ACT 3: Let me tell you about NordVPN

One can say that JK Rowling has lost her... ...magic.

Harry Potter was in a passionate physical relationship with his broom 🧹 and that is why he found quidditch so exhilarating.

Newt Scamander is an eccentric, but fairlu normal wizard who wants to write textbooks. Why does he need to be a key figure in in wizard world war 1? Seriously, cramming minor characters into major events like this is something I associate with fanfics based around oc's, not a professionally made movie.

Nobody: JK: Hagrid was called Fagrid by a school bully who was gay for him.

One of my big gripes with this film is that it took everything from the first Fantastic Beasts ending and reset it at the beginning: Credence is gone -> Credence is back (unexplained), Newt and Tina are on good/affectionate terms -> they aren't talking to each other, Jacob loses his memory -> Jacob has his memory back (sort of), Grindelwald is captured -> Grindelwald escapes (ok this one was obviously going to happen at the beginning, but when combined with all the other resets it's just annoying).

People shouldn't be thinking of it as "show don't tell", too many take it literally. We should be saying "prove, don't assert".

All the teleporting onto Hogwarts grounds was driving me insane

She should've written books, and that movies were based on those, not directly from her pen. She wants a compelling story with many, many characters, but on the big screen that is just not possible (Unless you make a tv series like GoT). She should've just taken her time and written another bookseries, not movies.

Fantastic Beasts and How to Milk Them

This series should’ve been a series of documentary-style movies about Newt training magic creatures. Like What We Do In The Shadows.

Professor Snape is a single mom

What works about the first Fantastic Beasts movie is that it doesn't feel like the first part of some grand movie trilogy. Its an isolated story within the Harry Potter universe. Every character's arc finishes and all plot points end nicely. Newt isn't portrayed as the chosen one or the awesome hero, he's just a weird eccentric guy who likes animals. The beginning of this movie is quite literally the ministry forcing Newt to take part in the plot for seemingly no reason. He's not an extremely powerful wizard and this situation doesn't call for his expertise with magical animals. They essentially get a Zoo Keeper to help them fight an extremely dangerous, homicidal dark wizard. The movie should have been about Young Dumbledore because this entire movie is built around a reference to a duel he and Grindelwald had and apparently they're lovers so that would had some character motivation. But nah just have Dumbledore lean against the desk for 5 minutes, its fine.

When they wrote the Lord of the Rings screenplay(imo the greatest adaption of a book ever made) Fran, Philippa and Peter were incredibly firm and removed anything, no matter how cool and popular they were to the fanbase, that wasn't directly important to Frodo or the Ring. An unenviable task since that book is huge and the established fanbase built over decades would be hyper critical. But it was necessary for the sake of making a coherent movie. Yeah they got loads of Oscars but I still don't think they got the recognition they deserved. Especially Fran and Philippa , I feel like Peter Jackson gets most of the credit because he directed as well but the three of them wrote one hell of a screenplay. Rowling sadly does not have those writing chops. AND shes pulling it all out of her ass as she goes since she doesn't have a well written book to go from.

it makes me really sad to see how jk is destroying her own universe trying to create this series when she clearly isn't doing it because she loves it. the difference between the Fantastic Beasts series and Harry Potter is glaring. Harry Potter was clearly written because she loved the story and the characters. fantastic beasts just isn't it

“Girl no, that is not the end of the film!” - the person next to me in the theater😂

This movie was 70% flashbacks so you could "understand" what is happening. No.

J.K. Rowling: "hermione was black all time along" also J.K. Rowling: "proceed to create and kill the useless character played by one of the most attractive black woman i've ever seen"

Regarding "show, don't tell"... to steal a phrase from Barbossa, it's a guideline rather than an actual rule. Same is true for most of the "rules" of storytelling, whether in novels, movies, or otherwise. You _can_ break the "rules," as long as you know what you're doing.

Not to mention: Leta has all that flashback stuff then just straight up dies, nobody cared about her anyway. And nobody really cares about Credence. Not sure why they're focusing on him so much.

Wow, I had the same reaction, except I really did think the end was only the end of the second act. When the new dumbledore brother shot a blast and took out a mountain side I leaned over to my friend and actually said, "Could you imagine if the movie just ended right here." Then the movie ended right there lol

When I first saw the big climax I audibly said "no. This isn't it. It can't be"

Honestly, it feels like Rowling has broken the films themselves into the structure beats. She has 5 movies planned. And so far they seem to fit that theory. Movie one is the opening. The hook to get you interested. Something that is usually only a chapter long in a book, or the first 5 to 10 minites of a film. Movie two is ACT 1. The characters were established in the hook and now we establish the world the story will take place in. That of the wizarding world in the 1920s, and how the world is devided on Grindalwald. Ending with the inciting incident (or plot point 1) and the choice that goes along with it. If the films continue in this manner, then the next film, Movie 3, will be the conflict of the series. As you put it, the rising action. Or Act 2. This is where the main characters are dealing with the conflict, but usually playing catch up to the antagonist. It will then end at the Midpoint (or plot point 2) Movie 4 would then be the second half of ACT 2. More rising action, but different from the previous as the main characters are actively trying to wrestle control back from the antagonist. This fill would then end at either the Crisis or just before it durring the calm before the storm. Which leaves the fifth and final film being ACT 3, the climax and resolution. Where we have our final showdown with the antagonist. If this is how Rowling is writing these films, its a nasty way to do it. It is possible to write this way, but its increadably complicated. I would say a master craft, which Rowling is not a master writer. She had a successful run with Harry Potter, but that was increably simple writing. I'm not saying shes a terrible writer. Harry Potters success shpuld speek for itself. What I am saying, is that shes not a screenwriter. And that trying to write a complicated 5 part screenplay is not something you should attempt on your first pass at screenwriting.

It's almost like Rowling is a book writer, not a movie producer

This is the breakdown of the plot of both Beasts and Crimes so far. Beasts: Where is Credence? Crimes: Who is Credence? Movie 3: Why is Credence? -Summary courtesy of Drax

J.K. killed all of her stories by herself. She's the living example of "can't leave well enough alone".

This sequel hurt me as I loved the first film fully and then there’s just this... like there was NO story ... I mean there was but it was all contradicting itself

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of J.K. Rowling

I think the most criminal thing about Fantastic Beasts 2 was how it's a horrible sequel. Fantastic Beasts 1 had it's flaws certainly but the ending with Credence's Death and Kowalski being forced to forget his adventure and go back to his mundane normal life were tragic. It gave the film a melancholic, sombre ending and you really felt sorry for these characters. Then Fantastic Beasts 2 comes along and completely retcons both of those emotional hooks within the first ten minutes of the film. What a way to ruin the ending of Fantastic Beasts 1.

Fantastic beasts 2: where not to find them.

I tried. I really tried. I would rather kill two hours by watching this review on repeat 6 times.

For a movie titled "the crimes of grindelwalde" grindelwalde is only in the movie for like 10 mimutes

A picture is worth 1000 words, but a 10 minute scene is worth 1 line of dialogue

I'm just watching these for Newt at this point. I sincerely love his character, but it is a shame he's not being featured in better stories.

"There's no way J. K Rowling could forget to have a second act in her movie" Well she forgot to make Ron not a joke, forgot to make Slytherin a house that wasn't just "bad guy house" and a couple other things. Whatever your opinions on her, like we need to be realistic here: She didn't become the super star because she wrote amazing books. She wrote good books, with good characters and good world building around the wizarding world. Especially now, this doesn't feel like a passionate writer wanting to expand the world she's written. it felt like her wanting to line her deep pockets a little more

Nobody: JK: Want to know what else was 9 and 3/4's?

The problem is that it's easy to write exposition dumps like this into a long book, but it doesnt work in a 3 hour movie. Youre right that the entire movie feels like an exhausting exposition, then everything explodes, followed by wild, out-of-left-field plottwist that only exists to set up the next movie. Youd think the 2nd movie of a proposed trilogy would have the most rising action, not the most exposition. I felt like there was going to be a quiz after about all the characters.

The narrator's critique boils down to: Rowling needed to write a book form of the crimes of grindelwald and have someone write the screen play based on the manuscript.

In my opinion Fantastic Beasts 2 is just a lump of solid filler and exposition that serves no other purpose besides allowing the 3rd film to happen.

This vid is literally 19 minutes of roasting Rowling lol

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald... Felt more like "Grindelwald 2: Also There Might Be A Fantastic Beast Somewhere In The Background Maybe"

God, hearing Lily's theme really brings back memories.

At the end of the movie, I was like: “this literally just felt like filler” and two weeks later, my dad was like: “did we even watch that movie?”

JK Rowling: I can't canonize the gay character I announced to get praise because the studio won't give me full control over the script Also JK Rowling: Let's make a movie with no conflict

Something that also bothered me is how each new movie in the Harry Potter universe drifts further and further away from spells. Most of the spells cast in the film are done without magic words. It feels like an important part of the world building is the magic and how it works, and that it's being thrown out for some reason.

The midpoint of Jurassic Park is the T-Rex breaking out of its paddock, stepping between the cars, and giving us our first earful of her glorious roar.

I was so excited as those dark shrouds started to fly around and they said "Grindelwald is gathering his followers' thinking that something was about to go down band that the villain had made the first move toward conflict as the heroes were yet un-prepared-- but then the sheet blew away and nothing happened.

Nobody: JK Rowling: The Harry Poter Storyline actually took place during the Cold War.

Several people in my theater went to sleep during this film and it was both hilarious and sad.

From the very first time I watched the movie I thought that flashback-exposition dump was so weird. We get a bunch of characters together, one tells a story, then the other tells and even longer story and we basically learn nothing of significance, then one of them dies. Like, what was that for?? So we know what Leta's greatest fear was, the fact that she got sick of her brother crying so she swapped him with another baby and her real brother died? But her brother apparently isn't dead, he's Credence, or is he? No he's not her brother, he's not the baby she swapped her brother with either, how is he connected to any of this? IDK I mean he says it himself if I remember right, he says "So who am I?" or sth like that. We literally learn nothing, we just wasted time.

I feel like a movie set in the time Voldemort was reigning would have been a lost more interesting than 5 movies about some author during grindelwalds time.

When i saw this film in the cinema, someone cried when the characters died in that climax. Like, they cried out loud, i couldn't even remember the names of the characters, it was so funny.

"The _real crime_ is Rowling's for doing such a poor job at structuring the whole thing " lmaoooooo

I was so pissed off by this movie that I was literally embarrassed to have dragged some friends to see it, based on the great trailer...

Years later, I'm still wondering what the crimes of Grindelwald actually are.

"Voldermort's plan was to make everyone pregnant"

Can't Dumbldore keep his hands out of his pockets?

What upset about this movie was that in the first FB film, there was this beautiful ending between Kowalski and Queenie. In the second movie, in the payoff to that scene, they use it as cheap comic relief and just kind of completely gloss over it, ruining the emotional impact that scene could have had.

I always believed that the flashbacks to Letha’s flashbacks as wel as the conversation with Dumbledore was an attempt of Rowling to make people like Letha and that way feel bad about her dying. I tought she would know that good actions would make us like her. Instead of standing there looking emotionless and you know, killing her brother and all.

And here my biggest problem was that Dumbledore, who was previously defined by his accomplishments, competence, and compassion now comes from some legendary line of wizards who have prophecies about them and an affinity for Phoenixes. It's easy to be a great person when it's setup for you. Kind of cheapens the whole thing.

dumbledore isnt the type of person to just tell newt about the bloodpack

I would rather relive my parents divorce than watch this movie again

Writing a book is something else then writing a screenplay. Rowling needed someone like you to correct the technical part of the screenplay. I constantly had a feeling rowling wrote newt and lestrange as Harry and hermoine being older and were growing apart. They had a different personality but newt and lestrange were recycled characters.

This film seems like a single episode in the middle of a Netflix series that only really works if you binge watch the whole series in a single day.

March 22, 2019 In reality Dobby was the Chosen One. And he was terminally ill which is why he let Harry become the Chosen One. That's why he was so obsessed with him. He was vicariously living through him. WHERE IS MY PAYCHECK?

I completely agree, when it reached the climax I legit thought it would be a 3h movie, cause it felt like it was the middle of the movie and not the end, and I was like "Wait, that's it ?"

The fact is, she should have written this series as books, then let a screenwriter adapt them into films just like with Harry Potter, but Warner Bros likely didn't want to wait that long. Hopefully the third film will be much better since I am pretty sure Kloves is helping her write it.

I also think that the characters were really lost in this film. For example, Newt doesn’t seem the type to fight with his brother. So the fact that this was one of the main plot points of the movie really threw me off. I feel like the character’s personalities weren’t consistent from movie to movie.

to me the worst thing about the movie is that one inclusion to use the meme No one: I would really like to see some of the other teachers of Harry in this fantastic beast franchise JK Rowling: I got you, I am just going to wiggle a young McGonagall in there. Everyone: But she used to be born in 1935 JK Rowling: Yes I know. Everyone: But the movie takes place in 1927 right JK Rowling: Yeah it takes place like a year after the first movie Everyone: So that is 1927 JK Rowling: I think it is, I am not that good at math, remember that one time I said Dumbledore was 150 only for him to turn out to be 115 at his death. Everyone: Yeah we remember, you're really bad at this plot consistency and internal logic stuff, aren't you? JK Rowling: *crickets*

Seems like they had a lot of characters in order to check all the diversity boxes, then they had to give them all screen time, then they had no time left for an actual plot.

My main complaint is that these movies aren’t self-contained. Sure, there’s going to be 5 of them and they need an overarching story and conflict. But there were 7 HP books and each of them had their own thing going on. Philosopher’s Stone had, well, the philosopher’s stone. Goblet had the triwizard tournament. Even HPB had Slughorn’s memory and the search for the Horcrux. But fantastic beast movies have nothing going on. It’s like, the thing that these movies are about aren’t actually what the movies are about. In the first one, Newt’s trying to recapture his escaped beasts, but what’s actually important is Graves/Grindelwald seducing Credence. In the second one, everyone’s trying to figure out who Credence is, but it’s actually about Dumbledore trying to get his blood pact back. As an audience, we’re given no set up for this. We don’t know why we need to care. The second one is the biggest offender of this. You can’t watch only the second one. You’re going to have to watch the next movies to see why this one mattered. Prisoner of Azkaban was the first HP I saw. I didn’t catch everything, but it was easy to see why the things that were happening mattered. In Crimes of Grindelwald, if you had never watched any of the other movies, you’d have no idea what was going on the whole time and you would have no idea what the purpose of the movie was. All of it’s runtime is just building up to Newt getting the blood pact and us finding out Credence is Aurelius Dumbledore, 2 things that had absolutely no set up, and 2 things that have no explanation as to why we should care. So now we HAVE to watch the next ones.

What i disliked: Queenie being like Voldemorts Mum, way too many HP references, not enough beasts.

That graph killed me lol, great vid, totally agree because something just felt really off with this movie

This actually explains why about halfway through I was completely lost and wondering why I should care. There wasn't a middle act that builds tension and make me care.

Grindelwald wanted to prevent WW2. He is the hero. Change my mind.

I agree! I also think my main problem with the movie is that this is not a stand alone film. Every movie-- regardless if it is a franchise or not, needs to be able to stand on its own. The movie should not rely solely on the past or future movies in that universe. All this movie does is set up future plot points for the next installment of Fantastic Beasts, and does not focus on the ones it was supposed to fulfill in this movie.

I think one of the main reason for J K Rowling messing up the script is that she is an book author, there should have been a scriptwriter like on every harry potter movie, the studio obviously had to much confidence in her writing ability that she would be able to write a script and that's not a dig at Rowling she is having to do something completely different working within film run times and thinking about limits in budget etc. Also David Yates as the director she have some more blame then you place on him here, as he could have changed some things around to fit a film format better.

Notice how JK Rowling created Harry Potter for the passion of writing these characters and their stories, and created Fantastic Beasts to make money

It really speaks to how her writing changed, or rather how it failed to change in any positive way. She was convinced people were there for the world and the lore and the dynamic action, when really it was all about how people became attached to Harry and his friends, struggling against a darkening world where the adults were either complacent, or impotent in the face of the dangers rising around them. She could have gone that same route with Newt and his friends, but wanted to make it another defining epic rather than let it be a smaller, less consequential story.

At this point I genuinely think someone replaced JK Rowling with a clone with only a very minimal idea of how humans think

She was too busy writing fan fictions for her own characters, about intense sexual relationships and what not.

Regarding cutting the 11 minutes at Hogwarts down to a single line in the beginning, you see, that would require Dumbledore to be honest and upfront with someone. And Dumbledore doesn’t do that, he’s a cryptic, secretive jerk.

I feel like the failure of this movie and jk Rowling can be summarized in the fact that in the movie Mcgonagall is a teacher at Hogwarts in the 20s when she was born in 1935 🥴

I’ve read each book at least 20 times so this movie’s insane lack of continuity makes it entirely unwatchable for me

This should have been a book or a series. JK Rowling can’t write screenplays.

And the magical beasts in the movie were trivial. The kelpy is forgotten as are most of the ones that escaped the circus. The only reason they bothered with the dragon is so Newt would have a strong pokemon to summon later. Newt felt like a side character in his own movie.

The fact that I barely learned anything about Fantastic Beasts _or_ where to find them is problem number one with this series. The creatures were barely a sub plot. I understand budgeting with films and how pricey CGI is, so there's really only so many digitalized aspects you can write about, but this is silly. Also, taking the setting to America had potential for so much extra story line and she decided on NYC in the 1920s like that hasn't been beaten to extinction.

It's always criticism that's copyright claimed.

5:46 "Now I am no artist, says every teacher who's ever written on a whiteboard, ever." LOL'd, he's right.... as a professor myself, I legitimately say that when I write on the whiteboard and so do all my colleagues, trololol. Instant like for you, Mr. video maker.

while I agree with this entire analysis, i'd be curious what your take on the move my neighbour totoro would be. seemingly, it also has a sort of structure of having a meandering first act that isn't really leading to anywhere and then a sudden third act climax. but somehow it works spectacularly and no one can say it's a bad movie. i''d just love to hear your thoughts

I think that the scene with Dumbledore looking in the mirror is the one Hogwarts scene I would keep because it does show more than just the blood pack exposition

You using the music from the good Harry Potter films is honestly making me saaaaaad

fantastic beast 2 better know as: *when you stole a fanfic and said: yeah this will doit just fine~*

I agree the structure (or lack thereof) is probably the biggest objective flaw with this movie. The one that was most *subjectively* bad for me though, was what they did to Queenie and Jacob. Their relationship in the 1st movie was simple, sweet, and although a bit unrealistic, I was still very invested in it, enough that Jacob losing his memories of Queenie at the end was genuinely tragic. Then what do they do to that very adorable couple in the next movie? Jacob is relegated to a 3rd-rate side character who does nothing at all, and Queenie turns into a controlling, borderline-insane yandere who slips her boyfriend magical roofies while having the gall to get mad at HIM for calling her "crazy." "Character derailment" doesn't even begin to describe it.