Everything wrong with Fantastic Beasts: the Crimes of Grindelwald
Plot holes, timeline issues, and bad choices, oh my!
Even before the movie came to theaters, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald was marred with controversy. Between the allegations of abuse against Johnny Depp or finding out that an Asian woman was playing a subservient snake, there was a lot that had the internet buzzing. After the movie premiered, it only got worse. Now, I love the Wizarding World as much as the next Potterhead, but even I have to admit there are a lot of problems with this movie. I’m not the only one, as this is the first Harry Potter movie to get a rotten score on Rotten Tomatoes. I hope that the next one is better than this one.
Here’s a breakdown of everything that’s wrong with the movie.
Professor McGonagall was always one of my favorite characters. She was sassy and Scottish, two of my favorite things. She was a lot of people’s favorites, which is why it seemed like a cool idea to add her into the movie as a little surprise for fans. However, it makes no sense. McGonagall started teaching at Hogwarts in 1956. She wasn’t even born when the flashback took place. What purpose does her cameo serve? It does nothing except ruin the magic with the obvious gaping hole.
My favorite thing about the first movie was Newt. He was quirky, awkward, and a little cinnamon roll. The story was unique, different from Harry Potter while still being along the same lines. However, Crimes of Grindelwald went a whole different path. Newt seemed more of a second character to Dumbledore. The hunt for fantastic beasts was forgotten. Instead of a magical quest for mythical beasts, we are given a Voldemort-like character and another wizarding war. While it’s technically the first war, it feels like a repeat of the one with Harry Potter. Honestly, if they were going to turn this into a Dumbledore prequel, which is what this is now, they should have just had that be the main draw from the beginning. I’m not a fan of this bait and switch.
One of my biggest grievances with Crimes of Grindelwald is the fact that Credence is revealed to be Dumbledore’s brother. That and Queenie’s betrayal, which I have a whole separate article for, are my main qualms. If this is not a lie by Grindelwald to manipulate Credence (which I really hope it is), then we have some major issues. I go more into depth in this article, but there is no real good explanation for how this is possible. Without any mention of a brother in Harry Potter, even by the greatest snoop of all time Rita Skeeter, where did this brother go? With a dead mother and a father in Azkaban (who then also died) where did this brother come from? It makes no sense.
While I absolutely love Jacob, he shouldn’t have been in the movie. Or, at least come up with a better explanation for bringing him back! To just drop the fact the obliviate only took away the bad memories is ridiculous. What about Hermoine’s parents who were obliviated? Their happy memories were taken, too. Was it a spell versus potion thing? If so, can someone please address that, because it just seems sloppy.
What did you think? Was the sequel as good as the first?
Featured Image: Flickering Myth