The Crimes of Grindelwald: A Review

I saw Crimes of Grindelwald recently, and overall gotta say, I enjoyed it for the most part. Many fans I know don’t, but keep in mind, if we want movies on the Maurauders, the Founders, or any others, these need to do well. If you set aside the “I don’t want to see this, meh” attitude there’s a lot to like.

The Good

-Visually Stunning

– A great plot. It gives real incite on how people, good people, get sucked into ideologies that in handset we portray as son evil. There is a subtle foil being played to World War Two, and it serves the movie well.

-Acting. The characters were fabulous as a general rule (I wish there had been more of Tina). The acting was stellar. Eddie Redmayne brings Newt to life in a beautiful way. He is shy, and has physical quirks that seem to come natural. He isn’t a hero type, and doesn’t magically become one. It’s how it should be.

Johnny Deppa must be mentioned because though he is problematic his acting cannot and should not be denied. He portrayed a type of villain I fear most and did so with a finesse only a veteran could bring. GG is a villain whose words make his world sound like a utopia. He can convince even the most stoic of his benevolent intents. Johnny Depp shows the conflicted nature as well as this silver tongue well.

To not speak of Jude Law would be wrong. Dumbledores screen time is limited, but man he made an impact. The self assured grin he wore, it was, for lack of better word, swagger. Dumbledore was confident and restrained. I want more.

To not mention the ladies would be wrong Zoe Kravitz acting chops continue to grow, though it a little reminiscent of her role in X men. I this this one can stand on its own though. She was the unlikely hero, with a tortured background. She carried undue guilt and didn’t know how to set it aside. The expressions Kravitz used to convey all this were beautiful. She has the line that breaks you heart, “You never met a monster you couldn’t love.” Yet, she didn’t milk it or overplay it.

Last, Allison Sudal, aka Queenie, who had such low billing it hurt. WOW. She blew it out of the water. She showed general emotion and turmoil. She was not flat, and showed both strength and weakness. She was the surprise I didn’t expect.

-Several good plot holes addressed

The Bad

Not enough Tina, or emotional range for Jacob (writers help him out)

-Flamel thrown in for no real reason

-Nagini backstory was started but not really fleshed our. Seemed kind of ransom. Maybe this will be sorted out later

– The circus felt random. Visually cool, but for no particular reason.

-Not enough French Wizardry Culture.

-I understand shifting the focus from Newt, but the lack of beasts, it makes him seem irrelevant.

The Questions: Spoiler Warning

I will fan riddle this out later, but for you to ponder

-Who is Credence?

-Who is Aurelis Dumbledore? Did he exist

-Was Queenie enchanted

-Why didn’t Jacob and Queenie immigrate to UK?

-Why did Dumbledore and Grindelwald make the promise they did? What type of magic is that?

-Who was with Corvus Lestrange when he died?

-Who is Letas half brother/ Yusuf Kama

-How does Nagini come to be with Voldemort in the future

-What does all of this mean for the fandom


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s