Fantastic Beasts: 10 Reasons Why The Crimes Of Grindelwald Is A Massive Disappointment
The latest Wizarding World film is an absolute catastrophe.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them was an unexpected delight when it was released in 2016. With a script written by Potter author herself, J. K. Rowling, and the entire creative team behind the last handful of Potter films returning for the film, it was a surprisingly solid prequel that expanded the magical world in some fun ways.
Which meant that despite the controversies surrounding nearly every aspect of the upcoming sequel, from Depp's casting to Rowling's infamous retcons apparently taking center stage, there was reason to remain hopeful for Crimes of Grindelwald.
Turns out, we shouldn't have been. Not only is Crimes of Grindelwald easily the worst film ever set in the Wizarding World; it is one of the worst blockbusters to be released this year. It is a staggering misstep from Rowling and the entire creative team, who did so right by the final Potter films.
Let's dig into all of the major ways that Crimes of Grindelwald is such an aggressively massive disappointment to fans and casual viewers alike.
HEAVY SPOILERS WITHIN!
10. It Ignores The Previous Film
The first ten minutes of The Crimes of Grindelwald are devoted to entirely undoing every single consequence from the third act of the previous film.
The opening of the film sees Johnny Depp's Gellert Grindelwald breaking free from his cell in the American Ministry of Magic during a transfer, undoing the arrest that only happened in the last few minutes of the previous film. Ezra Miller's Credence Barebone is suddenly alive again, which is given no explanation other than some generic exposition that simpy yadda-yaddas over the situation and hopes audiences don't notice.
Dan Fogler's Jacob Kowalski comes into the film with his memory immediately restored, after the climax of the first film essentially solely revolving around him and the rest of New York City being obliviated and having their memories erased.
Within minutes, all the consequences from the prior film are completely erased. It makes for convoluted and disjointed storytelling, which is all-the-stranger considering that Rowling wrote both of these scripts herself.
Why put in all of these consequences at the end of the first film if you're simply going to completely ignore/undo them and set everything back to the status quo at the start of the next film?