The Secrets Of Dumbledore

Thank the gods this was an improvement.

I was actually eagerly anticipating the end credits for this cause I wanted to know two things. Who directed it and who wrote it? David Yates returns to direct but honestly it feels so different and is so visually impressive at times that I thought they did get a different director. And wonder upon wonders, I was right! J.K. Rowling had the help of a screenwriter and worked in conjunction with them, and the script works for the better. It's not as bombastic as you would expect, if anything it sets the board for future confrontations between Dumbledore and Grindlewald as more or less they confront one another and know they will have to fight, while Albus recruits the help of Newt and newcomer to the wizarding world Eulalie to help him gain an edge over Grindlewald. Again, not very big stakes and the best way I can summarize it is the first two movies were more in the tone of Prisoner Of Azkaban whereas this movie seems more Order Of The Phoenix or even Half Blood Prince. Which is odd because you have a fair few cutesy moments, but then you see a magical creature get it's throat slit. It just isn't a fun kids movie series at this point, there is history and intrigue in this period of time and they do want to expand on it which I love. Before seeing this I wanted it to cap off at 3 movies, but truthfully after seeing this bring on the fourth film! It does what any good sequel should do, expand on the story, advance the characters, and introduce new elements. Newt is way more sociable and warm, a far cry from his shy and non-human interest in the first film. Eulalie is a warm welcome to this series, she is lovely, I think she's brilliant, nothing but a joy to watch throughout and I can't wait to see more. Jude is outstanding, having so much more time on screen and delivering his own Albus while staying true to the character we originally met, and the dynamic with him and Grindlewald is the best part of the film. Cause you can tell and infer a great deal from Jude's and Mads' performances, they love each other and would prefer not to fight but you can tell there's so much more behind their eyes. I loved it. Plus, I can never have too much Mads Mikkelsen in my life thank you very much. The visuals and cinematography are leaps and bounds better than I dare even say most of the Harry Potter series, the shots they do in this I wish were in the other movies it's done super well. All I wanted was a good movie and I got a good movie that made me want another. I can't ask more than that. 4 stars, 8.5/10, good end to the week!

In Retrospect: The Crimes Of Grindlewald

Well I kinda remember why I haven't seen this since opening day.

I wasn't super keen on it the first time around so has the passage of time lessened the impact of a less than favored sequel? Well I must admit there were more things I appreciated and very much liked on second viewing, and then there were things I was just like, well you could have left that out and just not did that. I've heard more than a fair share of bad mouthing over the years on this movie so I'll try to no let that lead me into tangents. I feel the story was mostly okay until 3/4 of the way through then it dropped significantly, and it's rather difficult to talk about it and not break it entirely down scene by scene. We don't have that much time or space to write that much. So I'll just say, I am okay with Newt still being a strong player in magical events despite his less than action hero status, and if the filmmakers are taking a more long way round version of the hero's journey where we fully see Newt become a capable and important wizard throughout the series then I have no problem with that. I like we get Jacob back quite a bit, he was a fun and happy character that brought the first film some levity so I don't mind he comes back even if he was drugged against his will by the person he loves. Just...we'll get back to that. Great seeing Zoe again, I got more out of Leta's story and the flashback sequences were some of my favorite parts of the movie all around, she's a rebellious and damaged witch that found some solace in a friend like Newt and honestly how many Slytherin's can you name who you like as people? Jude Law is still awesome, I'm so happy we're getting more emphasis on him in the next movie, I see more of how he plays Dumbledore as a figure who wants to help but has to stay out of the action, almost a older Obi-Wan type character that we'll get in that upcoming series, he just plays it perfectly. Now on the opposite side of the acting spectrum, a lot of the side character fat could have been trimmed. It's not necessary to see the backstory of a snake turned horcrux, Credence trying to discover his family is by no means a bad story but it wasn't given enough time to feel important or impactful. I feel Ezra Miller was almost floundering for any semblance of substance to cling onto in this for his role, so I can't hold this against him. Johnny Depp isn't a bad villain in my eyes, again more underutilized and not given much to work with, no harm or foul on the actor. Alison Sudol as Queenie however, they did you dirty my love! You took a queen, a marvel to behold, one of the most lovable and charming characters in this series, and you assassinated her before my very eyes. She kidnaps Jacob, force feeds a love potion to him even though he loved her already, is off her rocker for no good godforsaken reason, and then just joins the evil wizard for oh! You guessed it! No reason. Look at how they've massacred my girl. There is no justifying sloppy terrible character writing. The plot just kinda meanders about, with no solid connective tissue to link so many character's stories, and once that last fourth of the movie kicks in is when it becomes a stupid soap opera. Revelations and personal history dropped forty levels on your head without prelude or intrigue, contrivance after contrivance, and a villain speech that strains the human mind's capacity for logic. I mean if Rowling did a good and admirable job writing the first movie and not making it an overcomplicated or stupid story, but then failed miserably here I'm just wondering what occured. And I think I can narrow it down to, she writes books. Not screenplays. If she wrote a 400+ page book and titled it The Crimes Of Grindlewald and could flesh everything out to her heart's content, I think we wouldn't have a problem. But she needs to write a script for a movie roughly two and a half hours long, so the disadvantages of her writing become more noticeable. Now if she relegates the actual script to a screenwriter and she just throws out ideas and works with them, we should be in safe hands here for however many we have left. It's a mixed bag of a movie and people can either like it or despise it, but me personally I find it complicated but average at best. 2 stars, 5.5/10, and I ask the ancient mystics and magi for a small bit of magic for the next movie. Until then.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindlewald

I know, I'm late. And I'm not too sure if I got a headache from this movie.

I have such conflicted emotions on this movie. I feel I have to make my stance clear on this matter, I am what I like to call a 'light' fan of Harry Potter. Really like the films, I have some nostalgia in play since I was 6 when the first movie hit, and me and my mom even if it was a school day went to see the new Harry Potter movies opening day. But I'm not that hardcore into it, I was more a regular fan in my youth but I still enjoy those movies today! I greatly enjoyed the first Fantastic Beasts movie, it was seeing something new yet familiar and it was interesting. I've heard some people say the movie is cluttered and busy, and yes I can safely say that the plot is nothing but heavy, involved, and busy! So much happens that it actually bogs the film down! Now some people I'm sure could look past it and still enjoy it, and there are bright spots in this bleak sky! I can honestly say Jude Law is the best part of the whole movie, but he's barely in it. To see Professor Dumbledore so young, and learning new things about him is wonderful and Jude Law pulls it off fully! Eddie Redmayne is still wonderful as Newt and still exudes some specific Time Lord traits, but it still doesn't save the film. You know what I think is the worst part of the whole movie? Not the heavy plot, or the several instances that does not pay off in the end, but the fact that I have this nudging feeling that this movie panders to Harry Potter fans. Now what do I mean by that you might ask? Of course it does, to a degree, it's a spinoff of an acclaimed and popular series! But there is more to it than that, for me. It's like the movie needs to lean back on the Harry Potter franchise because there is so little that the Fantastic Beasts characters contribute to the story, and I just had a revelation! You know how some people say the plot of Raiders Of The Lost Ark would end exactly the same way if Indiana Jones would not have gotten involved? I think that's utter rubbish to begin with, but this movie I think would end the exact same way if Newt did not appear. Nothing happens! But back to the main point, it's like the filmmakers were like, "Hey! You remember Dumbledore, and Professor McGonagall, and Hogwarts, and the LeStrange family, and the phoenix in Dumbledore's office, and the snake Nagini? Guess what! It's all in this movie because we didn't have enough original character content to fill this movie!" and it hurts the movie. I like to call this the Star Wars prequel syndrome, now I know Star Wars references itself at nauseom and that is a bit distracting but the Harry Potter world does not need this fanservice pandering, not at this level. You can reference Hogwarts or the other wizarding schools, or a older character that pops up later, but when you flat out show the sorcerer's stone.....no!! Ohh my head....I have no idea if I can recommend this. If you read this whole review and still want to see the movie, by all means do. But with this much plot jam packed in this movie, I can truthfully say this franchise will not last beyond the 3rd movie. It will be a trilogy, no more no less. It can't go on for 8 movies, because there's just not much there! By the time the first movie hit, J.K. Rowling was on what, the 4th maybe even 5th book? She had a plan for a beginning, a middle, and an end. This series does not have that! If it makes it to movie #4 I will be amazed. Alright, I'm done. Hopefully The Grinch does not suck as bad as the 2004 movie, I'll let you know tomorrow. I genuinely wish to do all the Harry Potter movies either before the end of the year or not that long into the new year. Because I need a pick me up to remind me why I looked forward to this movie.

Early Man

Dang Aardman, I hate to say this about you but you made such a forgettable movie.

Early Man had my attention, I really love the Wallace & Gromit shorts Aardman Studios did so when I saw they got a new movie coming out, I was happy to see them again. But...they made it a sports movie. Ugh. Why?? If you want to make a boring, forgettable, and all around useless movie you make a sports movie. If you have seen one sports movie you have seen them all. You ready for this plot? It's gonna blow your mind. So our story begins in the Paleozoic Era, where a tribe of cavemen are living their avergae everyday life until they are invaded from bronze clad warlords that push them out of their home into the desolate wasteland. A young man named Dug is whisked away to their kingdom where he discovers an odd game they play, football (or to you Americans out there, soccer) and he makes a deal with the leader of the warlords saying if he wins the game of football against his best team, his tribe returns to their land and if they lose, do you even care at this point? So begins every underdog sports movie ever made. Now granted I did not see this coming. Everything from the poster, to the plot synopsis, to the friggin' trailer treated this movie as another oddball adventure from the people who brought you Wallace & Gromit, with the same british humor, well done claymation style, and just a sense of fun in this movie. But no. Boring ass sports movie with dashes of funny british humor. Characters are very simple, I do love the fact they got Tom Hiddleston to play the villain as this snobbish french guy, and Eddie Redmayne is still a likeable, kind, and good hearted protagonist but everyone else falls flat. I really cannot for the life of me recommend this movie. Hell, I feel like I need to go back and watch their other movies, because they have made some decent stuff guys I swear. Do not let this movie ruin your view of a very good production company. Early Man can be skipped and you will not miss a thing. I am never reviewing another sports movie until either Cool Runnings hits my list, or Creed II comes out. Sports movies are boring. They don't contribute anything, I'm not saying the lives of people who play sports are worthless, or the stories of famous sports affiliated people can't make compelling cinema, but how in the holy name of the sultan of swat can you make sports movies when there is nothing there to make it interesting? And don't start that whole, "Well you loved The Sandlot so shut your face nerd!" because The Sandlot is not a sports movie. That is probably why I like it so much because it is not a sports movie, it is a summer movie. Go back and watch it, then watch all the Rocky movies, and you have seen the best and only sports movies you have ever seen. Tune in tomorrow for another Aardman movie, and hopefully I like it better than this one. It has pirates in it! Wait...my track record with pirates sucks. Fu-

In Retrospect: Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them

Yep, still highly enjoyable.

Fantastic Beasts has finally hit video and I got to sit down and rewatch it, and it is better on second viewing. I still love the setting of 1920s New York, something out of our element both in time and space with new characters, a good story, and fantastic beasts. I still say Eddie Redmayne is the best part of the whole movie, still the most Timelord wizard you ever did see and I love him to death. Now originally on viewing I hated Tina, not the actress who potrays the character I like her just fine and dandy but the character just seemed so out of place, this timid little worry mouse, but then I watched it again put myself in her shoes, and my entire perspective changed on her. She has to put up with some bullcrap in this movie, of course she would act like this, the poor dear's practically harboring on a nervous breakdown any moment. Jacob is still very entertaining, he gets that everyday man thing down to perfection, and yes the ending is still very bittersweet, but I still like it. Queenie is still absurdly adorable, I just friggin' want to squeeze her she's so goshdarn, gee whiz, cutesy! Graves is still an interesting villain, and I can only imagine where the story could pick up after the events of this one. A 5 picture deal? Really? Damn. I mean I'm psyched to see more but you just wonder how this is all going to go down. The creatures are still great, I'm happy each has their own distinct personality and traits, you could never confuse the creatures in this movie and that's something I greatly admire. The action while minimal is still really good, the drama hits when it needs to, the comedy is still very good, and I just want to see more of these characters. If memory serves (and it rarely does for me) I think the next movie comes out in 2018 and I can deal with that. Probably. Highly recommend buying this movie, it's great for adults, it's great for kids, it's a movie I can definitely see viewing multiple times in the future, and hopefully you do too.

Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them

Well 15 years after The Sorcerer's Stone hit theaters, we venture once more in to the magical world created by J.K. Rowling. Does it do justice to her works?

The short answer is, yes in a way. The long answer, let's begin. The first thing I have to point out is I have no idea what a movie is about beyond trailers, so I have a sense of surprise when I see the movie, and this movie had a lot going on it other than just an easter egg hunt for magical creatures. The story takes place in 1926 New York City, and I was actually a bit off with the time. I thought it was either going to be the 30s or the 40s, I even narrowed my guess down to a year, 1937 so I was a bit off. It's quite interesting to see the magical world not only in a different era but also a different country. The basic rules of the wizarding community is still there but slightly different, and my God I thought the Ministry Of Magic were massive assholes, this organization set in America was the bane of my existence for this entire movie! I have never had more hatred for a fictional organization in my life. But all it does is make our protagonist's more enjoyable and you can really stand for what they are trying to do. Our hero Newt Scamander is a brilliant zoologist for the wizarding world and is on a quest to obtain a rare magical animal only found in America, after he arrives though several mischievous creatures escape and the hunt is on to capture them all to avoid the revelation that there are witches and wizards walking amongst us. But something more dangerous is happening around them. First of all the scenery is great, both in location and in the creatures. Yes you can tell it is very obvious CGI but it still looks impressive. The magic is familiar and yet new and looks and even feels just right. The casting is perfect in the case of our main hero, played by Eddie Redmayne who I can fully believe is Mr. Scamander and oddly enough he acts well...very Time Lord-ish. He feels like the wizard equivalent of The Doctor, in fact Matt Smith tried out for the role and Eddie looks a lot like Matt both in clothing and physical features. I mean it's just uncanny! He is the real star of the movie to me, nothing else compares. The story kept me interested all the way through, and even had a twist that no one could ever see coming and made my jaw drop to the floor. The creatures are brilliant in design and you do care for them greatly, even though I was very shocked at how few creatures actually escaped. I mean, in the trailer it seems like 10 creatures actually escaped when in reality it added up to about 5 total. Not a bad thing by any true stretch but did turn out to be a bit misleading. Beyond that, I really liked this movie! When it was first announced I just asked why couldn't they leave well enough alone, but obviously the world of Harry Potter is a bit more expansive than the 8 books, now is this movie series good enough to warrant four more sequels? That can only be answered in time my friends. Until next time.