One cannot help but
wonder at Warner Bros. Whilst a new film set in the Harry Potter universe holds
undeniable appeal to the fans, I cannot help but worry that the studio is now
trying to extend a completed franchise by adapting Rowling’s spin-off books as
a means of trying to dull some of the ache left behind by Batman vs. Superman. Contextually, I took this movie with a grain
of salt and whilst the film itself is very pretty and actually very sweet; not
a bad adaptation at all, it’s far from wonderful.
The story is actually kind of
nice when we consider that the film is based on a fictional ‘textbook’ about
magical creatures. It follows author Newt Skamander, off the boat from England
to New York where the magical community is underground and the dark wizard
Grindelwald is at large. Through a series of mishaps Newt’s suitcase filled
with magical creatures is mistakenly picked up by a muggle and the beasts are
accidently set loose. Already falsely accused of wreaking havoc downtown, time
is against Newt as he rushes about the city tracking down his creatures before
the authorities do whilst simultaneously trying to prove his innocence by
identifying the true culprit terrorising the city.
I honestly did think this
was a lovely film. For a start, because it is adapted by Rowling, directed by
David Yates, and produced by David Hayman and Steve Kloves: all the ‘old gang’
so to speak, it does have that nostalgic feeling, it does feel like a Harry Potter
movie even though the events are taking place several decades before Harry
reads Newt’s book in school. So the Harry
Potter aesthetic is already there and this is a major plus for the movie.
The story, whilst being a little flaky, sometimes predictable, and having that
feeling of twisting/creating events and facts to make them work together, is
actually not a bad adaptation. We have characters that we’ve already heard of
and the movie doesn’t ruin itself by over-explaining everything, in the
possible event of having Harry Potter
virgins in the audience. If you haven’t read the books, then some of the asides
and little inside titbits may not make sense, but the film is quite good in
this regard because it really doesn’t exclude those who aren’t familiar with
the stories.
However, the establishment of a magical community in America,
whilst working fine, did feel a little rushed and sometimes flimsy. Yes,
American witches and wizards are going to be different from British magical
citizens, but the way it’s depicted in this movie is in a very backward way: a
political statement that is ham-fisted and obvious.
On the plus side we have a
great band of misfit characters that band together, which is very lovely. Eddie
Redmayne as Newt Skamander is adorably awkward always with his head cocked to
one side, which was a very nice touch I thought.
But without a doubt, the real
stars of the show are the computer wizards! The world inside Skamander’s
suitcase is incredible and the creatures brought to life on screen are
stunning: fearsome, beautiful, unnerving, and cute. The interactions that the
actors have with these CGI creatures is actually what gives the film its
sweetness and heart; you can really see the fascination and love that Newt has
for them and it’s beautiful.
At the end of the day, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is a fine film: it’s a
relatively good adaptation, it’s got heart, and the aesthetic feels nice and
familiar. But I have to admit that there was a little voice in my head
throughout the movie asking why they couldn’t just leave the Harry Potter world alone. What can we
expect now? A dramatic sports movie adaptation of Quidditch Through the Ages? And I can’t help but wonder if the
story of Grindelwald and Dumbledore is in the running for a film series now.
Starring: Eddie Redmayne, Colin Farrell, Katherine Waterson, Dan Fogler, Ezra
Miller, Samantha Morton, Faith Wood-Blagrove, Jenn Murray, Carmen Ejogo, Alison
Sudol, Gemma Chan, Ron Perlman, and Johnny Depp.
Rating: M
No comments:
Post a Comment