Fantastic beasts 2: The Crimes of Grindelwald

Fantastic beasts 2: The Crimes of Grindelwald is the 10th movie set in the Harry Potter universe and the second Fantastic Beasts movie. It takes place about six months after the events of Fantastic Beasts and where to find them. 

What's good?

The movie does not have 3D release which is good. Firstly, because Potterverse films don't really need 3D to enhance them. Secondly, the last 2 movies ('Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2' and 'Fantastic Beasts and where to find them' didn't work in 3D) and thirdly, the lack of 3D was good as this gives audiences one less element to criticise.

The re appearance of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry for barely a few minutes, will evoke a feeling of nostalgia among Potterheads. Jude Law as Albus Dumbledore and Johnny Depp as Gellert Grindelwald put in good performances, but they don't come face to face. The makers are obviously saving it for the final installment of the spin off prequel series which will see the legendary duel between the two, take place. (I hope Newt or some fantastic beast doesn't make an appearance in that duel to keep with the fantastic beasts theme and it being Newt's story. Which is an argument given regarding the title and the central character(s) or a lack of it?)

What's bad?

The lack of a central character.

Arguments could be made that a slew of appearances by magical creatures and their master Newt makes Newt the central character but, how does that make this film any different from the first installment where we actually dealt and were introduced to multiple Fantastic beasts.

Add 'The Crimes of Grindelwald.' The movie does actually introduce Grindelwald properly and shows him amassing followers and holding gatherings. He is being chased by the aurors for crimes he committed in Europe prior to the first instalment. In this writers opinion Grindelwald does not commit any crimes (plural) in this film.

The Harry Potter movies too barely featured the Order of the Phoenix in the 5th movie?

They got away with this in the Harry Potter series as each film was based on the books (and had to be named as such) which featured Harry Potter (and friends as the central characters) and whatever in great detail. Even if the movies didn't.

Misleading title

Here the titling of the movie just seems off. The words 'Fantastic Beasts' should be omitted, as it is the name of one of the background reading books at Hogwarts and unlike the first film here there is no story of the fantastic beasts being found or described about. Yes they’ve thrown in the Zoulu(for what exactly?) and the Maledictus.

The Bowtruckle description does bring a smile to fans who have read the books. But what else? It just exists in the movie to validate the title. By all means continue Newt's story. But don't name the movie Fantastic Beasts: Crimes of Grindelwald. The name ‘Crimes of Grindelwald’ with a little more focus on the Dark wizard would have been good.

The building up of a movie franchise without giving the viewers something to enjoy in this installment of the franchise.

In this era of streaming services, the audiences are familiar with slow build up as they know that they will be able to watch the episodes that really matter within a few hours. So the lackluster middle episodes don't really matter. In the movies we know that there are going to be three more Fantastic Beasts films. And maybe the 5th one will be the franchise redeemer. But are we supposed to just while away our time till approximately 2024?

The original 8 Harry Potter movies were spread out over a period of 11 years. All  8 movies had a proper ending for audiences to take home after viewing each installment.

Excessive retconning by J.K. Rowling.

She claims to have been sitting upon the piece of information regarding the Maledictus for 20 years. Really? Did she know 20 years back that the series would still be running and be so popular? Or that there would be social media where she could retcon the series at will and thwart the fandoms comprehension? The changing of timelines and family trees is annoying.

She has also tried to fuel her Twitter reveals through subtle hints in certain scenes. You didn't think she wasn't gonna do that, did you?

Who should watch it?

Being a movie set in the Harry Potter Universe it will undoubtedly have good costumes (the previous installment triumphed Oscar for costumes in 2017), visual effects etc.

This movie is for those who love good visual effects. Potterheads will watch it out of loyalty. (They should avoid it too, for it may possibly drive them to abandon the universe they held so dear for over a decade) I have decided to reread the seven books and watch the seven movies and ignore everything (sequels and prequels) after that. Kind of like how some Star Wars fans ignore the existence of the prequel trilogy.