Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

Name: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them
Genre: Adventure, Fantasy, Family
Released: November 18, 2016
Duration: 133 min
Rating: 66
Cast: Alison Sudol, Carmen Ejogo, Colin Farrell, Dan Fogler, Eddie Redmayne

2016

METASCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 50 Critic Reviews

See All

USER SCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 1267 Ratings

See All

7.2

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.2	Your Score
7.2	User Score Generally favorable reviews based on 1267 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Play Sound

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them

Now Playing: Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them

Movie Details & Credits

Warner Bros. | Release Date: November 18, 2016 | PG-13

Starring: Alison Sudol, Carmen Ejogo, Colin Farrell, Dan Fogler, Eddie Redmayne, Ezra Miller, Katherine Waterston

Summary: It's 1926 and Newt Scamander has just completed a global excursion to find and document an extraordinary array of magical creatures. Arriving in New York for a brief stopover, he might have come and gone without incident… were it not for a No-Maj (American for Muggle) named Jacob, a misplaced magical case, and the escape of some of Newt’sIt's 1926 and Newt Scamander has just completed a global excursion to find and document an extraordinary array of magical creatures. Arriving in New York for a brief stopover, he might have come and gone without incident… were it not for a No-Maj (American for Muggle) named Jacob, a misplaced magical case, and the escape of some of Newt’s fantastic beasts, which could spell trouble for both the wizarding and No-Maj worlds.… Expand

Director: David Yates

Genre(s): Adventure, Fantasy, Family

Rating: PG-13

Runtime: 133 min

See All Details and Credits

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

100

The Guardian Peter Bradshaw

Nov 12, 2016

That entertainment enchanter JK Rowling has come storming back to the world of magic in a shower of supernatural sparks - and created a glorious fantasy-romance adventure. Read full review

Bill Goodykoontz

Nov 16, 2016

It’s all quite intricate and entertaining and terrific to look at. The “Fantastic” of the title might be stretching things a bit, but it doesn’t miss the mark by much. Better still, it makes you look forward to, and not dread, the next installment — and that’s real magic. Read full review

Michael O'Sullivan

Nov 17, 2016

The plot thickens, along with the emotional tension, which was always the best part of the Potter universe, and not the dazzling special effects. Read full review

Manohla Dargis

Nov 17, 2016

With the strange caws and showy displays, these beasties provide a lot of the movie’s easygoing pleasures. The adults are rather less engaging. Read full review

Chris Nashawaty

Nov 12, 2016

Fantastic Beasts is two-plus hours of meandering eye candy that feels numbingly inconsequential. Read full review

Empire Helen O'Hara

Nov 12, 2016

Big, bold and teeming with imagination, it is so busy world-building that it occasionally forgets to have fun. But with this heavy lifting done, there’s every reason to hope for an even more magical adventure next time. Read full review

Eric Henderson

Nov 17, 2016

The film exists resolutely outside of salience and doggedly within the comfort of escapism. Read full review

SEE ALL 50 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

dspratlin

Nov 19, 2016

What’s it about?

Eccentric magizoologist Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) misplaces an enchanted suitcase in 1920s New York. An extremely profitable franchise is unleashed. What did I think? Hey, you guys like Harry Potter? Then I’ve got good news: Fantastic Beasts is the worthy spin-offWhat’s it about?

Eccentric magizoologist Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) misplaces an enchanted suitcase in 1920s New York. An extremely profitable franchise is unleashed.

What did I think?

Hey, you guys like Harry Potter? Then I’ve got good news: Fantastic Beasts is the worthy spin-off that you’re going to be really into for the next ten years or so. While it’s darker than the original films, it’s packed with subtle little nods to them that fans will adore, and the story (though somewhat complicated) is good enough to stand alone. It’s tremendous fun to see the wizarding world through a 1920s lens – magical speakeasy, anyone? – and the inhabitants of Scamander’s Pokeball-meets-TARDIS suitcase are just as fantastic as advertised. This film will frighten young children, but everyone else will be thoroughly enchanted.… Expand

20 of 35 users found this helpful2015

A1yr

Nov 18, 2016

A worthy successor of Harry Potter movies, well thought out story and good casting make it works. Finally we get some insight to the wizard's world, and we like it. I think CGI is exaggerate, however it's well made and enjoyable.

12 of 18 users found this helpful126

M_Ridcully

Sep 9, 2017

I think if more people could set nostalgia aside they'd realize this is a much better film than the entire HP series. Moving to 1920's America setting and removing the angsty teenagers who have to save the world because the negligent adults are too incompetent are both absoluteI think if more people could set nostalgia aside they'd realize this is a much better film than the entire HP series. Moving to 1920's America setting and removing the angsty teenagers who have to save the world because the negligent adults are too incompetent are both absolute improvements.

Newt himself is an extremely underrated character, and brilliantly portrayed by Eddie Redmayne. See Pop Culture Detective's "The Fantastic Masculinity of Newt Scamander" on Youtube for a better examination, but I'll sum it up here: He's not macho or "The Chosen One" or a witty schmoozer. But he doesn't fall into the typical nerd/genius/outsider stereotypes either. He's quiet, introverted, humble and sensitive, but also confident in his abilities and sympathetic towards his beasts as well as humans.

The only major downside to the movie was that it couldn't decide which movie it wanted to be: a lighthearted romp about chasing down escaped magical beasts, or a dark conflict between wizards, anti-wizard muggles, and dark wizards. I personally preferred the latter, but it would not make a lot of sense to have Newt in a movie purely about that (and of course the former also brings child appeal and toy sales to the table).… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

JPK

Jun 14, 2019

Decent Prequel
Fantastic Beasts is pretty boring in it's first 25 minutes, But it starts to get fun after that point even though it lacks the magic of the Potter films.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

Belous

Nov 14, 2018

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. You know what was good about “Harry Potter”? It had “Harry Potter” in the title and it was about Harry Potter. In “Fantastic Beasts and where to find them” there are those “beasts”, but the problem is that the movie is not about them and has a single word about where to find them.
The film begins with a battle of a group of mages and a mysterious dark sorcerer and a bunch of newspapers headlines about someone called Grindelwald. Who is it? That’s a good question. If you want to know than go watch sequel, because he is not in this one. The twist of Grindewald’s exposure is very weak, it simply leads to nothing. Throw it out of the movie and nothing will change. Oh, wait, if you do that than it wouldn’t be so interesting to see the sequel. It’s really sad when the first movie of a cycle tries to sell you the sequel.
What is a real pity is the fact that the beasts are absolutely gorgeous, but there’s too little screen time with them. The story just begins when some of them flee, later they become a secondary storyline, giving the first place to Creedence. He is a very powerful wizard, who turns into an obscurus, a dangerous magical creature, by suppressing his magical powers. And someone might say: “But here is your magical beast and a story about it!”, but it is a very cheap move. The viewer clearly understands that the story of the beasts ends with the capturing of the last escaped creature, long before the end of the movie. Who is this Creedence guy? Why should I care for him? The whole movie feels like the creators just stuffed too much and didn’t bother to make some part really good.
But no everything is bad here. Eddy Redmayne (Newt) and Ezra Miller (Creedence) are superb in portraying their characters. You could watch this movie for their performances alone. It’s difficult to say something good about other aspects of this film. The editing feels raggy and awkward, the stories are skin-deep, and the sequel baiting is frustrating. The movie had potential but it lacks of polishness almost in every aspect.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

jjjjosh

May 27, 2023

Not good. Disappointing. Worse than the Harry Potter films. Don't recommend. Don't intend to watch sequels.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

Brearosemcm

Nov 8, 2020

Johnny Depp was the best thing to happen to the show and now that he’s gone I’m not gonna be able to watch it, Firing him was a big mistake.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

SEE ALL 219 REVIEWS

More From Metacritic