Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald
Warner Bros. | Release Date: November 16, 2018
5.7
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 784 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
334
Mixed:
271
Negative:
179
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
5
bfoore90Apr 28, 2020
Clear disappointment when compared to the first one, which I greatly enjoyed. The acting, visuals, score are top notch and sense of wonder are still there but the plot and screenplay is just so overstuffed that you almost feel this movie isClear disappointment when compared to the first one, which I greatly enjoyed. The acting, visuals, score are top notch and sense of wonder are still there but the plot and screenplay is just so overstuffed that you almost feel this movie is filling for something better. I loved the performances as the returning characters, creatures, ect and Johnny Depp is a very convincing villain but the script lacks focus with meaningless side-characters and subplots that end up going nowhere… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
vitortfvDec 16, 2020
Disappointed, as this new universe is not bringing me a bit of the emotions I felt with Harry Potter.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
andre27Mar 5, 2019
Fantastic Beasts e os crimes de Grindelwald não é de longe tão bom como o primeiro mas consegue ser um bom filme. Todo o envolvimento com o mundo Harry Potter é muito fixe e a história não está mal conseguida mas para este segundo filmeFantastic Beasts e os crimes de Grindelwald não é de longe tão bom como o primeiro mas consegue ser um bom filme. Todo o envolvimento com o mundo Harry Potter é muito fixe e a história não está mal conseguida mas para este segundo filme resultar era necessário mais carisma por parte do vilão e ai o filme falha completamente.Péssimo papel de Jonhy Deep. O vilão não tem carisma, personalidade, motivo, impacto e nem é assusta. Depois de um Voldmort esse Grindelwald não nada nadinha mesmo e o filme perde muito com isso.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
kushtopiaJul 28, 2019
On first watch, I loved the movie because it seemed like a genuinely interesting and complex narrative. The sound design, production, CGI, cinematography is all amazing, as expected, and the actors are on top of their game and give rise toOn first watch, I loved the movie because it seemed like a genuinely interesting and complex narrative. The sound design, production, CGI, cinematography is all amazing, as expected, and the actors are on top of their game and give rise to some very likable characters. Not to mention, the opening sequence of this movie is the best in the entire Harry Potter franchise. On second watch, however, I realized that my small suspicion that the movie wasn't as coherent as it seemed, was correct. This time, I made sure to pay attention to every detail, plot point, ect, and....this movie doesn't make sense in the slightest. Like not even a little. I suggest watching it once, and never watching it again. If you do this, there is a good chance you will like the film and will remember it fondly. If you watch it again, you'll notice how stupid it is. I'm giving this movie a 6 because it atleast tricked me into liking it on my first pass.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
5
eva3si0nMar 28, 2019
2 part of Fantastic Beasts it is possible to look at a trailer. All plot in it is perfectly described. What in general sense to watch the movie if the only role of this movie to connect 1 part and not left 3 yet. In general it is impossible2 part of Fantastic Beasts it is possible to look at a trailer. All plot in it is perfectly described. What in general sense to watch the movie if the only role of this movie to connect 1 part and not left 3 yet. In general it is impossible to call the movie the integral work, considering as it comes to an end. If the 3rd part appears the same, then it will be the biggest extension of a plot, knowing Warner Borthers I will not be surprised. Mediocre cinema which discredits a saga name about Harry Potter.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
5
JaysographyAug 28, 2019
The Crimes of Grindelwald is the latest in the ever expanding universe of J.K. Rowling but also its second film in the Fantastic Beasts trilogy. From the beginning of the film you are filled with laughter and joy as you once again live outThe Crimes of Grindelwald is the latest in the ever expanding universe of J.K. Rowling but also its second film in the Fantastic Beasts trilogy. From the beginning of the film you are filled with laughter and joy as you once again live out your Harry Potter dreams as a child. However, while you are lost in the magic you might also end up leaving the film being lost in the plot as well. The main gripe with the film is that, technically speaking, the film never actually accomplishes anything. The movie ends where it began, there is no progress. Therefore leaving many critics scratching their heads as to why there should be a third instalment when they could have simply ended the series with a slightly longer than average film.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
5
JortigoMar 17, 2019
A tape that is very good but lacks the elements that made his predecessor fantastic.
7 of 8 users found this helpful71
All this user's reviews
6
DukeJonDec 27, 2018
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The first 20 minutes was the best of any Harry Potter film I've ever seen. Dark and exciting, it's a shame the rest of the movie didn't stand up to this. The movie is long, boring in long stretches, with a convoluted plot and too many characters. The CGI looks great but it's overdone - you feel as though you're being led from one over the top set piece to the next. I'm not crazy about the Harry Potter universe (unlike the people I went with) so a lot of what went on was very confusing. This isn't the film to see if you're not familiar with the franchise. Johnny Depp was ok as the villian... though he never seemed to do anything particularly villainous. The best part was when they went back to Hogwarts. Above all, a movie should stand on its own two feet, it shouldn't exist simply to set up the next movie in the series.… Expand
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
6
Vitor007Nov 21, 2018
In a matter of characters, J.K. Rowling does very well, leading everyone to want more about their story.
By being a very long film, often does not have enough plot to tell, making some pure points curl up for big revelations in the end. TheIn a matter of characters, J.K. Rowling does very well, leading everyone to want more about their story.
By being a very long film, often does not have enough plot to tell, making some pure points curl up for big revelations in the end. The production can repeat the sequence of incredible effects of the first film, but with less "intensity". The conflict between Dumbledore and Grindewald is the key point of the film. In order for there to be no new issues in the script, it is best that the next sequences have a better "direction". 6.1/10… Expand
7 of 9 users found this helpful72
All this user's reviews
4
roastbirdNov 18, 2018
Bad.

1. Random character pops up without a reason.
2. Character do things that out of his character.
3. 80% of the time was talking about love stories that doesn't related to the movie.
13 of 18 users found this helpful135
All this user's reviews
5
angelsanzcorreaNov 27, 2018
Shallow, goes nowhere, and with undeveloped+plain characters. A bit of fun, but mostly just a device to push watchers into the next movie.
10 of 14 users found this helpful104
All this user's reviews
6
HARRYNUGZZNov 20, 2018
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I am a decent HP fan. Not the biggest of fan boys but I definitely have a lot of respect for the series and only want to see it presented in the best light. In my opinion this movie while beautifully done lacked in its ability to develop and present a fluid story. To keep things simple here's what I enjoyed about the film. First this film didn't focus too heavily on the magical creatures like it did in the previous installment. I felt like the first movie relied much to heavily on cute/weird creatures to give a reason of interest to the audience. This time around a decently clear story line was first presented with showing Grindelwald and him being the bad guy. I loved the sets and visuals as well as the characters who were all fairly interesting. Ok... so now the bad. It seems like who ever wrote the script said to hell with a coherent story, lets fill this piece of crap up with as much convoluted story material as possible. Even the beautiful scenery and interesting places the characters go cannot distract one from constantly wondering where did such and such come from or how did she or he get here? Why are the characters here? so on and so forth.. Weird sub plots and characters popping in and out made watching this movie extremely difficult to watch at times. One example is Comma's eye parasite or whatever. The movie clearly eludes to him having some sort of problem with his eye....ok cool. As the story goes on we see him mess with it and take eye drops and such. It finally comes down to him passing out randomly and the main characters pull some squigly creature out of his eye. This part has no meaning to the movie as a whole and I was personally left wondering how did he get the parasite why did they put so much effort in showing us all this information?This is just one example where you're left scratching your head wondering what was the point. I can name 3 other parts of the film with the same head scratching confusion as this example. In summary just wait till the movie hits red box. Its worth renting not paying a crazy movie ticket price to view.… Expand
5 of 7 users found this helpful52
All this user's reviews
5
MisterGokuNov 17, 2018
Pros: Good acting, gorgeous visuals, beautiful score. Cons: Overstuffed with subplots, often confusing, and it all just seems like a filler for the next film in the installment. Definitely one of the weakest entries from the mind of JK Rowling.
12 of 18 users found this helpful126
All this user's reviews
6
Trineo99Nov 17, 2018
First of all, just like in the last movie the acting in this film is excellent but with a few exceptions. Eddie Redmayne was still excellent as Newt but I think he did a better job in the first film. Same thing with Dan Fogler who didn’t seemFirst of all, just like in the last movie the acting in this film is excellent but with a few exceptions. Eddie Redmayne was still excellent as Newt but I think he did a better job in the first film. Same thing with Dan Fogler who didn’t seem as funny but useless and could have just been written out of this film. But I did really like Jude Law as a younger Dumbledor and Joshua Shea who plays young Newt. Joshua played younger NEwt so well that he actually looked like a younger version of Eddie. Jude Law brought the same kind of attitude towards Dumbledor that we all know and love. The special effects and set designs still looked marvellous. The creatures special effects just like last time were great and looked like if we saw them in real life that’s what they would look like. The sets looked directly like they got taken directly out of a history book. Now with this film being a sequel, you would think they would fix the problems they had in the last film but for this one, they didn‘t. The main thing that bugged me was Johnny Depp. He didn’t do a good job of playing the main villain. It could be because of the writing or just because of his acting. Next is all of the subplots. I counted there are around four of them. But seeing how I couldn’t really figure out the main plot one of those subplots could have been the main plot. The last thing is the pacing in this film. Some scenes just seemed like the plot stopped for this one scene that could have just been taken out. The entire film felt really slow and only in the action scenes did it seem to pick up. At least the music was good. In the end, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald just seemed like a cash grab film.… Expand
8 of 12 users found this helpful84
All this user's reviews
6
Captain105Nov 25, 2018
Johnny Depp saves the film!
Without Johnny Depps stunning performance of Grindelwald there would be very few good aspects to The Crimes Of Grindelwald. The movie seems mishmashed at some points and doesn’t really fit together well, theJohnny Depp saves the film!
Without Johnny Depps stunning performance of Grindelwald there would be very few good aspects to The Crimes Of Grindelwald. The movie seems mishmashed at some points and doesn’t really fit together well, the characters built in the first film kind of fell flat. But the seriousness of this new fantastic beasts cinematic universe will be fun to see expand.

So, if you like a darker serious Harry Potter film that still ends with blue flaming dragons then by all means, go see it!… Expand
6 of 9 users found this helpful63
All this user's reviews
6
Jim222001Jan 30, 2019
J.K Rowling and David Yates still don’t give us much of a good reason to why these movies exist. Fans rather have more Potter. The Fantastic Beasts stories have yet to fully get off the ground. Despite a likeable cast and some magicalJ.K Rowling and David Yates still don’t give us much of a good reason to why these movies exist. Fans rather have more Potter. The Fantastic Beasts stories have yet to fully get off the ground. Despite a likeable cast and some magical moments.
The Crimes of Grindelwald is bit over-stuffed with too many characters and subplots. You also have Rowling annoying fans. By messing with the time line and having some characters introduced way too early. To how she originally wrote them.
My main problem is how they used the delightful Queenie though. Having her tempted by the dark side is like Mary Poppins tempted by the dark side. To me that worked least of all. Well that and flashbacks of Dumbledore (Jude Law) and villain Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) looking at each other in lust. To show as Dumbledore said it “they were more than friends.” Rowling has said they were an item. However on film it came off a bit goofy.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
5
VirgonoShakaJan 7, 2019
Ugh!!! I'm starting to wonder if JK has read her own book series because at times, this felt more fanfiction (bad one) than cannon. With a story that is not even interesting, effects that are meh at best, and characters that have no purposeUgh!!! I'm starting to wonder if JK has read her own book series because at times, this felt more fanfiction (bad one) than cannon. With a story that is not even interesting, effects that are meh at best, and characters that have no purpose at all in being in the movie other than "we were in the first one" or "we appeared in the books" this movie at no point seems like something worthy of the Wizarding world, and easily takes the place as the worst so far, with its final "twist" only adding insult to injury. Apart from good music, some ok performances (Deep and Law) and some nice moments or creatures, this is a list of crimes that make the future bleak.… Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
5
thedaywalkerNov 17, 2018
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Being a HUGE fan of the Harry Potter series (including the first Fantastic Beasts) I got out of the theater truly disappointed.

This isn't a terrible film by any means, but it's the first time I was completely bored watching a Harry Potter movie.

The performances are great, Jude Law as Dumbledore was amazing, it's really a shame we didn't get a lot of him, Redmayne as Scamander again blew it out of the park, Johnny Depp's performance was good, but unfortunately because of all the useless subplots, and useless characters that were added, the character of Grindelwald didn't have the attention it needed, I mean the name of the movie is "Crimes of Grindelwald" and he really doesn't do much. All the romance added just help make the movie even more boring. J.K. Rowling missed the mark on the script on this one

The movie is visually stunning, the score is amazing, the first scene with Grindelwald escaping prison is awesome, and the twist in the end was actually really good and quite shocking.

But unfortunately those things couldn't save this movie from it's very inconsistent storytelling and boring really boring script… Expand
11 of 19 users found this helpful118
All this user's reviews
5
SNoOOobNov 21, 2018
With too many cups of writer's overflowing ego and wasted consideration about own creation.
4 of 7 users found this helpful43
All this user's reviews
4
Xan_RyilNov 19, 2018
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I went with almost no expectations after lukewarm first movie, but J. K. Rowling along with David Yates still manage to disappoint me. Grindlewald starts off with a brilliant sequence but within that you could see that the director does not have that grip and lacks the crunch. A promise which is thrown soon after.

Rowling needs to understand that writing a movie is different than writing a novel. You can’t keep it that slow and almost no character development is offered in the movie that’s why. Much like it’s ancestor series, Grindlewald hardly did not lose any of the character from the first movie even though strict criticism over the talentless cast. Here is what is wrong with the movie
1. Baggage of the first movie
As said earlier, fans failed to identify with almost all of the lead characters from the first movie. It was needed to drop some of the characters (Jacob atleast) but next movie kept them on even though Tine, Queenie and Jacob play no role in story. Even new characters don’t help much. Dumbledore, Theseus and Nagini are merely decorative items. Someone should tell the producers that the beasts are not as interesting as they think and presenting them. Neither are they cute not funny and no one wants to see them. People want the darker tone and a better goal (not credence again).

2. Who to follow
Although movie is flooded with the characters but there is a confusion who is real protagonist. Series started with Newt, but his role and contribution has diminished to only avoiding direct eye contact. Dumbledore was expected to have a strong role but he has only an extended guest appearance. 3. Marvel’s Formula
Harry Potter has always casted diverse actors but here it was diverse too much. Much of the cast was unnecessarily ethnic. Smaller roles to only bring some interest or color in the story were played by international actors. Also this single movie has more special effects then all of the 8 Harry potter movies combined. Many of the actors are in 20’s or 30’s. It can’t be swallowed that there is not mature aurar on the team. Everyone is just out of school and holding a high rank and important position in ministry. On the other hand, they were too old for kids to connect with.

4. Weak writing
Screenplay is vague and even by the end one is not sure what’s Gindlewald’s real motive. May be it was explained in the novels but not in the movie which audience came to watch. Last movie ended with Gindlewald’s capture and this started with his escape, that was too quick to digest. He was shown to be very strong and powerful from the start of the movie which should have been a work in progress. A slow escape and gradual raise to the power involving obtaining of a special object to cast a citywide curse which would kill that many aurars. Instead they kept Ginglewald doing nothing after escape and in climax (which was hard to identify) Gindlewald casts a spell so massive to kill a lot of powerful wizards.
5. Waste
Like Harry Potter, we don’t have “Cream of British Film Industry” but we do have “Johnny Depp” an actor known for his vast versatility and what a waste. He never was given a chance to show his true colors (especially with all white makeup). Series’ fans were against his casting but producers could have benefited from Depp’s following which they totally lost as he does nothing out of the box except wearing weird lenses.

Still I liked the movie better than the first one as it had a better second half. Here is what is good with this movie.
1. Jude Law and Zoe Kravitz
Only two actors stood out of the mediocre performance. Jude looked like he studied Michael Gambon very well and transformed his personal accordingly. With all his movement, one can see Michael Gambon’s Dumbledore. Zoe had only one chance to shine in the series and she sure did not miss it. She brought much needed depth to her character with mysterious air and elegance.

2. Magical effects
For fans, it would be satisfying to see there are a lot of magical sequence. When you are directing a movie after a fan favorite series, a lot of things could go wrong, and in case of Grindlewald, everyone involved in the movie made sure that they all do go wrong.… Expand
9 of 16 users found this helpful97
All this user's reviews
5
Jk9785Nov 19, 2018
A convoluted mess from start to finish, David Yates' sixth entry in the Wizarding World franchise is a massive disappointment. J.K. Rowling's script makes no sense and it messes up the timeline. This is unfortunate, because the performances,A convoluted mess from start to finish, David Yates' sixth entry in the Wizarding World franchise is a massive disappointment. J.K. Rowling's script makes no sense and it messes up the timeline. This is unfortunate, because the performances, especially those of Johnny Depp and Eddie Redmayne, are insanely good, but the writing makes this film the worst in the Wizarding World.… Expand
5 of 9 users found this helpful54
All this user's reviews
6
werewolf3dNov 16, 2018
the most boring movie I've seen this year .... is it bad, no... but it's boring....
13 of 25 users found this helpful1312
All this user's reviews
6
EpicLadySpongeNov 16, 2018
We have had awesome adventures throughout this Wizarding World universe, but the fun seems to be missing in this latest installment of Fantastic Beasts. Not even J. K. Rowling can save her own work from having a muddled plot that's right inWe have had awesome adventures throughout this Wizarding World universe, but the fun seems to be missing in this latest installment of Fantastic Beasts. Not even J. K. Rowling can save her own work from having a muddled plot that's right in your face. Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is everything you just saw from its predecessor minus the fun you just experienced and an extremely muddled story that will leave you begging for someone to fix it.… Expand
10 of 20 users found this helpful1010
All this user's reviews
4
MakorNov 20, 2018
While the first fantastic beasts movie wasnt great, it atleast felt like it had some heart and a nice story to tell. The sequel however feels uninspired and messy. The worst thing about the movie in my opinion was the pacing, the storyWhile the first fantastic beasts movie wasnt great, it atleast felt like it had some heart and a nice story to tell. The sequel however feels uninspired and messy. The worst thing about the movie in my opinion was the pacing, the story switches between so many characters , and non of them feel very human or likeable. Things just seem to happen so the movie can show you some expensive CGI magic, and then move on to the next stupid character. And the characters really dont hold up. While the original Harry potter story had a few strong, main characters. Fantastic beasts has maybe one, Newt. He is likeable and rather interresting, but the movie tries to show you the story from everyones perspective, and it ends up kind of ruining the movie, because almost all of them suck. The acting sadly wasnt good enough to hold up the sometimes terrible dialog and characters just dont seem like real people.

The story is real heavy on fan service in my opinion, as it all revolves around setting up the main Harry Potter story, and making nothing a coincedence in that story. Everything needs to be connected. But then again just as much of the story is about the AMAZING magic and the TRAGIC heatbreak of the love stories the movie features. Sadly it feels old and kind of cliche, which is the last thing this overproduced film needs.

One thing i did like about the movie is its music, Quite a few times, i looked away from the bad movie, and just enjoyed the good music that was playing in the background.
Will probably be trying to find some sort of soundtrack to listen to sometime.

All in all, the movie needs you to either be a hardcore HP fan, who will swallow up anything Rowling makes. Or someone who just wants to see a stupid lovestory cliche, with some cool magic. Sadly i am neither
4/10… Expand
5 of 10 users found this helpful55
All this user's reviews
5
MarkiniNov 22, 2018
Slow and an over-encumbering plot. The film has way too much dialogue for its own good. And story arcs that are both confusing and boring. While the magical parts are great, they're short and sparse. The cast is great, but it really is aSlow and an over-encumbering plot. The film has way too much dialogue for its own good. And story arcs that are both confusing and boring. While the magical parts are great, they're short and sparse. The cast is great, but it really is a tragedy on how untapped the talent was used.… Expand
4 of 8 users found this helpful44
All this user's reviews
4
qqiwkqaqwNov 23, 2018
Dissapointing movie, lower than it's predecessor, and the story is just pretty bad.
4 of 8 users found this helpful44
All this user's reviews
5
JLuis_001Nov 24, 2018
J.K. Rowling is a good writer. What she achieved with Harry Potter was surprising, after all she made many children become interested in reading again. Even for me Harry Potter also meant a lot. His books were among the first ones I read as aJ.K. Rowling is a good writer. What she achieved with Harry Potter was surprising, after all she made many children become interested in reading again. Even for me Harry Potter also meant a lot. His books were among the first ones I read as a kid and I continued with my love for the saga during my adolescence and yes let's say that now as an adult I still enjoy the films.
The books are part of my library and I now consume these new films and I repeat; I think she is a good writer. Hardly a great one but her work was solid, however and sadly, there's a serious problem: She's not a screenwriter. Maybe someone made her believe it and the people involved in the production allowed it, but even though the characters of this whole universe belong to her, it's incredibly obvious that she's not a good screenwriter and unfortunately this films suffers because of it.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is a film completely devoid of structure. Being a film of little more than two hours long, its plot barely advances a little. Evidently they're trying to extend the story, though perhaps too much. Even getting into trouble with her own mythology.
Unlike the previous film, in this one, everything feels pretty lackluster. Everything that made the previous film pleasant is completely absent here. All the events feel hurried and misguided, in addition to leaving almost all situations completely open.

The theme is interesting, especially for those who already know more or less where the story is going, but the way in which Rowling builds the events feels neglected and what probably would have worked very well in a novel doesn't translate well to the cinematic language and therefore doesn't work as it should.
And also I have to say that the film has two very serious problems. The first has to do with its title. By being called Fantastic Beasts the story has to include them even though they're completely unnecessary. The second one is the level of magic shown in these stories, which is far superior to that seen in the Harry Potter films, with the exception of the battle between Dumbledore and Voldermort in Order of the Phoenix.
Voldemort being a more powerful and obscure wizard than Grindelwald, I'm surprised that he could never have done something similar to Grindelwald's final attack in this film.

And above all, don't fool yourselves, maybe they're selling us Newt Scamander as the main character of this franchise now but frankly it's quite evident that this story is aimed at building the mythical final duel between Albus Dumbledore and Gellert Grindelwald and especially the ultimate fate of the new key character: Credence, who finally gets to know his true identity at the end of this film.
Although it's fair to ask if with the little success this film has had at the box office, Warner will move forward with the five films plan. I really don't know that, although frankly there's no point in making five films if you're only going to be sharing crumbs in each installment until they reach the ending. That's not fair to the fans because it honestly seems a very rude way to take more money out of them with what little is being delivered.
I said this because the mystery of this film is poor. The biggest revelation only happens in the last two minutes and everything that goes on until that moment is really not essential, it's not really important, they don't give anything really substantial and that disappointed me a lot because I'm a fan of this universe, but it is what it is.

The only reason I gave it a five is for one simple reason; The level of production remains at the very first level. The magic of this magical world created by Warner is still there.
You can see that technology has advanced and honestly, the film looks excellent. Only some minor problems in which the green screen is very evident, but beyond that, the visual effects, the costumes, the sets, the music. Everything's excellent in those departments. I cannot complain about that at all.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald was very regular. It wasn't worth the two year wait. It's definitely the most disappointing film of this franchise so far but I could hardly say that it's the scandalous failure that many people are saying it is. I don't see it that way and I don't believe it, but it's very far from what was promised.… Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
5
PipeCDec 31, 2018
Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Yates and Rowling.

The fantasy cosmos the whole world fell in love with is back under the title "Wizarding World," this time around no Potter included. Mr. Newton Artemis Fido "Newt" Scamander takes up theFantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Yates and Rowling.


The fantasy cosmos the whole world fell in love with is back under the title "Wizarding World," this time around no Potter included. Mr. Newton Artemis Fido "Newt" Scamander takes up the torch, a famed Magizoologist known for being expelled from Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, his gorgeous and naughty creatures and his duty to helm supposedly five entries.

Directed by well-known filmmaker David Yates and written by the author herself behind the books, "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" arrived in theaters two years ago, cooking a spin-off/prequel franchise up that got more positive than negative opinions among the stern fandom. Enjoying acceptable box office numbers both domestic and overseas and mostly positive critical reception thanks to the modest-yet-charming performance of Academy Award-winning Eddie Redmayne, wonderfully crafted visual effects, the unexplored pre-Hogwarts world, the fabulous titular beasts and mythical creatures, an enticing plot twist and the delightful journey across New York; "FBWFT" was a pleasant and far-seeing surprise that shocked us sooner rather than later.

"Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald" is the second extension set in this long-running sub-Potterverse, directed by the same director of the last four films in the original saga and penned by prolific writer J. K. Rowling. A bolt from the blue is that even with the creative backbone almost untouched, this second part happens to be a pyrotechnic and enjoyable misfire, plenty of deficiently unified sub-plots that ultimately saturate the not-so-eye-popping visual spectacle, introducing untidily so many narrative threads that, instead of complexity, utterly erode the core story.

Admittedly the dark beauty of some gigantic, messy set-pieces works not quite right because of the writing individuality, but still, by composition, they're simply bracing, as ever. Philippe Rousselot also returns as director of photography, which benefits visual cohesion as for the franchise' look and tone even when the action moves from America to Europe, mainly to Paris, France. Some shots really work, others shine, but none of them are part of the confusingly edited, overextended, strange action sequences. As usual, imagery is rich in content, not as cozy, universal and relatable as the previous ones, but at least it's impressively appealing. The titular 'fantastic' adjective is tailor-made for these beasts. The two adorable creatures who stole the show last time come back in order to edge into the spotlight with their naive behavior and mini-treatments; but it's Europe which hypnotizes with engaging animals. The Circus Arcanus holds important gears for the plot, so when madness is unleashed in the Parisian streets, it showcases a range of magnificently designed creatures who take over the screen, and therefore, the audience. Newt's traveling zoo/suitcase gives us short glimpses of unexplored habitats, in which the most prominent feature is a visually overwhelming underwater seaweed-seahorse. They monopolize a large part of the long title, but their greater and short splendor takes place only in the first act in visual terms, as story-wise, the greatest trick comes up.

Rowling's widely known for erecting fantasy worlds brimming with mythos, facing good against evil, going through an ambiguous area of grays which create beautiful, knotty stories. The primary thread here is clear and synthetic, but to strengthen it and nourish it she draws upon clumsy narrative saturation that ends up throwing an all-star cast, a few engrossing performances and some gloomy digital effects out. The script has no focus to unfold, its ambition to put too much information into a single two-hour-plus feature is atrocious; Dumbledore's true origins are only tested by giving more plot weight to Jacob Kowalski's love affair, mitigate the prominence of the beasts and deliver a worthy development to its great villain are some of the sins that neither the strongest cinematic spell achieves to break. This is a perplexing mythological disaster of endless derivations that, without the talented central figure, would have been the longest headache of this year at the movies.

"Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald" by David Yates mesmerizes us with gorgeous beasts, good performances and special re-encounters with characters from the original franchise; but a hodgepodge of overlong, untidy plots doesn't enrich the main world as it should, instead, weakens and endangers this new franchise of dissimilar entries. "The Crimes of Grindelwald" loses its magic, is darker and more tedious than its predecessor, a longueur which tries to provide emotion and thrill with wrongly placed provocative twists that the only thing they achieve is to sink progressively this magical world which is lost in a mess of sequels, spin-offs, homages and Hollywood rip-offs.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
6
buddhalouFeb 19, 2019
Outstanding production design and special effects help to create a rich and inviting universe - to tell less than captivating stories in.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
4
amheretojudgeNov 17, 2018
the spells are mere tomfoolery..

Fantastic Beasts : The Crimes Of Grindelwald Yates's glossy magic is clearly outdated and ineffective. This overstuffed people-pleaser is no way, Rowling is supposed to get her mojo back. What was exploredthe spells are mere tomfoolery..

Fantastic Beasts : The Crimes Of Grindelwald

Yates's glossy magic is clearly outdated and ineffective. This overstuffed people-pleaser is no way, Rowling is supposed to get her mojo back. What was explored in Potter franchise, is reminisced till it grows numb in here; the spells are mere tomfoolery. The patterns are getting more and more clear and the structure is getting worn out. Both the installments of Fantastic Beasts, feasts itself with a rolled dice here and there in its first half, and then amps up the charge for a loud finale, which it actually isn't.

The plot is complex but infomercial, their barely resides any flow. The first act is spent upon chattering and mapping the characters about their current state. And just when it was supposed to get thick, it gets more dump, Rowling keeps adding more characters to confuse you; it is ultimately pure magic, she is distracting you. But this distraction isn't feasible to either the makers or the viewers. And all these characters with their hidden secret, walking parallel-y to the story-line ends up in a showdown where Depp is at the throne of it; on that rendezvous point, Rowling's spell casts upon us.

The characters mingle around with political agenda that helps them catch you, and once you are in hold of them, they won't leave you until you nod along to their schemes. Rowling's perspicacious knowledge of the trajectory is what this franchise still thrives on. The narration is discreet and each character gets a voice. Depp gets to overpower others on screen and he loves it as much as we do. Redmayne seems to have found an apt shoes to fill in, his not-so-smooth-talk is way too smooth. Law doesn't have much to offer, but he makes sure that there isn't any regret on casting him.

Miller is underused and works as a pawn for the most part of it. Waterston and Fogler are convincing on revisiting their role whilst Sudol still is looking for something, and on additional cast, Kravitz gets a big chunk of bite. The lethargic over thought-out and ineffective conversations itches you like lumps which is surprising coming from Rowling, especially at the initial stages; she seems in a rush to give you even a compelling argument. The background score is decent if not anything extraordinary, the sound effects are sharp and the visual effects does make your eye pop.

Unfortunately, all of that seems moot if considered the final outcome of the plot. With so much to say, with so many voices, there probably will be one or two that you might wish to take home with you. Ticking for more than two hours, Yates's visual galore tricks are getting predictable, there is no grip, just empty cat and mouse chase that are following wrong tracks. Undoubtedly, Fantastic Beasts : The Crimes Of Grindelwald is the weakest link of this magical world, that once dared question the big questions of life, is now unfortunately settled on the thrills of "stupefy" spells.… Expand
6 of 13 users found this helpful67
All this user's reviews
6
Weekend_KnightsNov 19, 2018
Whilst calling Crimes of Grindelwald ‘filler’ would perhaps be unfair, on any view it is a film which scrapes by on the good name of its forebears – like an indolent child born of a prestigious family. There is a definite sense that theWhilst calling Crimes of Grindelwald ‘filler’ would perhaps be unfair, on any view it is a film which scrapes by on the good name of its forebears – like an indolent child born of a prestigious family. There is a definite sense that the lacklustre plot is held together by little more than the audiences’ collective anticipation of what is to come (i.e. the greatest wizarding duel of all time, the famed clash between Dumbledore and Grindelwald). With that said, however, for those who enjoyed Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, this sequel is indubitably essential viewing. Whilst it’s not a wholly satisfying film in its own right, there’s enough of the old magic for it to be enjoyable, and it does what it needs to do to further the series; laying the foundations on which the subsequent instalments will stand.… Expand
4 of 9 users found this helpful45
All this user's reviews
4
DrBlahBlahNov 16, 2018
Both predictable and confusing, over-stuffed and dull, this is another shameless cash-grab from the studios who weren't satisfied with the billions they made from the Harry Potter films. (And there's three more in the works!)
8 of 19 users found this helpful811
All this user's reviews
4
movieducationNov 16, 2018
Avada kedavra and obliviate this installment, FANTASTIC BEASTS : THE CRIMES OF GRINDELWALD is all visual of magic but no enchantment, uninspiring storyline and characters with emotional range of teaspoon ! Why is J.K Rowling trying to piss me off ?
7 of 17 users found this helpful710
All this user's reviews
4
BigManJamNov 16, 2018
Literally hot fookin garbage, everything about this movie pist me the fook of. It is a disgrace to Harry Potter.
7 of 17 users found this helpful710
All this user's reviews
5
JokohamaDec 6, 2018
Beautiful, but boring. The whole movie feels like a couple of mid-season tvshow episodes, without climax.
2 of 5 users found this helpful23
All this user's reviews
4
LivingTribunalDec 26, 2018
Johnny Depp and Jude Law did great acting, but it wasn't about Fantastic Beasts at all. There are too many holes in the story. And we can't understand most of the character's thoughts. There are too many! It makes you wait for the next film,Johnny Depp and Jude Law did great acting, but it wasn't about Fantastic Beasts at all. There are too many holes in the story. And we can't understand most of the character's thoughts. There are too many! It makes you wait for the next film, but this film itself is a shame of Harry Potter franchise.… Expand
2 of 5 users found this helpful23
All this user's reviews
4
PepsiJamieDec 10, 2018
I'm giving this 4 stars ONLY because the FX were stellar and the acting was good. The storyline is confusing at best, irresponsible and offensive to HP fans at worst. It's as if your reading a "choose your own adventure" book from cover toI'm giving this 4 stars ONLY because the FX were stellar and the acting was good. The storyline is confusing at best, irresponsible and offensive to HP fans at worst. It's as if your reading a "choose your own adventure" book from cover to cover.

Like many others, I have read and watched all the Harry Potter films numerous times. I have enjoyed them immensely and consider them an incredible asset to literature. In my opinion J.K. Rowling, Warner Brothers and David Yates should be ashamed for creating such a jumbled mess and associating it with Harry Potter. If Warner Brothers was smart they'd start over and actually READ the script before making another costly, bewildering and unworthy film that is in any way associated with the Harry Potter franchize.… Expand
2 of 5 users found this helpful23
All this user's reviews
6
sensorglitchNov 18, 2018
I enjoyed it. Had some low moments, it was a bit confused at points, it seemed like they tried to add too many subplots and things got muddy because of it. I had fun. I might see it again.
4 of 11 users found this helpful47
All this user's reviews
4
TVJerryNov 20, 2018
This film starts with the confusing escape sequence of the titular wizard (played by Johnny Depp). From there it descends into a tedious parade of dramatic character interactions that get more and more mystifying. Some of the fantasyThis film starts with the confusing escape sequence of the titular wizard (played by Johnny Depp). From there it descends into a tedious parade of dramatic character interactions that get more and more mystifying. Some of the fantasy creatures return (along with their keeper Eddie Redmayne), but unlike the first film, there's not much visually dazzling in the effects, the environments or even the costumes. The audience members who had read the books (or at least the Harry Potter series) seemed to be more pleased with what was happening, but I found it a jumbled, puzzling, slow mess.… Expand
3 of 9 users found this helpful36
All this user's reviews
4
IrisenDec 6, 2018
Crimes of Grindelwald is a disappointment of a movie. I can't say it's bad because it's redeemed by some of its aspects, like its visuals (the Archives scenes is very entertaining to watch) and the sheer nostalgia factor (If you've seen it,Crimes of Grindelwald is a disappointment of a movie. I can't say it's bad because it's redeemed by some of its aspects, like its visuals (the Archives scenes is very entertaining to watch) and the sheer nostalgia factor (If you've seen it, you know what I'm talking about) but it still remains disappointing. The plot is boring, the characters are either butchered in their development or incredibly flat. The stories are convoluted, it's as if JK tried to cram in as much story elements and new characters as she could and the end result is a bloated, confused mess. The only reason I'm not giving this a worse rating is the aspects I've mentionned before and Jude Law's Dumbledore, who's pretty hot (ngl), and I'm weak for that kind of stuff.
The last plot twist gave me the urge to throw myself in the nearest river. I never want to see that movie again but I still remain hopeful for the sequel, and I really hope that JKR can get better at writing for movies.… Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
4
alvindinoMar 11, 2019
The worst part is, after all the rotating subplots appear without a significant impression, as if the subplots are Disapparating just like that, the story doesn't really have a conclusion. This film is only felt as a bridge to deliver us toThe worst part is, after all the rotating subplots appear without a significant impression, as if the subplots are Disapparating just like that, the story doesn't really have a conclusion. This film is only felt as a bridge to deliver us to the next episode. We will not understand this watch if we do not watch the previous film, we will not get a meaningful answer before watching the next film. It's disappointing, because in terms of narration, this is an 'important' story in the history of the magic world. J.K. Rowling once again showed her ability to build a complex universe. But it seems like it's better to be booked first. As a script, it's just too much. The Potterheads will just be happy, because they have explored a deeper magical world. But as a film, this is no longer the story of Newt Scamander. This is a crimes of maxim story to turn on the franchise that should have been finished.… Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
4
GrantD243Dec 8, 2018
Oof. Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is a perfect example of how a film can suffer from being the middle child in a planned trilogy. This whole film is just setting up the third film. What little story development there is isOof. Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is a perfect example of how a film can suffer from being the middle child in a planned trilogy. This whole film is just setting up the third film. What little story development there is is largely unsatisfying, and a lot of this film is just...boring. It also had an odd flow to it and feels pretty clunky at times.

Newt is still one of my favorite characters in the Harry Potter universe, but he deserves a better story. I hope the third film makes up for this.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
4
katieleigh422Dec 8, 2018
If only I could differentiate my rating based on whether I liked watching it vs. whether I thought it was a good movie. Admittedly, I have no objectivity regarding the Wizarding World and will enjoy every moment you let me get my eyeballs onIf only I could differentiate my rating based on whether I liked watching it vs. whether I thought it was a good movie. Admittedly, I have no objectivity regarding the Wizarding World and will enjoy every moment you let me get my eyeballs on it. But this movie was a mess and had plotholes and questionable character points all over the place. See it if you love the Wizarding World -- those of you who do will likely get more out of it than you did the first in this series. But was it a good movie? Not really.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
4
MattBrady99Dec 20, 2018
“Magic blooms... only in rare souls. Still, we must skulk in shadows. But the old ways serve us no longer.”

‘Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald’ is a muddled sequel/prequel that lacks magic and wonder. The most tedious part is“Magic blooms... only in rare souls. Still, we must skulk in shadows. But the old ways serve us no longer.”

‘Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald’ is a muddled sequel/prequel that lacks magic and wonder. The most tedious part is realizing there’s going to be four more of these; something I was once comfortable with. This isn’t the type of story that inspired J.K. Rowling to start writing - no, this is a studio movie asking when the script is done.

The biggest crime this movie has ever committed is being boring.

Still, not everything is bad…

David Yates directing during the action sequences was entertaining and delivers some creative set pieces. I mean, the guy knows how to direct a big budget movie and make it look as good as it does. The production design and costumes are excellent as usual for these type of movies.

Eddie Redmayne and Dan Fogler are great once again. I believed they chemistry a lot more than first one. However, the characters themselves don’t suit this type of story, especially Jacob whose brought back without a good reason. I guess that memory wipe spell didn’t work because it only took away bad memories, yet he remembers the first world war - so why did he forget in the first? I wonder if this affects the people of New York as well.

Katherine Waterston did the best with the material she was given, which isn’t much as her character is put on autopilot. Jude Law as a youngish Dumbledore is perfect casting. Law’s shape and classy approach to the character makes his presence enthralling; too bad he’s screen time is slim.

I’m aware this opinion may spark disagreement, but I thought Johnny Depp played Grindelwald with the right charm and dangerous presence for the character to work. While I still believe Colin Farrell would’ve been perfect as this series Voldemort, because I could imagine Farrell growing into that wicked and striking villain.

And that’s really it for positives.

I gave the first movie credit for avoiding nostalgia and managing to stand on its own two feet, but now it’s trying to build a franchise without telling a good story. The movie is all over the place in terms of storytelling and narrative.

I’m not sure about you, but I was struggling to follow what was going on. I thought it was just me at first as I don’t consider myself a fan of the series or know the Wizarding World that well. It was meant for the fans who can easily follow this narrative, right? Well, to my surprise and relief, I was wrong. It’s never a good sign when hardcore fans struggle to explain the entire “plot”. Is it about Newt Scamander? How about Grindelwald?

Some of the visual effects looked pretty bad and painfully noticeable when interacting with non-digital performers. I said this once and I’ll say it again, I kinda wish there was more practical work.

Overall rating: I don’t know the fate of these movie in the future, but judging on the box office results and the critical reviews from both critics and fans alike, it’s pretty bleak. I’m sure there will be a third movie and fans will see it no matter what while holding a grudge against Rowling.

What a time to be alive.… Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
4
TyranianMay 20, 2019
Plenty of colourful magic but seriously tedious characters and plot. Never does anything intelligent.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
eagleeyevikingFeb 15, 2019
While the film is entertaining throughout its runtime, it does feel more like an exposition dump than a wizarding adventure.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
JPKJun 14, 2019
Very Messy And Disappointing
Crimes Of Grindelwald may have great performances from Law and Depp, and beautiful special effects. But it’s also very messy with a pretty poorly written script, bland characters, and is pretty boring.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
enter_thedragonApr 18, 2020
Not horrible. Not especially good, I suppose. This movie felt like an episode in a television show, more of a transitory story from beginning to end. The plot is simple, if you can call it a plot. If you liked the beasts aspect of the firstNot horrible. Not especially good, I suppose. This movie felt like an episode in a television show, more of a transitory story from beginning to end. The plot is simple, if you can call it a plot. If you liked the beasts aspect of the first film there's some pretty cool few new beasts. Many callbacks to the Harry Potter lore we know and love. But the film was fairly weak. Go into it with no expectations, and see what you think. I'd still recommend it .… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
promised_mahdiMar 3, 2019
i'm confused some spells were in this movie with wide use and they weren't in harry potter series i think it's not reasonable a spin off should be loyal to its source this film isn't in addition there is a prediction in story that i reallyi'm confused some spells were in this movie with wide use and they weren't in harry potter series i think it's not reasonable a spin off should be loyal to its source this film isn't in addition there is a prediction in story that i really can't figure out its connection to grindelwald… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
schokokipferlJul 1, 2019
The movie has potential, but it just comes out rather messy... too much is introduced at once and it just makes the audience confused. Queenie’s story, Nagini’s story, Leta’s story could all have been much more interesting if any of them wereThe movie has potential, but it just comes out rather messy... too much is introduced at once and it just makes the audience confused. Queenie’s story, Nagini’s story, Leta’s story could all have been much more interesting if any of them were given more attention. I’m really hoping FB3 makes up for it!… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
ComandanteCobraMay 18, 2022
Not awesome , not terrible...average on the verge of boring.
It's a very long movie targeted toward adult vievers that didn't add much to the Potterverse.
Some inconsistency with Potter world can be irritating, but it is not the end of the world.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
r96skMay 12, 2022
Better than its predecessor, even if I still didn't really dig it.

'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald' has more of a vibe about it, especially early on, and is marginally better paced. Overall, though, I'm kinda split on how I feelBetter than its predecessor, even if I still didn't really dig it.

'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald' has more of a vibe about it, especially early on, and is marginally better paced. Overall, though, I'm kinda split on how I feel about this second instalment. It is a definite improvement, and yet I don't have any noteworthy positives to share about it. The cast, despite names I like, are just so forgettable to me in this.

As such, I don't feel like I can give it any more than a 6/10 rating - which feels harsh, but 7/10 feels too high. With that said, I still plan to check out 'Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore'. It just needs that little extra oomph and these would be films that I'd enjoy, so hopefully that 2022 release will produce.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
iCampoRamilMay 18, 2022
Mucho más oscura de inicio, presenta una parte interesante de misterio/thriller, pero luego no acaba tan interesante y se apaga un poco. todo por una resolución del tema demasiado simple. Lo bueno que tiene, eso sí, lass pinceladas que dejaMucho más oscura de inicio, presenta una parte interesante de misterio/thriller, pero luego no acaba tan interesante y se apaga un poco. todo por una resolución del tema demasiado simple. Lo bueno que tiene, eso sí, lass pinceladas que deja para la tercera parte.

· Cosas buenas: detallitos y referencias para los fans fans, se la juega bastante al ser tan oscura, con discursos supremacistas y demás. Los efectos especiales son una auténtica maravilla, y cómo no, Johnny Depp lo hace impresionante de Grindelwald.
· Cosas malas: introducen demasiadas cosas sin propósito que dejan al espectador confuso con tanta saturación de información, es bastante caótica en líneas generales.
· Conclusión: se le nota a la legua que es una transición de la parte 1 a una tercera que se viene con un gran hype, aún así, tiene cosas guais, pero sin duda peor que la 1.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
CoolBRSep 4, 2023
An okay movie, there isn't anything much special about it. The plot is generic without many memorable scenes, we just keep following the same characters that appeared in the last movie.

For Harry Potter fans there are many references andAn okay movie, there isn't anything much special about it. The plot is generic without many memorable scenes, we just keep following the same characters that appeared in the last movie.

For Harry Potter fans there are many references and nostalgia which makes the movie better.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Kdog152Jan 11, 2023
Just as good as the first film. These films just keep getting better, though what should I expect from a film based on a book by one of the best authors in history. However, there were a few things that didn't make sense. for example, thereJust as good as the first film. These films just keep getting better, though what should I expect from a film based on a book by one of the best authors in history. However, there were a few things that didn't make sense. for example, there are a few times were a name from harry potter is mentioned at Hogwarts, such as travers, except, travers doesn't go to school some 2 decades after, as he is at school with Tom riddle. Lita lestrange dies and her brother is dead, so how does Rudolfus lestrage be born, if the lestrange family is extinct? there are so many plot holes in this film. Like, how is Credence a Dumbledore? Dumbledore only had 2 siblings, Arian and Aberforth. The beginning scene was pretty crap too. But for the most part, it was good. The last 20 minutes was especially good.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
Fixer84Mar 16, 2023
A dull and flat film that leaves you absolutely nothing at the end of the vision, if not the awareness that going forward at this rate it will only get worse.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
More From This Movie

52 Critic Reviews

5.7 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 77 Project Hail Mary
2 75 Send Help
3 73 Hoppers
4 72 The Sheep Detectives
5 68 Crime 101
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL