I just wanted to say this, after watching Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald. I won’t bother with reviewing the movie itself, I find there is little to be gained by yet another review. I did want to give my opinion on a specific aspect though. I’ve heard and read a ton of negative remarks in regard with the movie’s title and the treatment of the protagonist, Newt Scamander.
A lot of people are saying that the title Fantastic Beasts is getting out of context along with Scamander who seems to be turning into a secondary character in his own franchise, since the second installment seems to be gravitating the next movies towards the climactic battle between Dumbledore and Grindelwald. I find this could not be further from the truth.
Let us examine the facts for a moment.
It has already been established, well before even the first movie was out, that Dumbledore defeats Grindelwald. J K Rowling might tweak some aspects of her world’s timelines, but I doubt she would outright defile them. This NEEDS to happen, and the movies cannot go any other way. And it will happen because Dumbledore is the most powerful wizard of his time.
We learn in the Crimes of Grindelwald that due to a blood pact, Dumbledore is in fact unable to fight our main villain, as of now, and needs to somehow break the pact before proceeding to beat Johnny Depp into an unrecognizable pulp of magical malevolence, in the greatest magical battle of J K Rowling’s universe.
OH WAIT! An unbreakable wizardly pact needs to be broken for the movies to end? I guess that would require a very specific and extremely difficult spell. Unique, even unrepeatable. That would require unique ingredients. Like let’s say the eyelashes of a black unicorn and the tears of a laughing dragon. Who on earth could have the uncanny skills to collect the necessary ingredients for such a massive magical feat while Superman…I mean Dumbledore, is busy chopping away Grindelwald’s influence around Europe?
OH WAIT! It just so happens that the main protagonist of the films does seem to fit the bill…
Newt Scamander is portrayed as a naturalist. He loves magical animals and they seem to love him back. Making a spinoff series of movies with just him running around saving magical beasts would be…lackluster. It would be fun, but it could easily have been a spinoff TV series. A film series needs to end with a bang. JKR could have created a villain in his size to complete his arc (and I think she already has *cough Credence cough*) Then again turning him into a spell-casting powerhouse would chew away his quirky personality.
But I think that what J K Rowling is trying to do, is to have two main heroes in her new series of movies. Completely independent and at the same time completely relying on each other. Newt needs Dumbledore to save his world. Only Dumbledore can. But then again, Dumbledore needs Newt to release him. Only the quirky Hufflepuff can pull that stunt.
So, here’s my theory:
I believe that Fantastic Beasts (and where to find them) will be Newt’s race against time to find the rarest and most dangerous of beasts, in an epic adventure to gather the ingredients for a mythically unique spell which will release Superman…Dumbledore from his confining pact.
In my humble opinion, the title of the new series is more central and relevant than ever. And now it has an epic twist. And Scamander? Well. How would you call the man who saves the man who saves the world?
What do you think?