The second installment of J K Rowling’s Fantastic Beasts series set in the Wizarding World again stars Eddie Redmayne as Newt Scamander. Redmayne’s shambling, mumbling performance is dull, but not as dull as the movie, which rambles on for two and a quarter hours with an overload of CGI, music and characters, all out of control, and a lack of a coherent plot, with the film merely serving as a link from the last movie to the next one. This is not very satisfying.
It is a couple of years since Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016), plenty of time to have forgotten all about it. The Crimes of Grindelwald plunges us right back into the saga as though we remember every detail of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Rowling knows – and loves and lives – her Wizarding World, but we’ve had a few other things going on since 2016, Brexit for instance. The Brexit plot is boring and interminable too, but we are up to speed with it every damned day.
It is very easy to feel lost in the Wizarding World, and, as The Crimes of Grindelwald concentrates on it so strongly, the convoluted Lestrange lineage needs proper explanation and clarity, one that Rowling’s screenplay simply does not provide. It is easy: if you don’t know what’s going on, you don’t care. Rowling’s dialogue is very basic and ordinary, with the author also struggling to keep all her characters in the frame, or to develop them or keep them fascinating. It may be sacrilege to say so, but Rowling could do with a fellow screen-writer.
The film has a slight tone problem. It is dark to try to appeal to adults, but full of cuddly toys and simple laughs to appeal to kids. It has always been difficult to make movie that work on two levels for kids and adults, and this one is having trouble here.
Inevitably perhaps, the surprisingly cast Johnny Depp seems largely to have taken over this second episode, and there is way too much of him as the villain Grindelwald, though he is better than expected, and makes his mark. Grindelwald’s screen time edges out Newt, and he needs to be always in focus as the heart and soul of the saga. Jude Law has a fair bit to do as a younger Albus Dumbledore, but the role is a cypher, and he is mostly just there, grinning or looking vaguely troubled. It is not really an acting role. There is a teasing thing that Dumbledore and Grindelwald were once ‘closer than brothers’ but what is this supposed to mean?
Katherine Waterston and Alison Sudol are back as Tina Goldstein and Queenie Goldstein, with Waterston just having to look earnest and grim, and Sudol camping around in a Marilyn Monroe impersonation, admittedly quite an amusing one. Dan Fogler is back as Newt’s annoying American sidekick Jacob Kowalski, though at least his mugging comedy relief turn stops half way through the film, and he becomes a more serious character, so, while unexplained, that is actually a relief. Ezra Miller wanders around looking sweet and soulful as Credence Barebone, though of course more of him in Part Three.
And then there are Cornell S John as Arnold Guzman, Ingvar as Sigurdsson Grimmson, Wolf Roth as Spielman, Carmen Ejogo as Seraphina Picquery, Zoë Kravitz as Leta Lestrange, and Callum Turner as Newt’s brother Theseus Scamander. They are an interesting crowd, but none of these characters has much to do in terms of action or dialogue that might make for memorable appearances. Some of what they are up to is mysterious or just baffling, and by the next film, it will be hard to remember who they all are, let alone what they are supposed to have done.
Then again, the film fails to deliver the promise of its title. Those looking forward to seeing Fantastic Beasts or learning about The Crimes of Grindelwald are going to feel frustrated. It is a no show in both departments.
David Yates directs a handsome, painstaking production with Hollywood-style ruthless efficiency, but The Crimes of Grindelwald is over-produced and under-imagined.
© Derek Winnert 2018 Movie Review
Check out more reviews on http://derekwinnert.com