The Crimes of Grindelwald reviews the details: what the critics say about the new sequel to Fantastic Animals

The reviews are for Fantastic animals: The Crimes of Grindelwald.

The second chapter of the Fantastic animals series – and the tenth installment of the Wizarding World series started in 2001 with the first Harry Potter film – starring Eddie Redmayne as Newt Scamander, Katherine Waterston as Tina Goldstein and Dan Fogler as Jacob Kowalski.

Ezra Miller is also present in the role of Credence Barebone, Zoë Kravitz in the role of Leta Lestrange, Jude Law as Albus Dumbledore and Johnny Depp as Gellert Grindelwald. David Yates, who directed the first one Fantastic animals film in 2016, has resumed its function for the second episode. JK Rowling wrote the screenplay, as he did for the first film in the series.

The critics have been divided Fantastic animals. While the direction of Yates and the screenplay by Rowling have earned praise, many have found the film confused and mired in two lines.

Here's what the reviews have said so far (spoiler warning):

L & # 39; Independent

4/5

JK Rowling has written an incredibly complicated script, full of brothers, sisters and star-cross lovers who all have close relationships with one another. An explosive final whirlwind, set around the Père Lachaise cemetery in Paris, merely takes a certain distance to clarify things.

Like his predecessor, The Crimes of Grindelwald has some very dark moments that turn into the realm of the film noir by Fritz Lang. These are interspersed with a lot of knockabout comedy. The performances are just as vivid as the special effects. Director David Yates and his team show their expected levels of craftsmanship. In terms of production values, this is the direction of Rolls Royce. The film boasts a surprising level of visual and inventive details. The only drawback is that Rowling has included so many characters and secondary textures that sometimes the narrative momentum is lost. (Geoffrey Macnab)

The Guardian

3/5

The epic story of Rowling's magical world includes specific references to the Hogwarts universe that we already know and love, younger versions of the old characters, and thus somehow look more prequalified, with hints of a myth of origin. But as often happens with fantasy adventures, storm clouds are coming and history is inexorably weighted towards a titanic battle of good and evil. It is as spectacular as the marvelous opening film, with lovingly crafted creatures, witty inventions and cheerful cartoons. But I could not help but feel that the narrative pace was a little hampered, and that we got bogged down, just a little bit, with many new details. (Peter Bradshaw)

The Telegraph

2/5

Everything about The Crimes of Grindelwald is intriguing and self-referential: it knows of an epic joke-the-points game played through reams of appendices and unpublished footnotes. The result is one of the most serious prequel-it cases starting from Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, where instead of ordinary storytelling, the value of a chessboard of characters and objects is redesigned with care over the course of two hours plus the change, in order to prepare the ground for what comes next. (Robbie Collin)

Digital Spy

(Mixed)

Written by JK Rowling herself, the film is a beautiful return to the wizarding world, with lots of magical moments and intricate traditions to keep fans interested. But, as a middle movie in a five-part series, it sometimes comes up against the pressure to juggle numerous stories and maneuver the cast for subsequent films. (Hugh Armitage)

Den of Geek

3/5

The last episode of Harry Potter's prequel in 5 parts by JK Rowling is a magical adventure, a dive into the world of magicians, full of wonder and joy, which should arouse warm memories and Christmas feelings. As a visit to Warner Bros' War of Bros War Bros, the sets, extraordinary visual effects, world-building and pure attention to detail will leave you speechless. But like the WB tour, there are too many people and you do not go there for the plot. (Rosie Fletcher)

The Hollywood Reporter

(Positive)

The sequel has better and sometimes galvanizing effects, a darker tone and a high battle between good and evil. Best of all, his characters are drawn more vividly and intertwined in relationships ranging from delicious to deadly.

Even the crime of Grindelwald has serious responsibilities, the most serious is a wrong performance of Johnny Depp as the villain of the title. But unlike the first episode, which seemed like an effort to extend the Rowling brand, this compelling film has a busy and kinetic style. (Caryn James)

The Los Angeles Times

(Negative)

An atrocious nuisance hardly enlivened by rare glimpses of Hogwarts, a glimpse of gay romance and a menagerie of disturbing computer-generated banners, Fantastic animals: The Crimes of Grindelwald It's enough to make JK Rowling's fans cry in frustration, as long as they can keep their eyes open. Allegedly Rowling, his fellow producers and the best colleagues of Warner Bros. thought of those fans – that is, their ability to please and enchantment, not just their pocketbooks – when they decided to launch a series of prequels to their justly celebrated Harry Potter cycle .

Then again, who knows what they were thinking, judging from the 2016 shaky Fantastic animals and where to find them, Which was written for the screen by Rowling herself and directed by David Yates with none of the grave and elegant atmospheres that brought on the last four films of Potter. (Justin Chang)

Fantastic animals: The Crimes of Grindelwald was released on November 16 in the United States and the United Kingdom.

It supports free journalism and subscribers to independent minds

.

Leave a comment

Send a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.