Animales fantásticos: Los crímenes de Grindelwald

Nudné, nezáživné, zmatené a caótico. Considero que los primeros diez minutos son la mejor parte de toda la película, mientras esperaba ansioso por más acción frenética y por lo que Johnny Depp nos mostraría. Y durante el resto de la película, solo habla aburridamente, y al igual que la primera entrega, la segunda también gira en torno a un excéntrico y su origen. París, Eddie Redmayne y la mencionada introducción fueron agradables, de lo contrario predominan las reacciones negativas. Esperemos que la tercera entrega con Mads sea mejor. (01.01.2021)

Otra papilla sacada al vapor, en el que se está preparando lentamente el duelo del joven Dumbledore con Grindelwald, pero de hecho solo se prepara, y probablemente se necesitarán algunas películas más. Una historia escasa y artificialmente alargada, basada más o menos en perseguir a un mago por París (sorprendentemente no Grindelwald), con Rowling y compañía que intentan sin éxito llenar una gran cantidad de personajes con subtramas secundarias con dificultades completamente banales, algunas de las cuales se presentan solo para estar en la película, pero no dicen ni hacen nada fundamental todo el tiempo (y probablemente lo seguiremos viendo en futuras secuelas). En el fondo, hay una especie de inicio de un arco narrativo histórico sobre el fatídico choque de los dos magos más grandes de su tiempo, la película como tal, sin embargo, no cuenta una gran historia y sólo cabalga sobre las líneas románticas tibias de sus protagonistas, la nostalgia de Potter y los animales digitales, utilizados exclusivamente como decoración. Visualmente, es hermosa y llena de estímulos imaginativos, además es divertida, pero eso solo la convierte en un parque de diversiones de atracciones coloridas y promesas incumplidas. (14.11.2018)

I actually had a bit of a déjà vu. Within the Harry Potter universe, the story is a few decades older than the one that was current at the time with the final two-parter about the Battle of Hogwarts. It’s as if the authors travelled back in time to do an inconspicuous film preparation for the epic final battle. And we’ve already seen that once. So, at times the first half of the film was incredibly boring. The entire movie is shot in these strange, dark-bleak colors that you have to work pretty hard not to be lulled to sleep by. And since there is nothing going on in the plot and there is zero action, it’s not easy to fight the urge to sleep. Some animals are quite nice the same way as in the first movie, but that’s about it. There isn’t much humor and the only thing that I remember about the characters is that Eddie’s portrayal of the anti-social Newt is more than believable. There still are a few good moments here. For instance, casting Jude Law as young Dumbledore was a great choice. J. K. Rowling also provided a couple of interesting story twists that fans of Harry Potter will surely appreciate. It still feels like a weaker return not only to Hogwarts. But when the film is taking place in Hogwarts, it picks up considerably. (26.11.2018)

I'm very satisfied, unless you count the fact that I went to the cinema three times, as I didn't get to see the film because tickets were sold out. I liked the world of Harry Potter because great wizard fantasy is scarce, so when it was discontinued I had no choice but to hope something similar would come along, and Fantastic Beasts is a great substitute (like The Hobbit for Lord of the Rings). Compared to Harry the casting is much better. Johnny Depp as the bad guy is excellent and finally appears in a film that won't flop financially, Jude Law as the young Dumbledore is great, and though I don’t Eddie Redmayne’s weird expression, he is a young undoubtedly talented Oscar winning actor, so it's worth a try. The production design is great and the return to the familiar world is pleasantly nostalgic, the numerous Easter Eggs are a delight, the action is decently handled, although there isn't much of it, and the finale with the blue fire dragon is spectacular. I can strongly feel that the cards are still being dealt and something big is being promised, but I don't mind it at all, because the first two episodes of Harry Potter were similar and since Azkaban it's was a ride. I'm looking forward to the pentalogy. 75%. (29.11.2018)

The first film proved that audiences are still quite curious about this cinematic world and will gladly pay to return to it. So what do we do in the second one? What makes sense. We're gonna add in everything that we think people might like, to keep it wringing it out for a few years. This approach is fine, it's just what Hollywood does with big movies, but unfortunately the second Fantastic Beasts shows that it's not always for the best. For example, getting a film directed by the biggest routine artist Hollywood has at its disposal, or wanting to milk the studio so badly that it sets up a lot of plots, subplots, characters, heroes and creatures that there's no time at all for a plot that makes even rudimentary sense. The result is a bunch of mediocre, albeit good-looking action, a lot of twists and turns that would put the creators of Wild Angel to shame, and a cauldron of book and movie references that fans are likely to enjoy. That last thing makes The Crimes of Grindelwald rather good, and if you head to the cinema expecting someone to simply shove things you probably like and probably want to see under your nose, you'll enjoy it. As an attempt to kickstart a grand fantasy franchise, however, it brutally fails in practically every way. Boring movie, and perhaps even a little embarrassing at times. (15.11.2018)