The final piece of our marathon on the world of 'Harry Potter' is dedicated to three (two released and one upcoming) spin-offs 'Fantastic Beasts', directed by the permanent director since the fifth part, David Yates.

Interlude

Three years after the release of the final 'Harry Potter' film, Warner Bros. announced the expansion of the cinematic universe with three new spin-offs. The first film, based on one of the three supplementary books of the main series, was set to hit screens in 2016.

After the release of the fourth film about the young wizard, J.K. Rowling, at the request of Comic Relief, decided to expand the boundaries of the magical world, and gradually three new books were published.

The first, from the perspective of magical sports expert Kennilworthy Whisp, was titled 'Quidditch Through the Ages'. The second, written by Newt Scamander, is a textbook for the subject 'Care of Magical Creatures'. This required Hogwarts textbook is called 'Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them'. The third book is a collection of 'The Tales of Beedle the Bard', including five stories, among them the very tale of the three brothers who received the Deathly Hallows.

It's easy to guess that it was the second supplement that served as the source material and formed the basis of the new franchise films titled 'Fantastic Beasts'.

America, Salute: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

'Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them' is just a thin textbook that belonged (in Rowling's edition) to Harry Potter. On the pages of the textbook, you can find witty notes from the famous trio regarding various animals (can you guess whose note is next to the spiders, and whose is next to the Hungarian Horntail?), a game of 'Hangman', and correspondence between friends on topics unrelated to studies.

The book has absolutely no plot and only describes various fantastic beasts, their danger levels, and tips for taming or fighting them. As David Yates said, it's practically impossible to even extract a short film from it, so J.K. Rowling personally took on writing the screenplay based on her own created textbook. For the writer, this work was a debut in the profession, as previously she only guided Steve Kloves' adaptation in the right direction, and now she had to personally create a story from scratch, taking only the characters (character, if you don't count the beasts).

For a debutante, Rowling, of course, did a colossal job. Essentially, it's the magical world familiar to all fans from the main series of books and films, but with completely new details, characters, and settings. The story was moved from the closed British school of witchcraft and wizardry, Hogwarts, to the open space of America in 1926. For the first time, the heroes were not children but adults, which introduced many socio-political themes into the script.

The director of 'Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them' could have been Alfonso Cuarón, the director of 'Prisoner of Azkaban', but the studio saw David Yates in the role, who had directed the franchise films starting with 'Order of the Phoenix'. In favor of the Briton, the 'Warner Bros.' argued for greater experience working with the cinematic universe, a closer acquaintance with Rowling, and a clearer vision and knowledge of the magical world. Yates initially even refused to take the director's chair, but after several attempts by Warner Bros., he agreed, stating that he missed Harry Potter and his world.

The story, beginning almost 70 years before the events shown in 'Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone', required a new cast. For the role of the only Briton in America, Newt Scamander, they took Eddie Redmayne, who, as we remember, had already tried to become Tom Riddle in 'Chamber of Secrets'. To prepare for this role, the actor observed wild animals at the London Zoo for five whole weeks.

The young zoologist is joined on screen by witch Tina, played by Katherine Waterston, her sister Queenie (Alison Sudol), and the head of security accusing Newt, Percival Graves, with the face of Colin Farrell. Also in the film, Ezra Miller appears as an Obscurus, and Dan Fogler plays Jacob Kowalski, a No-Maj (the American version of 'Muggle') who accidentally discovers the existence of magic.

Many members of the old team returned to give fans the same feelings from the magical world (and make money on the franchise). Among them are producer David Heyman and production designer Stuart Craig, who created all the sets. 1920s America was actually filmed at Leavesden Studios in Britain. The new geolocation of the magical world helped refresh the view of the saga and evoke nostalgia for the main series. Rowling even wrote four stories, 'Magic in North America', published on Pottermore (now Wizarding World) to promote the film.

It would seem there's almost nothing to surprise fans with, but the writer created this world in her head, so opening up its new facets wasn't a big problem. The screen features the Magical Congress of the United States of America (an analogue of the British Ministry of Magic), students of the American school of witchcraft and wizardry Ilvermorny, but most importantly, new interesting beasts of the fantastic world. Watching the first part of the spin-off, one inevitably feels a sense of nostalgia for the main film series.

A successful advertising campaign, fan nostalgia, a fairly decent plot, and a new magical world led to the 2016 film 'Fantastic Beasts' grossing over $800 million at the box office on a budget of $180 million. The film attracted viewers, so Warner Bros., sensing the money, quickly turned the trilogy into a pentalogy (five parts). It's funny that the creators' next step turned out to be less confident.

Gypsies from Paris: Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

After the success of the first 'Fantastic Beasts' film, the studio immediately began work on the sequel. In 2018, the second part, titled 'The Crimes of Grindelwald', saw the light of day. Yates and Rowling returned to their roles as director and screenwriter.

The events of the sequel unfold a few months after the end of the previous film (in 1927), and the setting expanded to London and Paris. It was in this year, according to canon, that Newt Scamander released the first edition of his book, which he had been painstakingly working on since the order in 1918.

The cast was impressively supplemented with big names. If we consider that Johnny Depp appeared in the previous film only briefly, then in 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald', the role of the villain was significantly expanded. By that time, a scandal with his ex-wife Amber Heard was already raging around the actor, but the studio decided not to abandon Depp's services, citing that they were not interested in the personal lives of employees (as it would turn out later, the 'Warner Bros.' principles are not very solid).

In addition to Depp, Jude Law appeared in the film as the young Albus Dumbledore. The producers considered many for this role. Benedict Cumberbatch, Christian Bale, Mark Strong, and even Jared Harris (son of Richard Harris, who first played the role of the Hogwarts headmaster in Chris Columbus's films) received invitations to participate in the filming, but in the end, Law became Albus.

Callum Turner played Newt Scamander's brother, and Zoë Kravitz played his beloved Leta Lestrange. Also among the cast were Easter egg characters for fans of the series. Some of them undoubtedly pleased viewers. For example, the appearance on screen of Nicolas Flamel (Brontis Jodorowsky) — a 14th-century alchemist, known creator of the Philosopher's Stone (also appears in the frame) and friend of Albus Dumbledore — is clearly a pleasant bonus for the film.

Or the appearance of Nagini played by Claudia Kim, bordering on a pleasant Easter egg and a point of contention. It turned out that Nagini is a Maledictus (a person whose blood is cursed from birth, gradually turning into an animal). In the film, the girl works in a circus, performing a number involving transformation into a snake, and becomes a friend of the Obscurus Credence. The fact is that viewers knew about the unusual nature of Voldemort's pet, and there was even a fan theory about the Maledictus, but making it official canon is a subjective decision for everyone. Personally, I liked it, and it's not the first time Rowling has turned fan fiction into canon; otherwise, how would the 'masterpiece' 'The Cursed Child' have appeared?

Despite the nostalgic Easter eggs that warm the soul, 'Fantastic Beasts' is filled with very, very dubious things that make the spin-off a film chasing fan winks for money and losing the true magic of the story as a result.

The most minor complaints concern trifles like the question: 'Why do most wizards cast spells without even opening their mouths?' As far as I remember, in the main 'Harry Potter' series, only powerful wizards could cast spells without speaking incantations. Only two names came to everyone's mind — Voldemort and Dumbledore. This is especially evident in their duel in the Ministry of Magic. And even then, remember how distinctly the Dark Lord pronounced every letter of the spell when he killed Harry in the Forbidden Forest. 'Fantastic Beasts' destroys this completely. In 'The Crimes of Grindelwald', every second person casts spells non-verbally, and the green flashes of Avada Kedavra fly around like fireworks on New Year's Eve.

More serious questions arise during the lesson with the Boggart. It would seem like another gift to the loyal viewer, because Dumbledore conducts the lesson just as Remus Lupin will conduct it several decades later. The scene shows that Albus's teaching methods will be entrenched in Hogwarts for decades and will be used for a long time. Such a wise and intelligent wizard. Just one nuance. Dumbledore never, according to the original story, taught Defense Against the Dark Arts. It was always said that before becoming headmaster, Albus was a Transfiguration professor, just like Minerva McGonagall in the main film series.

As for McGonagall, perhaps the biggest complaint is associated with her. In the second part of 'Fantastic Beasts', the teacher, played by Fiona Glascott, briefly appears on screen. Again, ordinary fan service, nothing more. Who doesn't sin with this today? Even that one is woven from a web of homage to the past. However, it's again unclear whether Rowling got lost in her own world or simply gave up on it entirely, but Minerva McGonagall could not have appeared in the film because she wasn't even born (!!!). Official canon indicates that the future Head of Gryffindor would only be born 8 years after the film's events, in 1935. Many facts confirm the screenwriter's huge blunder.

Roman Kovalev

Review of the film 'Spider-Man: No Way Home': Fan Service Has Finally Won

On December 15, 'Spider-Man: No Way Home' was released, the main Marvel blockbuster this year. The most anticipated project of winter. The most large-scale Spider-Man film. The most, the mos

Open material

In 'Order of the Phoenix', answering Umbridge's question, Minerva says she has been teaching for thirty-nine years. If you do some simple math and remember that the events of the fifth 'Harry Potter' take place in 1995-1996, it turns out that Professor McGonagall only became a professor in 1956-1957. A mistake spanning thirty years. How to explain this? I don't understand. Because even the excuse that it's her relative won't work, since Minerva got her surname from her Muggle father. The only option is the childish excuse of a namesake.

All these moments spoil the impression of the film incredibly. It creates the feeling that no one treats the legacy of the magical world with respect, reverence, and love anymore. As if they found a good cash cow and now need to milk the provider dry. You can talk about dubious decisions as much as you like, call them retcons, but we're not in Marvel comics. You can't take words out of the song. For me, such decisions are huge plot holes that can no longer be closed, which is why the second part sharply turns into the deservedly worst film of the franchise. Of course, there remains one more question for the creators, but it will be more appropriate to discuss it later.

Viewers and critics also noticed something amiss in the 'Fantastic Beasts' sequel, as evidenced by ratings and box office. With an increased budget of $200 million, the film only managed a figure just over $650 million. As mentioned in the first article, 'The Crimes of Grindelwald' is the only film in the franchise not to enter the top 100 highest-grossing films in cinema history. Alas and alack, but they got what they deserved.

All Your Secrets Are Visible in the Lens: Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore

The average performance of the second part did not prevent the studio from continuing production of the trilogy. 'Warner Bros.' still plans a five-part project covering a time span of 19 years, up to 1945.

After the release of 'The Crimes of Grindelwald', the creators took a break to better prepare for the new part. Initially, 'Fantastic Beasts 3' was supposed to be released in the fall of last year, but besides the break, so much happened during production that the premiere date is currently April 2022, and it's not known for sure whether it will stay that way (we are also in Dark Times).

The events surrounding 'The Secrets of Dumbledore' snowballed. First, the pandemic, which shifted everything. Johnny Depp's lost court case and his dismissal from the role of Grindelwald (and so all principles were thrown out the window, in favor of a checkbox in modern society, over a completely controversial court case. Even the writer's support didn't save him). The search for a new actor for the antagonist role, criticism towards Rowling for her statements on Twitter. Welcome to the harsh new society, where there is no longer room for magic.

In connection with the aforementioned circumstance, the cast of the film 'Fantastic Beasts 3' was joined by Mads Mikkelsen, replacing Johnny Depp. It is also known that one of the roles will be played by Russian actor Alexander Kuznetsov ('Acid', 'Dad, Die'). The other main actors will return in the images of their characters. As screenwriter, together with J.K. Rowling, Steve Kloves will again act, who adapted all the books for production except 'Order of the Phoenix', hired to bring the spin-off story back to the franchise's former level.

Little is known about the plot of 'The Secrets of Dumbledore'. There are rumors that the events of David Yates' film will take place during World War II (so at least 12 years have passed since the last part. I hope they explain what happened during these years), and the characters will even visit Rio de Janeiro. It is assumed that Dumbledore must enter into a final battle with his former friend Grindelwald and obtain one of the Deathly Hallows — the Elder Wand.

We'll find out how true this is at the premiere, but for now, everything looks like some kind of surrealism. Starting with Depp's dismissal, 'Fantastic Beasts' is increasingly mired in doubt. The weak second part tarnished its reputation, and the absolutely unfair request for Johnny to give up the role of Grindelwald further stained it. Thank God the actor managed to film a small scene and will receive his full fee for the film, at least a modicum of justice.

Changing the character's appearance for the third time in three films is a very strange decision. Okay, in the first one it was Polyjuice Potion, but now... 'Fantastic Beasts' is becoming another British work, 'Doctor Who'. However, not only Albus's former friend (and, ahem, lover) will change his appearance for the third time. There was talk that a cameo of Tom Riddle could be seen on screen. If the news turns out to be true, then most likely the young Dark Lord will be played by a new actor for the third time. Previously, the roles went to Christian Coulson in 'Chamber of Secrets' and Frank Dillane in 'Half-Blood Prince'. The Harry Potter multiverse has also opened up.

In addition to juggling actors, the problem remains the film's plot, which, starting with the second part and judging by the title of the third, has completely moved away from the original idea. It was planned that Newt Scamander, who has many merits in the magical world, and his study of magical creatures would be the engine of the plot, and by the time of the third film, the title 'Fantastic Beasts' could be safely abandoned. Newt fades more and more into the background, and the beasts themselves are shown less and less. As a result, what prevents calling the film simply 'The Secrets of Dumbledore' and considering it a separate project from the spin-off, a la 'The Book of Boba Fett'?

The original idea, in the pursuit of money and fan service, turns into aimless wandering in the territory of the Forbidden Forest. The authors got confused in their own timelines, plots, and actors, so that 'Fantastic Beasts' no longer looks like a convincing and interesting project, as it was 5 years ago during the first part.

Producer David Heyman once said: 'We are not Marvel. And we are not planning a film about Dumbledore called 'The Headmaster' yet.' He kept his word. They named it differently — 'The Secrets of Dumbledore', but for me, the biggest secret of Dumbledore still remains: what happened to him over 11 years that he changed so much? And judging by the fact that the plot of the third part will take place parallel to World War II, no one is going to answer the question.

Epilogue

Before finishing the marathon dedicated to the 'Harry Potter' and 'Fantastic Beasts' films, I would like to say that despite the failures of the last released film and the dubiousness of the upcoming one, the magical world remains as wonderful as it was in childhood. And if you want to immerse yourself in magic again, you can safely turn on all the main films of the series and the first spin-off and rewatch them with pleasure. It doesn't matter whether on TV or streaming, on New Year's Eve or in summer, alone or surrounded by loved ones, the world of 'Harry Potter' is always ready to give magical emotions, reveal some new details, and invite you into the beautiful world of witchcraft and wizardry.

Well, it turns out, Mischief Managed!