Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore | April 15, 2022 | Final Trailer on Page 75

[dudalb]

On 9/10/2023 at 4:30 PM, SpiderByte said:

Zaslav forgetting this entire trilogy exists just about sums it up

I think teating LOTR and, to a lesser degree, the Potter franchise like a comic book franchise is a huge mistake.

Anyway, any Potter stuff in the future will NOT be "Fantastic Beast" based.

Maybe this thread is about due to be put in the atchived inactive list. A new thread could be started if and when we get  info on the next Potterverse project.

Edited September 11, 2023 by dudalb

[Mojoguy]

J.K. Rowling Says She Would “Happily” Do Prison Time Over Her Transgender Views

 

“I’ll happily do two years if the alternative is compelled speech and forced denial of the reality and importance of sex,” Rowling said on X, the social network formerly known as Twitter.

 

https://deadline.com/2023/10/jk-rowling-prison-time-transgender-views-1235577768/

 

Dang, WB probably wishes they could muzzle her. Doubt the Potter cast wants anything to do with franchise as long as she controls it.

[Arlborn]

2 minutes ago, Mojoguy said:

J.K. Rowling Says She Would “Happily” Do Prison Time Over Her Transgender Views

 

“I’ll happily do two years if the alternative is compelled speech and forced denial of the reality and importance of sex,” Rowling said on X, the social network formerly known as Twitter.

 

https://deadline.com/2023/10/jk-rowling-prison-time-transgender-views-1235577768/

 

Dang, WB probably wishes they could muzzle her. Doubt the Potter cast wants anything to do with franchise as long as she controls it.

Don’t you just love it when people throw away their legacy like this? Just great.

 

 I somehow don’t think a sequel to the main saga will ever be made while she’s alive, but enough money thrown at the actors could prove me wrong though 

[Eric the Ape]

 

Love me some karma lmao

[Arlborn]

27 minutes ago, Eric Fazbear said:

 

Love me some karma lmao

What the hell, who starts a franchise without telling the proposed director of its movies how many movies they should plan for? It all should've been planned in advance...

 

Star Wars sequel trilogy vibes, somehow.

[PlatnumRoyce]

12 minutes ago, Arlborn said:

What the hell, who starts a franchise without telling the proposed director of its movies how many movies they should plan for? It all should've been planned in advance...

 

Star Wars sequel trilogy vibes, somehow.

 

As reported at the time, the initial claim was 3 films. 

 

Honestly, I read this more evidence for my belief that FB1 was launched as a trial balloon (and thus doesn't really burn any larger universe narrative plot points). Despite FB being well reported as a 'trilogy'/three films by the time of Rowling's statement, Yates notes only that Yates + cast were signed up for a single film without mentioning sequels.

Rowling clearly wanted to make a "Dumbledore prequel series" (could easily have been books)  but no one pre-committed to that coming off of HP.

[clockwork]

Not exactly new information here. We been knew WB was taking a break from this anyway. Will Warner Brothers ever get their franchises back on track? Maybe some day.

[Eric the Ape]

16 minutes ago, Arlborn said:

What the hell, who starts a franchise without telling the proposed director of its movies how many movies they should plan for? It all should've been planned in advance...

 

Star Wars sequel trilogy vibes, somehow.

I mean it was three movies for the longest time, but then when the first movie dropped, they announced it would be five. Even back in 2016, I was skeptical on that idea, and I'm still confused what the goal was or why they did it. Were they just spooked by the bad reviews for BvS and Suicide Squad and needed a bigger safety net? It's dumb.

[Arlborn]

1 minute ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

 

As reported at the time, the initial claim was 3 films. 

 

Honestly, I read this more evidence for my belief that FB1 was launched as a trial balloon (and thus doesn't really burn any larger universe narrative plot points). Despite FB being well reported as a 'trilogy'/three films by the time of Rowling's statement, Yates notes only that Yates + cast were signed up for a single film without mentioning sequels.

Rowling clearly wanted to make a "Dumbledore prequel series" (could easily have been books)  but no one pre-committed to that coming off of HP.

This makes sense.

 

What a pity, I can see the logic and thought process of turning the Newt movies slowly into the Dumbledore prequel movies, but it was never going to work out, it felt too cynical to give a movie to Newt(my favorite HP character by the way) and then slowly wrestle the whole thing away from him while pretending it was still about him. The way it was done just left a bitter taste in the mouth of many people.

 

Plus, the quality just wasn't there after the first movie. Then you had JK Rowling showing her true colors off screen, the Depp problems, etc etc etc

[grim22]

16 hours ago, Eric Fazbear said:

 

Love me some karma lmao

 

This is the best quote

 

Quote

Yates claimed the entire idea of a five-film franchise wasn’t the studio’s at all. It was initially planned as three films, and he suggested the saga’s author and Beasts trilogy screenwriter J.K. Rowling made the announcement of a five-film plan without much of the creative team knowing ahead of time during a media event for the first film, 2016’s Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.

“The idea that there were going to be five films was a total surprise to most of us,” Yates said. “[Rowling] just mentioned it spontaneously, at a press screening once. We were presenting some clips of FB1. We’d all signed up for FB1, very enthusiastically. And Jo, bless her, came on … and said, ‘Oh, by the way, there’s five of them.’ We all looked at each other — because no one had told us there were going to be five. We’d committed to this one. So that was the first we’d heard of it.”

 

Throwing JK right under the bus

[grim22]

14 hours ago, Arlborn said:

This makes sense.

 

What a pity, I can see the logic and thought process of turning the Newt movies slowly into the Dumbledore prequel movies, but it was never going to work out, it felt too cynical to give a movie to Newt(my favorite HP character by the way) and then slowly wrestle the whole thing away from him while pretending it was still about him. The way it was done just left a bitter taste in the mouth of many people.

 

Plus, the quality just wasn't there after the first movie. Then you had JK Rowling showing her true colors off screen, the Depp problems, etc etc etc

 

There was a genuine way to make 5 films out of this, just separate the plotlines.

 

2 Fantastic Beasts movies, 2 movies leading up to Dumbledore and Grindelwald with only Katherine Waterston's character being common between the movies. Then the final and 5th movie where all the characters from both franchises come together in the battle. 

 

Combining 2 things with massively tonally different plots killed off the franchise.

[ZeroHour]

3 hours ago, grim22 said:

 

This is the best quote

 

 

Throwing JK right under the bus

A task she typically prefers to do herself. 

[WittyUsername]

That interview seemingly confirms what we already figured out, that J.K. Rowling fell too much into her own hype. 
 

Of course, certain individuals will continue to insist that Fantastic Beasts failed because a certain actor was recast for the third movie, as if these movies were doing great before that. 

Edited October 27, 2023 by WittyUsername

[nox]

An MCU film is on trajectory to have OW similar to FB3 domestically: FB3 had 6M previews, and x7 OW internal multiplier. The tracking thread here suggests almost identical numbers for The Marvels. (Overseas I am sure it will probably end up grossing much less.)

 

It is a bit incredible that global powerhouse franchises like Wizarding World, DC and Marvel managed to reach such lows in a span of less than 2 years. At the same time I don't think it means the franchises are doomed. Just because one film underperforms, doesn't mean the franchise has to be reset. Both DC and Marvel also had mega hits during this span.

 

I hope the recent struggles of Marvel and DC convince WB to give Fantastic Beasts characters another chance. If they rebrand the films, shift the focus of the story, and hire a director with fresh vision, it will surely attract interest and the fans will show up.

Edited November 8, 2023 by nox

[dudalb]

On 10/27/2023 at 10:16 AM, WittyUsername said:

That interview seemingly confirms what we already figured out, that J.K. Rowling fell too much into her own hype. 
 

Of course, certain individuals will continue to insist that Fantastic Beasts failed because a certain actor was recast for the third movie, as if these movies were doing great before that. 

The whole think seesm to have been started with th eidea that "Hey a film sereis based on Fantastic Beasts! Cash Cow on the way"

without really things through.

Shades of what happened with the Hobbit.

[dudalb]

On 10/27/2023 at 5:48 AM, grim22 said:

 

This is the best quote

 

 

Throwing JK right under the bus

"Victory has a thousand fathers, Defeat is always a orphan".

John F Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs fiasco. 

Yeah, Yates is indulging in a little Cover Your Ass here...........

[dudalb]

On 10/26/2023 at 2:37 PM, Eric Danvers said:

I mean it was three movies for the longest time, but then when the first movie dropped, they announced it would be five. Even back in 2016, I was skeptical on that idea, and I'm still confused what the goal was or why they did it. Were they just spooked by the bad reviews for BvS and Suicide Squad and needed a bigger safety net? It's dumb.

Something similiar happened with the Hobbit..changing it from two to three films midway through filming..and IMHO it hurt, at least artisctically, the films since the last two seemd pretty bloated.

[Arlborn]

3 hours ago, nox said:

I hope the recent struggles of Marvel and DC convince WB to give Fantastic Beasts characters another chance. If they rebrand the films, shift the focus of the story, and hire a director with fresh vision, it will surely attract interest and the fans will show up.

I think that sadly for us Newt's fans, the opposite reaction will happen from WB to The Marvels bombing. They'll probably be even more wary of trying to end this saga and end up with a big bomb in their hands.

 

This really should just have been a story about Newt, and they should've made a trilogy or something out of Dumbledore's story. Now we'll end up without the conclusion of either of them, and that's just sad.

 

 

(plus there's the whole JK Rowling horrifying transphobia thing which I'm sure is already making WB extra careful about anything HP related)

 

 

Edited November 8, 2023 by Arlborn

[PlatnumRoyce]

12 minutes ago, dudalb said:

The whole think seesm to have been started with th eidea that "Hey a film sereis based on Fantastic Beasts! Cash Cow on the way"

without really things through.

Shades of what happened with the Hobbit.

But that's the great thing about a "Fantastic Beasts" series - you don't have to think things through! Just make adventure movies. That would likely have a lower ceiling but it wouldn't have the risks of bringing an entire IP down due to franchise fatigue. Making Dumbledore "M" gives you some additional worldbuilding but doesn't commit you to burning major plotlines. 

Edited November 8, 2023 by PlatnumRoyce

[dudalb]

17 minutes ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

But that's the great thing about a "Fantastic Beasts" series - you don't have to think things through! Just make adventure movies. That would likely have a lower ceiling but it wouldn't have the risks of bringing an entire IP down due to franchise fatigue. Making Dumbledore "M" gives you some additional worldbuilding but doesn't commit you to burning major plotlines. 

Nonsense! Making any good film requires thinking things through and careful planning. This whole "doing things off the cuff" routine is for fanboys and amateurs.