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

[grim22]

11 minutes ago, Lucas said:

 

This reeks of desperation.

 

They are going to end the movie by calling the group of wizards recruited by Dumbledore as "Dumbledore's Army" aren't they.

[Noiret Jak]

On 3/21/2022 at 11:59 PM, ViewerAnon said:

 

Honestly, I would be surprised. The reception I've heard isn't great. It isn't terrible either, but sort of the definition of middling. And the people I know who've seen a cut of it haven't thought it was all that much an improvement on The Crimes of Grindelwald.

But, nobody's seen the final cut, and I've been wrong before. Frequently so when it comes to guessing RT scores!

 

  

 

I think so. For my many issues with Jo Rowling at present, I'm invested in this world.

 

The movie seems to be much more rhythmic, any chance you like it?
It's strange, moreover, that no other screening has taken place since this summer.

[Noctis]

We'll get official reactions when the premiere hits in 6 days.

 

Cautiously optimistic.

[Samwise the Brave]

The first reactions will be similar to what occured when FB2 aired. It also started with 8.4 on Imdb and a more or less acceptable RT score. I just hope it's gonna stabilize this time

I predict

7.0 Imdb

79% audience score

64% RT score

61 Metacritic

[clockwork]

One thing I'm sure of is that all the reactions/reviews will be positive about Mads Mikkelsen, which will keep the score up. Also with this having a more discernable throughline/plot in addition more action scenes spread throughout I can see people saying it's better paced and easier to sit through than than Crimes of Grindelwald.

 

I'm predicting between a 50-65% RT score with audience scores around 70 and up. I can see the critical consensus being something like  "While still containing flaws found in the previous installments, Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore is an improvement over it's predecessor and manages to create a few sparks of magic" or something along those lines. 

Edited March 23, 2022 by clockwork

[Noctis]

1 minute ago, clockwork said:

One thing I'm sure of is that all the reactions/reviews will be positive about Mads Mikkelsen, which will keep the score up. Also with this having a more discernable throughline/plot in addition more action scenes spread throughout I can see people saying it's better paced and easier to sit through than than Crimes of Grindelwald.

 

I'm predicting between a 50-65% RT score with audience scores around 70 and up. I can see the critical consensus being something like  "While still containing flaws found in the previous installments, Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore is an improvement over it's predecessor and manages to create a few sparks of magic" or something along those lines. 

 

Crimes had "glimmers of magic" so if it hits 60% it should be more strong than "spark" but I agree generally. 

 

I think Mikkelsen and Law are gonna get great reviews for their performances - with Law being the absolute best. 

[interiorgatordecorator]

Has anyone ever tried to work/force the math on how much Harry Potter 1 would have done with Deathly Hallows part 2 market conditions?

Edited March 23, 2022 by interiorgatordecorator

[DarkSkies]

12 hours ago, Noctis said:

 

Crimes had "glimmers of magic" so if it hits 60% it should be more strong than "spark" but I agree generally. 

 

I think Mikkelsen and Law are gonna get great reviews for their performances - with Law being the absolute best. 

 

I actually liked several scenes in COG. The opening sequence was good and I liked the flashbacks in Hogwarts, which were quite touching. Grindelwald's Rally and the fire scene were also excellent. Depp and Law were both good, and there were some very inventive magical ideas in there. The script was just... all over the place with a lot of it feeling underdeveloped, underexplored, or just limp set-up for later films (Flamel, Nagini). 

 

I think SOD looks good so far. I've liked both clips. If the narrative if more focused it should - should - garner more positivity. I think... 

[ViewerAnon]

There's a lot of really interesting, cool stuff in CRIMES OF GRINDELWALD that gets lost amongst *gestures wildly*

[Felipe]

 

[Napoleon]

12 minutes ago, Felipe said:

 

Where's Lally?

[Felipe]

1 hour ago, Napoleon said:

Where's Lally?

And Yusuf...

 

[EmpireCity]

China is not fond of black people.  

[Noctis]

11 minutes ago, EmpireCity said:

China is not fond of black people.  

 

I'll never forget the video of an entire train in China just staring at a black person.

[Claire of Themyscira]

8 hours ago, EmpireCity said:

China is not fond of black people.  

They are very anti-Black.

 

Sick & Nasty!

[TheBigYawn]

13 hours ago, Felipe said:

 

 

All the supporting characters look so out of place here. This would have been a better poster with just Mikkelsen and Law facing each other, preferably with a new setting as a backdrop too rather than Hogwarts. 

[TheBigYawn]

On 3/22/2022 at 3:20 AM, clockwork said:

They still haven't given a decent explanation why he's working with Dumbledore.

 

They sort of explained it, but it was in a deleted scene lol.

 

Nonetheless I find it implied with the plot twist in CoG that Dumbledore wanted Newt to get involved with the obscurus in the first film due to his prior experiences on the matter, as well as his empathy for all kind of misunderstood beasts. Dumbledore must have suspected the mass destruction in NY came from an obscurus, possibly even Credence, but evidently he didn't tell Newt directly. And we know Dumbledore can't face Grindelwald himself, but he probably knew Grindelwald might be interested in the obscurus and may have hoped Newt would stop his attempts to get his hands on it. 

Edited March 24, 2022 by TheBigYawn

[TheBigYawn]

On 3/18/2022 at 4:24 PM, snarkmachine said:

 

Getting David Yates back was their first big mistake. It's a new franchise, take a risk and go with someone who has a fresh vision.

 

You know, upon rewatching this yesterday, I found it had a lot of charm and probably even more everyday magical background and foreground elements than all of Yates' prior Potter films. The earlier scenes at the bank seemed inspired by older slapstick comedies, combined with deadpan comedic delivery in the shot compositions. The world building as a whole is great as well, but at some points it feels almost excessive, as if they realized they needed to compensate for the film having a far less engaging story than Potter.

 

The darker, more intense scenes, however, are more similar in tone to Yates' Potter films. Tonally it's obviously a bit of a strange mashup, and one of the biggest faults of the film, but that's how the script is written, so I'd say Yates delivered on what the script asked for.

 

However I will agree that when the foundation of the series was laid the producers could have taken a slight risk by hiring a new director. 

Edited March 24, 2022 by TheBigYawn

[MrPink]

So is Katherine Waterston not in it at all? What's the story reason anyhow

[grim22]

34 minutes ago, MrPink said:

So is Katherine Waterston not in it at all? What's the story reason anyhow

 

Newt realized he had zero chemistry with her and decided to cut his losses despite canon saying they ended up together. It will be explained as them having written the books together but as platonic friends.

 

On a slightly more serious note - has Eddie Redmayne ever had any chemistry with any of his co-stars? Even in Theory of Everything, they feel like friends than lovers. Closest is probably Les Miserables, but that may be more to do with the 2 actresses doing the heavy lifting.