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

[Gavin Feng]

 

 

 

[BadOlCatSylvester]

Well, there you go @Noctis.

[Lucas]

What happened to quality titles.

[lor15]

Out on my birthday, hope it delivers. The title is obviously appealing to HP fans.

[Chicago]

2 minutes ago, Lucas said:

What happened to quality titles.

Yeah it's missing a 'Rise of" in there somewhere 

[Lucas]

2 minutes ago, Chicago said:

Yeah it's missing a 'Rise of" in there somewhere 

Rise of Skywalker, Crimes of Grindelwald, and Secrets of Dumbledore are really bringing the standards down.

[Gavin Feng]

Look back the title of the first one

 

 

Yes, where can we find them now?

[BadOlCatSylvester]

Who is this even for? Even the Potterheads hated the last movie. And they're the only ones who would even be remotely interested in seeing these. General audiences were burnt out after part 2, and don't even get me started on the transgender community's thoughts.

 

At least the latter group will have front row seats for one of the biggest trainwrecks of the last few years. I'd grab my popcorn if I were them, because the circus has only just started.

[Felipe]

The new release date seems pretty good.

 

25 March 2022
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022)

 

08 April 2022
The Northman (2022)
Bullet Train (2022)
Sonic the Hedgehog 2 (2022)

 

15 April 2022
Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore
Lost City of D (2022)

 

22 April 2022
The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2022)

 

06 May 2022
Thor: Love and Thunder (2022)
 

[grim22]

15 minutes ago, Lucas said:

Rise of Skywalker, Crimes of Grindelwald, and Secrets of Dumbledore are really bringing the standards down.

Re-upping this

 

 

On 11/8/2018 at 2:20 PM, CoolioD1 said:

the dichotomy of the title still makes me laugh. it's just two totally separate things smashed together. it's like if a movie was called Snow Dogs: The People vs. OJ Simpson.

 

[Cmasterclay]

Last one was one of the biggest blockbuster stinkers I've seen in ages. Just an astonishingly grimdark, boring, and convoluted mess. First one was okay enough but not even close to the magic of the originals. Without Hogwarts or the core story, who cares? This franchise isn't supposed to be Lord of the Rings or Star Wars - we are attached to the specific rhythms of the books with the school years and such. That's what made it fun. This series is a chore. And all of that was BEFORE J.K. Rowling turned out to be a huge piece of shit!!

 

Legitimate chance this makes less in total domestic than Deathly Hallows 2 made opening day. Not ruling it out.

[Felipe]

7 minutes ago, BadOlCatSylvester said:

Who is this even for? Even the Potterheads hated the last movie. And they're the only ones who would even be remotely interested in seeing these. General audiences were burnt out after part 2, and don't even get me started on the transgender community's thoughts.

 

At least the latter group will have front row seats for one of the biggest trainwrecks of the last few years. I'd grab my popcorn if I were them, because the circus has only just started.

Well, I liked it. The Yusuf Kama storyline was pretty convoluted, but I liked Leta Lestrange character and the rise of fascism plotline with Grindelwald. The movie made the same thing in EU-UK in terms of boxoffice performance, so I guess some people liked it. It can go both ways with the third one.

[Felipe]

5 minutes ago, grim22 said:

Re-upping this

 

 

 

Q: What kinds of ‘beasts’ are we dealing with here – human or animal?

 

A: The idea of beasts works on several different levels within the movies. There’s the literal sense of non-human creatures: some of them cute, some of them terrifying, some simply strange. Then there is the metaphorical sense of the beast inside a man, the crude emotions that a manipulative genius like Grindelwald knows how to stoke and use. We’re also dealing with the idea of beastly people:  that some humans are something less than human.  Even where there is great charisma and intelligence, there may be an utter lack of conscience. Finally, I’m exploring the idea of creating beasts, which is to say, othering or dehumanising our fellow people, as the first step towards cruelty or extermination.

 

So through this beastly landscape walk our original four characters, led by the shambling figure of Newt Scamander, who loves the purity of creatures that the world might call monsters. The human world around Newt and his friends is becoming darker and more complex, and the original hunt for escaped creatures will become a hunt for something much more elusive and difficult: a return to humanity.

 

https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/latest-answers-to-frequently-asked-questions/

[Eric Duncan]

6 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

Last one was one of the biggest blockbuster stinkers I've seen in ages. Just an astonishingly grimdark, boring, and convoluted mess. First one was okay enough but not even close to the magic of the originals. Without Hogwarts or the core story, who cares? This franchise isn't supposed to be Lord of the Rings or Star Wars - we are attached to the specific rhythms of the books with the school years and such. That's what made it fun. This series is a chore. And all of that was BEFORE J.K. Rowling turned out to be a huge piece of shit!!

 

Legitimate chance this makes less in total domestic than Deathly Hallows 2 made opening day. Not ruling it out.

I was thinking Dark Phoenix numbers in the old July slot. But this new one has me bump it up to…Terminator Genisys numbers

[WittyUsername]

20 minutes ago, Felipe said:

Q: What kinds of ‘beasts’ are we dealing with here – human or animal?

 

A: The idea of beasts works on several different levels within the movies. There’s the literal sense of non-human creatures: some of them cute, some of them terrifying, some simply strange. Then there is the metaphorical sense of the beast inside a man, the crude emotions that a manipulative genius like Grindelwald knows how to stoke and use. We’re also dealing with the idea of beastly people:  that some humans are something less than human.  Even where there is great charisma and intelligence, there may be an utter lack of conscience. Finally, I’m exploring the idea of creating beasts, which is to say, othering or dehumanising our fellow people, as the first step towards cruelty or extermination.

 

So through this beastly landscape walk our original four characters, led by the shambling figure of Newt Scamander, who loves the purity of creatures that the world might call monsters. The human world around Newt and his friends is becoming darker and more complex, and the original hunt for escaped creatures will become a hunt for something much more elusive and difficult: a return to humanity.

 

https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/latest-answers-to-frequently-asked-questions/

That sounds like a pretty iffy line of reasoning.

[Napoleon]

The Dumbledore/Grindelwald storyline seems to be a hard sell - aside from the hardcore fanbase, there doesn't seem to be much interest for it in the general audience. That title is not a good sign for this movie's chances of turning things around for the franchise, but that's not surprising.

[Cmasterclay]

 

[WittyUsername]

 

[Lucas]

Just now, WittyUsername said:

 

lmao what

[AdrianL]

Seems like they're dumping this. Having this smack between two huge MCU movies I think this will flop big time.