NO MORE HARRY POTTER: 'THE CRIMES OF GRINDELWALD'

- Director: David Yates (Harry Potter 5-8) - Writer: JK Rowling (Yes, the queen herself) - Starring: Eddie Redmayne (The Theory Of Everything), Johnny Depp (whatever), Jude Law (That guy who starred in everything in the 2000s) - Runtime: A painful 134 minutes

Some background: I'm not a die-hard fan of Harry Potter. I read the books, I watched the films; I thoroughly enjoy both media. They're not flawless books, nor are they perfect films, but their emotional and entertainment values are top-notch, and without a doubt, it left an inarguable imprint on pop culture.

---------------------- I. Completely. Despise. This. Film.

What?

Somehow, a Harry Potter film (a stretch to say the least), has become the epitome of everything wrong with the film industry: A film so preoccupied with its planned 5-part series that it completely derailed the franchise; A product so soulless, so self-serious, that it negated all the things that made Harry Potter so popular in the first place; A writer at her utmost creative drought yet given the reigns to dole out a "whatever sticks" approach to the only franchise that should have been "everything needs to stick";

All. Amounted. To this.

-----------------------

Full spoilers from here on out.

The positives:

- The performances and the production values:

Needless to say, its only saving grace is the cast and director David Yates. Not only is he the right man for the job, he should have been the only man for the job; Yates knows "The Wizarding World" better than anyone right now, and I would love to see his vision going forward.

Johnny Depp was Johnny Depp, but blond.

Jude Law stole the show as Dumbledore, for the 14 minutes that he's in the film.

Suavest professor in Hogwarts

Eddie Redmayne was charming and likable as a character sidelined IN HIS OWN FILM and is in dire need of much better material. Dan Fogler was amazing to witness as Jacob. Nicholas Flamel in the film was funny and merely a plot device. Everyone was fine.

That's it.

--------------------

The negatives:

THE ENTIRE FILM IS A SETUP FOR A SEQUEL

The first rule in making any film, as far as I am concerned, is a setup and a payoff within said film. I'm not against sequel baiting, but a film needs to work as its own contained story.

I smell SEQUELS.

A great example: Avengers: Infinity War: It's the first part of a two parter but stood on its own as a brawling epic, with a story worth telling over a 2-hour stretch, with an incredible payoff and a damning cliffhanger.

'FB2' completely fudged this, with setups aplenty and payoffs a dime for a dozen. A few prime offenders:

- Will Dumbledore be able to defeat Grindelwald? Ahaaa, sequelllll - Who is Credence Barebone? Throw in a twist that makes no sense in a flashback within an exposition dump. - Who is Yusuf Kama, and why is he in the story? Ahaaa, cause HE IS ACTUALLY THE BROTHER OF LETA LESTRANGE. - Why is Dumbledore in love with Grindelwald even though there wasn't any indication of the relationship in prior BOOKS, MOVIES OR PLAYS? Well, cause the writer says so. Okay.

I'm not against Dumbledore being in love with Grindelwald. Wizards are people, love is love, whether it's coming from Jude Law or Legally Silverhaired. But using this aspect as a plot device to conceive an out-of-thin-air unbreakable spell is just cheap, lazy writing.

And the absolute worst thing about all of these questions, were how predictable they were.

We know that Dumbledore will eventually defeat Grindelwald BECAUSE IT'S IN THE BOOKS AND THE FILMS PRIOR.

We know that Credence isn't actually a Lestrange, but rather, a Dumbledore. Because let's face it, Dumbledore didn't give two shits about Potter or Riddle, but an Obscurus orphan with no direct relation to magic? Come on. That wasn't a twist, it was barely a knot.

-------------------------------

AND THE CLIMAX.

Oh no...

Believe me, if the film was crawling to the finish line before the third act, it certainly discombobulated in the final battle.

An already messy movie, followed by a nonsensical rug-pulling bonanza and manifested in a garish lightshow with no stakes, no interest, not even a present villain, it wanted to inspire goosebumps; instead, it induced us to unconsciousness before nailing the coffin with the frankly insulting climax.

------------------------------

I would not mind skipping this, and the next one, and the one after that, to get to the conclusion of the franchise. Because for better or for worse, it is time for the Harry Potter franchise to be laid to rest, rather than bludgeoned to irrelevance by its own greed.

Overall: D Dying for the Grindelwald-Dumbledore duel, and please, just let Eddie Redmayne do something else more worthwhile with his time.