?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
07 December 2016 @ 04:37 pm
Picoreview: Fantastic Beasts  

Picoreview: Fantastic Beasts & Where to Find Them: really not very good.

It started out slowly and took far too long to end. There were tedious bits in between occasionally interrupted by charm, but the charm was rarely presented by Eddie Redmayne’s Newt, who, as the lead, literally had a line about how people didn’t really like him very much. But that was okay, because Katherine Waterson, as the other lead, was also almost entirely unlikeable. (Wait…)

To make it worse, though, the second leads, *particularly* Alison Sudol (playing Waterson’s sister), outshone them on every level in terms of charm and charisma (which is pretty awful because I didn’t even like Dan Folger’s Jacob Kowalski all that *much*, as he was too clearly The Way In to this story).

Many of the fantastic beasts were wonderful and at least two of them were in fact fantastic. Unfortunately, there was very little in the story that actually required them, and even less about where to find them. At least one of them was dreadfully overused and added considerably to the tedium.

Lest you think I utterly loathed the whole thing, let me pause to say I thought the bad guys were terrific. I thought Samantha Morton was deadly and that Ezra Miller gave a powerful performance. I really enjoyed Colin Farrell and Carmen Ejogo. I got a kick out of recognizing Ron Perlman’s goblin _from his walk_, on a subliminal level, before he’d even spoken or I’d gotten a look at his face. That was good SFX. Despite all the film’s problems I was essentially ready for more.

Except then the Big Reveal completely obliterated any interest I had in seeing any more movies in the series. Just, honestly, like, “Nope, I see how you were trying to add intrigue and dimensions here and what you have done is removed all of them, so I’m out.” And then on top of that they Should Not Have Done That Thing to That Character…

…and the fact that I can think of at least three characters in the film to whom that sentence applies does not help matters any. There’s one in *particular* I mean when I say it, but there are at least three to whom it applies.

I really, *really* wish that had been a better movie. There were parts I liked. The bones were there. In fact, I’d say the bones of two *different* good movies were there. Neither of them, however, made it to the screen.

I am disappoint.

(x-posted from The Essential Kit)

 
 
 
Deborah Blakedeborahblakehps on December 7th, 2016 03:40 pm (UTC)
Bummer. I'm finally going to get to see it on Saturday, and I'd been really looking forward to it. At least now I have reasonable expectations...
kitmizkit on December 7th, 2016 03:45 pm (UTC)
Other people have liked it more than I did! Perhaps you'll be pleasantly surprised instead! O.O :)
Deborah Blakedeborahblakehps on December 7th, 2016 03:48 pm (UTC)
Anything is possible, although I tend to be picky :-) Of course, there are plenty of silly "B" movies that I enjoy despite myself, so you never know. And hey, it will be a distraction from the shingles and the post-election depression...
6_penny on December 7th, 2016 05:46 pm (UTC)
Shingles-ow. Many sympathies
Deborah Blakedeborahblakehps on December 8th, 2016 12:01 am (UTC)
Yes. And the fact that they showed up right after said election...probably not a coincidence!
Herefoxherefox on December 7th, 2016 05:11 pm (UTC)
I dozed off in the beginning for a little bit it was so slow. I found that Eddie Redmayne tended to mumble his lines which, on top of the accent, made it difficult sometimes to understand what he was saying.

It was a very pretty movie in a lot of ways though I found that a lot of the beast's designs looked straight out of video games for the most part.

So I'm kind of right there with you. It wasn't horrid but I'd have rather gone to Dr. Strange (which I still haven't seen *sob*)
Deborah Blakedeborahblakehps on December 8th, 2016 12:02 am (UTC)
Now THAT was a movie!
Brienzebrienze on December 8th, 2016 06:07 am (UTC)
I was entertained, I suppose because I'd have happily spent the whole two hours inside his trunk, nevermind about plot or character development.

I'm 1000% with you about the big reveal, though. That is not a "chocolate in my peanut butter" situation. Harry Potter movies are usually so good about casting, too. (And aren't the Brits supposed to be, er, British?)
Deborah Blakedeborahblakehps on December 11th, 2016 01:27 am (UTC)
Alas, I agree with you completely. The first half of the movie could have been condensed into about 15 minutes (tops), and while the creatures WERE fantastic, it would have helped if there had been, you know, a plot to go with them.

And that last bit....SIGH.

Ah well. It was still worth seeing in the movie theater for all the pretty, but such a disappointment. Can we have Harry back now?
kitmizkit on December 11th, 2016 08:20 am (UTC)
Ah, I'm so sorry you agree with me. :)
Deborah Blakedeborahblakehps on December 11th, 2016 02:03 pm (UTC)
Well, it's not your fault the people who made the movie blew it! (And at least I was forewarned to have low expectations, so I probably enjoyed it more than if I'd been expecting something truly...fantastic.)