Though he was eminently good natured, Merlin, my family’s beagle, always snarled at huskies — immediately and on sight.
We never figured out why. Some things in this world just rub you the wrong way.
I have a few myself: Phlebotomy, polyether foam, Pokemon Go, and anything to do with Harry Potter. That’s right: I’ve never read a Harry Potter book, and despite a concerted effort couldn’t make it through a quarter of one movie. (I should mention that I find this legitimately strange — remember, I’ve made it through Fifty Shades of Grey, Safe Haven, Green Lantern, Keeping Up with the Joneses, and Transformers: Dark of the Moon — but something about Potter just doesn’t sit right, doesn’t entertain. It has me fidgeting and glancing away from the screen, at once uneasy and deeply, aggressively bored.) For whatever reason, Harry Potter is my husky.
You may think this disqualifies me from reviewing Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, the newest installment in the Potter universe. You may even be right. But in a week so demanding of fresh starts and open minds, why not afford J.K. Rowling a shot, too?
In light of my aforementioned prejudice, I focus my comments here on three aspects of this film cognitively available to any viewer: The actors, the special effects, and the story. For other analyses — such as how this entry may fit, or not, into the Harry Potter canon — please direct your inquiries to someone able to distinguish between said canon and a crushed-up Ambien.
Point the first: The talent. In Fantastic Beasts, Eddie Redmayne plays Newt Scamander (these names!), a socially awkward wizard and conservationist type who lurches around New York toting a magical suitcase full of magical creatures. These escape periodically and wreak minor havoc, so he runs afoul of Porpentina Goldstein (Katherine Waterston, best known to me not for her roles in Steve Jobs or Boardwalk Empire but for her fleeting scene as a third year associate in Michael Clayton; also … these names!), who I think is an officer in some sort of magical police. They link up with Jacob Kowalski (Dan Fogler, brilliant in the underappreciated gem Take Me Home Tonight), a muggle who dreams of opening a bakery, and together embark on some New York adventures. Colin Farrell and Samantha Morton feature as well, marking (I think) the first time they’ve shared the screen since Minority Report. (If only fourteen years had been so kind to me.)
As you might guess, casting an Oscar winner who previously played Stephen Hawking guarantees a solid (though awkward) lead performance, and the remaining talents are no slouches either. Fogler in particular is fantastic; his befuddled everyman supplies not only the monster’s share of comic relief, but also the most relatable and ultimately moving performance of the film. It’s high time he’s a star. Waterston loses herself in Porpentina (I just cannot even), all glistening eyes and deep concern and real emotion. It’s a star turn, too.
Point the second: The effects. Set in a grey, not-especially-bustling twenties New York, the SFX crew has plenty to work with even when magical creatures aren’t on screen — though they often are. And the Beasts are indeed Fantastic, both in chuckle-worthy cuteness and in CGI slickery. (I’m not sure it’s worth viewing this film just for the animals, but it’s close.) There also are some truly beautiful magic effects, and costumes are fun too, if a tad bleak. Although surprisingly muted in greys and browns and flat skies, this film’s a visual treat: it’s a big-budget wow-machine, and you won’t be left wanting.
Point the third: There are two basic storylines at work — one concerning the titular beasts and largely futile efforts to corral them, and another involving some dark and powerful threat to the magic world. The first plot is easy to follow but pretty self-indulgent — plenty of chase scenes just for the sake of flexing CGI muscle, and ultimately no particular point to any of it — and the second plot made very little sense to me. Perhaps chalk this up to my unfamiliarity with anything in the Harry Potter universe, but it always seemed to demand some earlier buy-in and left me wondering who these people were and why anything mattered. (There it is! Husky, husky!) I therefore posit that if you’re a fan of the franchise you’ll probably love it — but note that I base this conclusion solely on the fact that this plot made me frustrated and bored, so your mileage may vary.
There are some adult-worthy themes brewing here, though it’s all a bit too disjointed to do very much with them. Characters come and go (like Zoe Kravitz‘s leader of the magicians), and a lot of this movie seems to be fairly shameless stage-setting for the inevitable sequels.
I will say though, despite some long stretches of huskiness in the middle, in the end I was pleasantly surprised. This is an action-packed, beautifully rendered CGI romp with fanciful magic animals running amok, memorable and quirky characters, and enough Harry Potter type stuff to please people who like that sort of thing. As a grudging newcomer to the franchise I wasn’t taken with the latter, but there’s plenty to enjoy here nonetheless. It’s hardly the best film of the fall, but for sheer visual entertainment and surprisingly good acting you could do a lot worse than this. See this one.
Haus Verdict: Even if to you Potter’s a flop, Beasts has enough visual pops, acting chops, and pretty backdrops to make for some good wizarding agitprop — and another J.K. Rowling cash crop. (Fine, I’ll stop.)
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them opens Friday November 18.
Never miss a review — sign up for email updates to the right, or like The Parsing Haus on Facebook.