Animales fantásticos: Los crímenes de Grindelwald
Título original: Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald
Cumpliendo con su amenaza, el mago Gellert Grindelwald escapa de su custodia y empieza a reunir seguidores con el objetivo de alzar a los magos purasangre para reinar sobre todas las criatur... Leer todoCumpliendo con su amenaza, el mago Gellert Grindelwald escapa de su custodia y empieza a reunir seguidores con el objetivo de alzar a los magos purasangre para reinar sobre todas las criaturas mágicas.Cumpliendo con su amenaza, el mago Gellert Grindelwald escapa de su custodia y empieza a reunir seguidores con el objetivo de alzar a los magos purasangre para reinar sobre todas las criaturas mágicas.
- Nominado a 2 premios BAFTA
- 3 premios y 22 nominaciones en total
Cornell John
- Arnold Guzman
- (as Cornell S. John)
Resumen
Reviewers say 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald' offers a darker tone and expanded world-building with mixed reception. Praised for performances by Eddie Redmayne, Johnny Depp, and Jude Law, and impressive visual effects, the film struggles with a convoluted plot and numerous subplots. Critics argue it lacks focus, serving more as a setup for future installments. Disappointment arises from the limited role of fantastic beasts and an underdeveloped villain. Despite these issues, some appreciate its deeper exploration of the wizarding world and ties to the Harry Potter series.
Reseñas destacadas
Am something of a fan of Harry Potter, books and films. Having grown up with the franchise and cherishing the fond memories being engrossed in the books, the midnight shopping trips to get the latest one and watching the films in the cinema being entertained, dazzled and at times even scared. Found myself really enjoying the first 'Fantastic Beasts' film, though not all my friends and family did for understandable reasons.
Had high hopes for 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald'. It became one of my most anticipated films of the year after being captivated by the trailer. Although the critical reception was mixed, the high hopes were not shattered because word of mouth from friends, whose opinions this reviewer always trusts, was positive and am someone aiming to see all the film for franchise completest sake. My thoughts after watching 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald' were mostly positive though with a few fairly serious misgivings.
'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald' is a sequel that is bigger in spectacle, darker in content and bolder in its basic story. Yet, compared to some sequels that have earned that distinction by me, it is an example of a follow-up that fell short of being better. It wasn't for me vastly inferior and the drop in quality was not large, although visually this film looked better and preferred the cast here too the previous film had more focus and cohesion and the creatures were used better. Can totally see where critics are coming from while also seeing what those who liked it saw in it.
Will get the not so good things out of the way. Do agree with those who have described 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald' as over-stuffed. There are too many characters and not all of them are necessary and the others given too short shrift, the inclusion of Nicolas Flamel for instance was pointless with him having literally nothing to do and felt merely there as a thrown in Harry Potter reference. It was great to see life at Hogwarts and feel nostalgic with the references, but that was also hurt by that what was shown didn't seem to fit continuity-wise.
There were too many story strands too, variably explored. Making the story feel cluttered and not always focused, which affects the cohesion. The big revelation(s) in the last act, especially for what seemed to be the conclusion of the main story strand, did confuse me and needed much more breathing space for the viewer to take it all in, one is left in a whirlwind that gets bigger.
Some of the pace could have been tighter, with some of the middle act meandering and not always involving. The ending came over as a bit rushed to me, well-staged but a slowing down pace-wise would have made the crucial revelations much clearer.
However, 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald' has a lot of fantastic elements. Once again, it does look great and looks even better perhaps than the previous film. The production design is wondrous, especially once in Paris though loved the look of Hogwarts as well, and it is beautifully shot, with tighter editing and slightly more polished effects (though both were great in the previous film). Loved the little details too. The return of James Newton-Howard was a more than welcome one, with a score that is even more haunting, more whimsical, more ethereal and more rousing, one standout being in the beginning with the phantom carriage.
Enjoyed enough of the script, with enough thoughtful, emotional (did feel for Credence) and amusing parts, the last one being provided by Jacob and the Niffler. Though there are parts that don't make the script here as focused as before and die-hard Harry Potter fans won't be squealing with delight as much and feeling as nostalgic over the references because the continuity fitted much more before. Although the story execution is flawed, there is charm, offbeat wit, imagination and nail-biting suspense, so the magic is there. Another improvement over the previous film is that the beginning gets to the point more and is better paced.
David Yates' direction shows experience and he handles the set pieces very well. The phantom carriage escape and Ministry Library scenes really stand out, while the circus freak show part is suspenseful and intriguing. Would have loved to have seen far more of the creatures and more variety but when they do appear they are delightful and each serve purpose to the story. Again not only are they technical marvels they also have personality, the most used is the Zouwu, while the one that serves most point to the story is Pickett. My favourite will always be Niffler though. The characters are worth caring for generally and the cast are on great form. Eddie Redmayne has even more nuance and charm here and Johnny Depp's evil personified Grindelwald is vastly improved here. Ezra Miller's repression and Zoe Kravitz's empathy are moving to watch while Dan Fogler is amiable and very funny. Genius casting too is provided by Jude Law as Dumbledore, a fine example of creating enormous impression in relatively minor screen time. Katherine Waterston, while still commanding the screen beautifully, is on the underused side and Alison Sudol is not as charming.
Overall, an enjoyable film with many fantastic elements. Just wanted it to be more fantastic than it turned out to be. 7/10 Bethany Cox
Had high hopes for 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald'. It became one of my most anticipated films of the year after being captivated by the trailer. Although the critical reception was mixed, the high hopes were not shattered because word of mouth from friends, whose opinions this reviewer always trusts, was positive and am someone aiming to see all the film for franchise completest sake. My thoughts after watching 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald' were mostly positive though with a few fairly serious misgivings.
'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald' is a sequel that is bigger in spectacle, darker in content and bolder in its basic story. Yet, compared to some sequels that have earned that distinction by me, it is an example of a follow-up that fell short of being better. It wasn't for me vastly inferior and the drop in quality was not large, although visually this film looked better and preferred the cast here too the previous film had more focus and cohesion and the creatures were used better. Can totally see where critics are coming from while also seeing what those who liked it saw in it.
Will get the not so good things out of the way. Do agree with those who have described 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald' as over-stuffed. There are too many characters and not all of them are necessary and the others given too short shrift, the inclusion of Nicolas Flamel for instance was pointless with him having literally nothing to do and felt merely there as a thrown in Harry Potter reference. It was great to see life at Hogwarts and feel nostalgic with the references, but that was also hurt by that what was shown didn't seem to fit continuity-wise.
There were too many story strands too, variably explored. Making the story feel cluttered and not always focused, which affects the cohesion. The big revelation(s) in the last act, especially for what seemed to be the conclusion of the main story strand, did confuse me and needed much more breathing space for the viewer to take it all in, one is left in a whirlwind that gets bigger.
Some of the pace could have been tighter, with some of the middle act meandering and not always involving. The ending came over as a bit rushed to me, well-staged but a slowing down pace-wise would have made the crucial revelations much clearer.
However, 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald' has a lot of fantastic elements. Once again, it does look great and looks even better perhaps than the previous film. The production design is wondrous, especially once in Paris though loved the look of Hogwarts as well, and it is beautifully shot, with tighter editing and slightly more polished effects (though both were great in the previous film). Loved the little details too. The return of James Newton-Howard was a more than welcome one, with a score that is even more haunting, more whimsical, more ethereal and more rousing, one standout being in the beginning with the phantom carriage.
Enjoyed enough of the script, with enough thoughtful, emotional (did feel for Credence) and amusing parts, the last one being provided by Jacob and the Niffler. Though there are parts that don't make the script here as focused as before and die-hard Harry Potter fans won't be squealing with delight as much and feeling as nostalgic over the references because the continuity fitted much more before. Although the story execution is flawed, there is charm, offbeat wit, imagination and nail-biting suspense, so the magic is there. Another improvement over the previous film is that the beginning gets to the point more and is better paced.
David Yates' direction shows experience and he handles the set pieces very well. The phantom carriage escape and Ministry Library scenes really stand out, while the circus freak show part is suspenseful and intriguing. Would have loved to have seen far more of the creatures and more variety but when they do appear they are delightful and each serve purpose to the story. Again not only are they technical marvels they also have personality, the most used is the Zouwu, while the one that serves most point to the story is Pickett. My favourite will always be Niffler though. The characters are worth caring for generally and the cast are on great form. Eddie Redmayne has even more nuance and charm here and Johnny Depp's evil personified Grindelwald is vastly improved here. Ezra Miller's repression and Zoe Kravitz's empathy are moving to watch while Dan Fogler is amiable and very funny. Genius casting too is provided by Jude Law as Dumbledore, a fine example of creating enormous impression in relatively minor screen time. Katherine Waterston, while still commanding the screen beautifully, is on the underused side and Alison Sudol is not as charming.
Overall, an enjoyable film with many fantastic elements. Just wanted it to be more fantastic than it turned out to be. 7/10 Bethany Cox
Watching this gives you the sense that nobody really knew where to go after the first film ended... and it shows. Beautiful film with a great cast, but an ultimately pointless story that sort of flops around like a dead fish not quite aware yet that its dead. This film is disappointing and forgettable.
The visuals are great, but there is no story. The film is just a collage of scenes with strange creatures appearing for no reason at all. The vast number of characters don't help to make the plot any easier to decipher. The only scenes that I enjoyed are the ones in Hogwarts. That's because at least I know what they are about.
Let me start off by saying that I am a big Harry Potter fan; I loved all 8 HP movies, and really liked the 1st installment of Newt's adventures as well.
This movie just didn't really do the trick for me. There was absolutely nothing to complain about visually; the movie was even more stunning than the first one, with even more beautifully designed 'Beasts'. And as many other people have mentioned, as a Harry Potter fan, you just can't hate this movie. Where Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them only contained a handful amount of references to the Harry Potter series, The Crimes of Grindelwald has tonnes. Enough to hype up any Harry Potter fan.
The problem this movie had for me was its plot, or rather, its almost nonexisting plot. This movie just seemed to serve as background information or something for the upcoming movies in this series (for which we'll undoubtedly have to wait another 2 years or more..), more of like a setup for things to come. It introduced many new characters and revealed certain things about already known characters. But yet, some of these things just felt unnatural, as if JK Rowling just kept writing more and more to squeeze into 1 movie. This basically leads to a movie where the biggest plot is to find Credence's 'true identity' - not really much of a plot at all. Some of the reveals about characters also seemed a bit strange, but that could be just me. All in all, all this dialogue about characters made it extra confusing to know what the movie was about, in addition to it lacking much of a plot to begin with.
This movie is definitely not a waste of money or anything, you could just buy a ticket for the stunning scenes and you'd be satisfied. It's just that this movie was quite a disappointment compared to many people's expectations I think, seeing as it basically is just a setup for the upcoming movies, which lacks a good plot.
The problem this movie had for me was its plot, or rather, its almost nonexisting plot. This movie just seemed to serve as background information or something for the upcoming movies in this series (for which we'll undoubtedly have to wait another 2 years or more..), more of like a setup for things to come. It introduced many new characters and revealed certain things about already known characters. But yet, some of these things just felt unnatural, as if JK Rowling just kept writing more and more to squeeze into 1 movie. This basically leads to a movie where the biggest plot is to find Credence's 'true identity' - not really much of a plot at all. Some of the reveals about characters also seemed a bit strange, but that could be just me. All in all, all this dialogue about characters made it extra confusing to know what the movie was about, in addition to it lacking much of a plot to begin with.
This movie is definitely not a waste of money or anything, you could just buy a ticket for the stunning scenes and you'd be satisfied. It's just that this movie was quite a disappointment compared to many people's expectations I think, seeing as it basically is just a setup for the upcoming movies, which lacks a good plot.
The special effects were great as was the scenery, however the movie was disjointed and did not flow. It seemed to jump from one special effect to the next and following the plot was tedious to the point of total boredom.
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesJohnny Depp signed on without reading a script. He wanted to be a part of the series because he is a self-proclaimed massive fan of the series.
- PifiasAccording to the books and Pottermore.com (site created by JK Rowling herself), Minerva McGonagall was born in 1935 and first started teaching at Hogwarts in 1956, when she was 21 years old. Even though the movie is set in 1927, eight years before her birth, she appears as a young professor in Hogwarts.
- Citas
Leta Lestrange: Oh, Newt. You never met a monster you couldn't love.
- Créditos adicionalesThere are no mid- or end-credit scenes.
- Versiones alternativasAn extended cut runs ~7 minutes longer.
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idiomas
- Títulos en diferentes países
- Bèsties fantàstiques: Els crims de Grindelwald
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- Lacock Abbey, Lacock, Chippenham, Wiltshire, Inglaterra, Reino Unido(Hogwarts School)
- Empresas productoras
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- 200.000.000 US$ (estimación)
- Recaudación en Estados Unidos y Canadá
- 159.555.901 US$
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- 62.163.104 US$
- 18 nov 2018
- Recaudación en todo el mundo
- 655.755.901 US$
- Duración2 horas 14 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta