Is he going to be main character in all 5 pictures? What do you

They'll be just as boring as the first.

He is going to be sidelines, the plan is to make it into dumbledore vs jonny depp movies.

This whole attempt to further milk HP was a mistake. Bets thing in that shitmovie was the non-maxical fat guy and they guy they suddenly replaced with jonny depp

More Sudol and Waterston QTs

Five seems overkill doesn't it?

>pictures
Are you from 1935?

>>81907558

Fucking millenial

>>81907172
>Is he going to be main character in all 5 pictures?
I hope not. He was pretty boring desu
>What do you expect from next pictures?
Nothing special really. FBAWTFT dropped the ball hard, there was hardly any dealing with the actual beasts, they could have put a decent romance in but didn't, and Colin Farrell is an infinitely better actor than Jonny Depp

are they all going to be called fantastic beasts 2, 3, etc?

i was really disappointed that the first film wasn't about newt's adventures finding cool magical beasts and more about some shitty doctor who-tier ghost thing wrecking shit in NYC

>>81907623
>and Colin Farrell is an infinitely better actor than Jonny Depp

They're retarded if they don't bring back Colin as whoever-it-was being found alive, with him going after Johnny Depp as revenge for being kidnapped and having his image ruined.

>>81907877
Yep, definitely.

File: IMG_1635.jpg (1MB, 1623x2886px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1623x2886px

I expect nothing and will still be disappointed. But is that really a surprise from a spinoff to one of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises? Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

>>81907172
No they are going to pander to HP fans and make the next movies about Dumbledore and Grindelwald. It's going to be terrible.

>>81907172
collin farrel was GOAT

shame he's getting replaced by depp

>>81907877
This. Depp is a miscast.