mediocre

>quickly slapped together movie
>based on a quickly slapped together book
>written by a hack writer

Good conclusion, Sherlock.

>>83475869

Indeed

Even the Potterfags I know who lap up this shit thought it was underwhelming.

File: 1439968072716.jpg (71KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 600x600px

>>83475869

>"thank you, Madame President"

HAHAHAHAHA NOPE

It was better than later HP movies tbqh

>>83475869
>mediocre
that's being generous

>>83475869
Another mediocre installment in what has been one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises? 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 r-right
"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.

>>83476357
>Atlas Shrugged that high
Spotted the fedora

>>83475869

long-time harry potter fan here. as a movie, it was pretty solid but the story was kinda rushed in my eyes. the whole grindelwald thing seemed totally unnecessary if you ask me. it would have been better if farrell's character had been a partner of grindelwald's instead of the man himself.

loved the monsters in the trunk though. really nice renditions of the things described in the book. surprisingly, I really liked the whole Obscurial storyline. even though it was a bit farfetched, the writers made it work somehow

the pacing was a bit too fast for me though. could have used more calm and comfy moments because I have always thought that this was a strength of harry potter movies. don't get me started on the ending "revealio" bullshit. including a 3 second scene in the movie where redmayne gave farell's character a strange look was too fucking easy to integrate but they didn't do it. made literally zero sense for him to come up with that shitty spell to begin with, especially considering that newt seemed to have autism

I pirated this movie and I'm still angry I lost my time watching it.

>the bad guy was inside the American Ministry of Magic all this time
>dealing everyday with thousands of the top wizards in the country
>no one tried to use the simple and benign spell revelio on him, except the British guy

>memory eraser rain work on everyone, even those inside their homes
>fat baker guy is only affected when he is directly under the rain

Fuck this shit movie.

>>83475869
Painfully.
>>83475937
Fuck. You.
Rowling is a good writer. She had a hard life.

>>83476516
>though
>though

File: images_article_2016_04_11_fantastic-muggle[1].jpg (25KB, 619x386px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 619x386px

Yates is a really boring and mediocre director, and he sucks all the whimsy and magic out of the setting.

And it's a shame the only charismatic character in the film is the one we can sure won't make a reappearance.

>>83475869

the B-plot should have been the a-plot and the A-plot shouldn't have fucking existed.

Collin Ferrell's character getting turned into Depp's was dumb, it should have been Ferrell the whole time, I don't even understand how The Vet figured out he was disguised.

>>83476946

>we can sure won't make a reappearance.

the ending pretty much implied him being in the sequel if you ask me. the blonde woman definitely wanted to be with him so she found him after the events as we see in the last scene

>cool a movie about dragons and shit
>big end was just swirling dark cloud is evil and does evil things
Epic simply epic

>>83477252
>the ending pretty much implied him being in the sequel if you ask me.

I guess if his business was successful enough he could go on vacation to hang with Newt, and it is confirmed Newt marries Porpentina, maybe they all come along on a nature quest.

>>83477252
And then they opened up a bakery and lived happily ever after.
Their story ark is finnished, mate.

>>83475869
BAD BAD NOT GOOD

>>83476946
I don't know why they stuck with him for all those movies, he is such a hack. He must be really good with budgets or easy to work with because his movies are trash.

>>83477495
>it is confirmed Newt marries Porpentina
god, they had such terrible chemistry on screen

>>83475869
Walked out pretty early on this one.

File: jacob-and-queeniejpgjpeg.jpg (183KB, 1330x887px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1330x887px

>>83476946
Jacob and Queenie were the best part of the film easily.

>>83476802
Rowling is a hack.