Top 10 Reasons Fantastic Beasts is Ruining Harry Potter

When “Harry Potter” first hit the shelves, no one knew what to suspect, but the originality of the plot, richness of characters, and expansive world swept readers away. Soon after, as films hit theatres, the rest of the Muggles got a taste of the Wizarding World and the series became a bonafide franchise and international phenomenon. There was so much to imagine and uncover. However, with “Fantastic Beasts,” a lot of the imaginative heavy-lifting is over. Worse, the creative team seems dead-set on explaining every little mystery, even ones audiences didn’t demand answers for.

Fantasy requires suspension of disbelief. An instantly identifiable face can bring you out of the story and make you more aware that you’re watching a movie. The “Harry Potter” franchise took a risk with unknown child actors in the leads, and it paid off big. With no preconceived notions, the audience was able to accept that they were the characters. In the “Fantastic Beasts” spin-off, many of the leads are well-established. The most stand-out might be Johnny Depp – and not just for his filmography. Amid abuse allegations, fans voiced their objections, and had difficulty warming up to him again. It’s hard to focus on a film when you’re thinking about the real person on screen, not their character.

When a world is established, a production team can be more at ease when executing a design. However, this runs the risk of a production being too stylized. In “Harry Potter,” styles changed as the characters grew up. The Death Eaters and Voldemort were more consistent, but their style was somewhat understated, just menacing enough without being distracting. The same can’t be said of “Fantastic Beasts.” The main look is more perfectly 1920s than the real 1920s; and Grindelwald’s dramatic style looks ready-made for cosplayers. Furthermore, the wizards of “Fantastic Beasts” dress like and interact with muggles 24/7, while in Harry Potter some characters struggle to figure out trousers. How does that work?

The “Harry Potter” films grew up as their audience did, gradually embracing more mature themes; but “Fantastic Beasts” often seems stuck somewhere in the middle. The franchise wants to be edgy, but also appeal to families in a safe way, and as a result it bounces back and forth between childish and adult tones. The producers might have been better off picking a lane between millennial nostalgia and adult tastes - upping the rating and embracing the mature themes, rather than flitting back and forth. There’s no point in backtracking to middle-grade when the “Harry Potter” franchise already did it.

The title of the franchise is pulled from a 2001 guide book, which J. K. Rowling attributed to Newt Scamander. So you’d think the main plot would revolve around Newt having adventures as he travelled around the world to document said beasts. In reality, it’s about the rise (and, we presume, fall) of the Dark Wizard Grindelwald. Now, this is fine for a plot, but why the title “Fantastic Beasts”? Why not . . . Quidditch Through the Ages? Or a totally original name? All we’re saying is, the bowtruckle and niffler are cute, but you know what a movie franchise with “Fantastic Beasts” in the title should be about? Yeah, Beasts! Fantastic ones!

The early 2000s ushered in the era of the franchise. Nearly twenty years on, as franchise fatigue sets in, viewers tend to be more acutely aware when their favorite stories are being padded out, diluting quality for quantity. Like the egregious cash-cowing of “The Hobbit” trilogy, “Fantastic Beasts” is facing a serious substance problem. The paper-thin plots of the expanded world don’t exactly make one want to rush back to theatres or re-watch the earlier “Harry Potter” films. In a time where long-form storytelling is in its golden age, material has to be worth the time and money, and with people already this tired of “Fantastic Beasts”, it might not be long before people feel the same about the series that spawned it.

Any good story needs balance. No horror film can be all scares, no comedy can keep up the pace of second-by-second laughs. The original “Harry Potter” films were at heart mostly magic and wonder, but they also did a great job of balancing out the whimsical plots with darker elements - both visually and narratively. Unfortunately, “Fantastic Beasts” is mostly doom and gloom. While Dan Fogler’s Jacob Kowalski brings occasional levity, the burden of relief is too much for one character. The original franchise travelled into progressively darker territory, but by starting the new franchise in the same bleak fashion it overshadows the adventurous fun of the earlier outings.

The original series was a tall order when it began. Seven books to adapt would make any studio wary, but Warner Brothers banked big enough to even expand the final film into two parts. Fans still debate whether the eighth movie was necessary (was it padding or a detailed use of the source material?), but in the end everyone was more or less satisfied. Which is why audiences raised collective eyebrows at the announcement that there would be FIVE “Fantastic Beasts” movies. There’s no established storyline to follow, the motivation for that many films is painfully obvious. Think of it this way, without the “Harry Potter” coattails to ride on, would this series even exist?

The original “Harry Potter” books and movies were well-plotted, and populated with engaging, well-developed characters. There were rules and everything ticked along like an efficient clock. Sadly, the same can’t be said of “Fantastic Beasts.” Why did Grindelwald have to infiltrate MACUSA? Newt and Tina are sentenced to death on the spot, but Grindelwald gets a trial date? Why memory wipe or kill off characters only to bring them back? Why, WHY?! Worse, that lack of cohesion is affecting the original franchise. Rules that were established and understood in “Harry Potter” are reworked or abandoned. Old characters are the wrong age, and the new characters don’t seem to have individual agency - their actions just forward the plot.

Even with all of its shortcomings, “Fantastic Beasts” could almost be forgiven if it minded its own business. Unfortunately, rather than focus on the new characters and plot, the series keeps drawing on familiar names and faces to further build the universe. These sorts of Ester Eggs are supposed to charm audiences, but they take it too far. Not content with cameos, they rework established identities - a slap in the face for long-time fans. Remember Voldemort’s snake? She was a human once! Dumbledore’s established and plot-critical family? Surprise, there’s more of them! Rather than charm, it feels like what we knew was a lie, the character equivalent of “it was all a dream.” Expecto Angry Audiences!