SPOILER-FREE! (till we indicate there are spoilers)
tbh…the storytelling was really messy, and the pacing was inconsistent, so coming out of this movie I was honestly a bit disappointed. I can’t remember if the original franchise was like this, or if the previous movie was like this too, but considering that it was JK Rowling writing it and David Yates as the director (since the 2007 movies he’s been directing every single one) I kind of expected more — I can’t explain this fully without spoiling it, so look to the comments if you’ve already watched!
On more positive things: Awesome visuals and great special effects! Set design is amazing, as always, costumes are great, the creatures look cool! Honestly, the best part of these movies is the interaction between Newt and his creatures. Putting plotholes and pacing issues aside, I love it when socially awkward, hesitant Newt, meets the eyes of some new fantastic creature bravely, and when his eyes light up with the awe and gentleness that Eddie Redmayne somehow manages to convey.
That’s mostly everything general I have to say — SPOILERS for everything below this
The problem with the Crimes of Grindelwald is that… they introduced too many characters and arcs all at once. It’s something a book can do, or a TV series (Game of Thrones does it amazingly well), because the medium allows for the balancing of different arcs all at once. For a movie, remember when we talked about Holdo’s sacrifice in Star Wars TLJ? That was great storytelling that balanced 3 different narrative arcs. CoG tries to do the same,,, but its arcs don’t all converge at the same time like in TLJ, so we don’t get a climactic moment when the stakes all rise at the same time (which is the pay-off of having so many narrative arcs in the first place). It’s further complicated by CoG trying to add in flashbacks alongside the current narrative (I counted at least 3). Instead, we get an awkward revelation scene when all the characters meet, and the “real story” is explained through expository dialogue, rather than any real effort. On that note I really hate that magic is used mostly as like,,,, a powerpoint presentation in some dialogue scenes,,, like thanks for helping us visualize but there are more creative ways to convey information without defaulting to magic.
Introducing too many things results in not only pacing problems, but plot holes — granted it could just be that they’re setting up for the next movie, but a movie shouldn’t leave so many things unanswered: 1. Leta Lestrange loves Newt? Then how did she end up engaged to Theseus? Then she went and died so that was never reconciled; 2. Why are Theseus and Newt estranged?; 3. Newt and Tina only vaguely reconciled,,,,, there wasn’t enough time given for them to reunite. Among other things, I thought Leta’s backstory was a little too complicated for the small part she had in the plot. She lacked screentime because of the different arcs running parallel to each other, and having appeared only in this movie, we don’t really have any emotional investment in her. So her shocking revelation about her brother and her death didn’t really do anything for me at all.
Also, about Credence. Ah this made me angry. I hate hate hate that plot twist at the end. I can’t figure out if Grindelwald was lying to Credence, but if it’s true.... I hate that he’s somehow part of the Dumbledore family. Just like Rey in Star Wars TLJ, I want a character that is no one, from nowhere. He doesn’t have to be from a special bloodline, from a pureblood family or whatever - him being nobody? that would be the ultimate rebuttal to whatever pure blood aryan-race thing that Grindelwald has going on.... Granted, we had Hermoine (we stan a feminist icon) but honestly the Chosen One being some Child of Prophecy or secretly related to whatever mystical figure? All that’s just an uninspired and uninspiring copout.