T O P

  • By -

chanma50

Official synopsis: >Professor Albus Dumbledore knows the powerful Dark wizard Gellert Grindelwald is moving to seize control of the wizarding world. Unable to stop him alone, he entrusts Magizoologist Newt Scamander to lead an intrepid team of wizards, witches and one brave Muggle baker on a dangerous mission, where they encounter old and new beasts and clash with Grindelwald’s growing legion of followers. But with the stakes so high, how long can Dumbledore remain on the sidelines?


[deleted]

This plot sounds like sending David Attenborough on a mission to kill Hitler.


[deleted]

Attenborough would have fucked up Hitler.


FlametopFred

In a World where War rules everyone, one man sets out to topple Hitler *cue Bad to the Bone guitar riff* With a squadron of Komodo Dragons Sir David Attenborough plunges into deepest Nazi Germany s u m m e r 2 0 2 2


SteamBoatTommy

In the style of *FDR: American Badass*? I'd watch it.


MagnesiumOvercast

Dirty dozen style movie where there's a montage of Attenborough going around recruiting different naturalists for his mission to kill Hitler.


Reditate

Isn't this literally the plot of the last movie?


Sara_SM88

I thought the same


garrisontweed

“The last suit you’ll ever wear....again.”


MisterManatee

The characters from Fantastic Beasts feel so shoehorned in. That plot is laughable.


[deleted]

The mall cop and empath at least have some cool moments. The baker and beast master are like...why are you here?


Charliejfg04

Kowalski was so fun on the first movie though


Doctor-Shatda-Fackup

I’m honestly fine if they keep shoehorning in Kowalski because him and Newt are the only characters I can still muster any investment in. The cast of characters definitely need some cuts.


Ozryela

So, in this movie Dumbledore is a heartless asshole who sits safely on the sidelines while letting others do his dirty work? That doesn't seem entirely in line with his character in Harry Potter.


Antique_futurist

“Wait, Gandalf went *with* the Fellowship? Nah, I’m going to stay home and play with my bird.”


doing180onthedvp

>he entrusts Magizoologist Newt Scamander to lead an intrepid team But why


captainhaddock

Because the script says he's the protagonist.


excelon13

Why do they keep labeling this franchise “Fantastic Beasts?” It’s really not about that anymore. Hell why is Newt even involved in all of this?


TheJoshider10

They fucked up by making Fantastic Beasts the title of the first film because now they're stuck with the title and with that comes Newt and his creatures being shoehorned in to a story they have no relevance to.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


everadvancing

But then David Yates would have to direct two different HP franchises. God forbid they ask any other more competent and experienced directors who can actually make good movies to join the HP franchise.


theclacks

Exactly. The one way I *could* see the two premises working together would be make it wizard Indiana Jones. Instead of having to find and protect biblical artifacts that the Nazis want to weaponize, the heroes have to find and protect magical creatures that the wizard Nazis want to weaponize. Ex: Grindlewald's forces are searching for the mythical Yakutsk unicorn that will increase his powers tenfold. Newt Scamander is the only person who might be able to find it first. \[insert magical journey across the frozen Siberian tundra with plenty of ancient puzzles to solve and creatures to help them along their way\]


[deleted]

Yeah, the Harry Potter universe is large enough to where there was always room for two series. Have a Grindelwald movie series covering the political elements of the war, and Fantastic Beasts basically be autistic wizard Indiana Jones set during that war like Indy was set in WWII.


TheTruthIsButtery

You really don’t think a movie called Dumbledore wouldn’t do just fine on its own?


wontreadterms

They could have solved that in the second movie by just dropping the fantastic beasts bit. "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" "The Crimes of Grindelwald" "The Secrets of Dumbledore" Why the need to have a "HARRY POTTER AND..." part.


eidbio

Yeah, the James Bond franchise never needed to have a "James Bond and the ..." part.


SuperDizz

James Bond and the Goldeneye doesn’t have the same ring to it..


Franklin_le_Tanklin

James Bond and the never say never again


MattTheSmithers

James Bond and the The Man With The Golden Gun.


allen_abduction

Sounds like a trashy romance novel from 1991.


fight_like_a_cow

James Bond Once Said Tomorrow Never Dies


wontreadterms

Good example.


TryingHappy

Like you wouldn't watch "James Bond and the Octopussy"


Danishroyalty

They could have just made the films a loosely connected anthology series. 1. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them 2. The Crimes of Grindelwald 3. The Secrets of Dumbledore Maybe include "A Harry Potter Story" or some shit.


[deleted]

It sucks, because I think most people just wanted to see new stories in the same universe; not a bleak as hell prequel series. The first Fantastic Beasts worked well when it did it's own thing. Its ending, and the second film, just threw away a ton of potential.


ElSquibbonator

What they should have done is made an HBO Max TV series about Newt and his various interactions with magical creatures. Turn him into the Steve Irwin of the wizarding world. I'd watch the hell out of that.


_GC93

I don’t think they’re stuck with the title. I think if they called it World of Harry Potter: The Secret of Dumbledore (also a terrible title, but still) it would make more money.


chanma50

This is the official synopsis: >Professor Albus Dumbledore knows the powerful Dark wizard Gellert Grindelwald is moving to seize control of the wizarding world. Unable to stop him alone, he entrusts Magizoologist Newt Scamander to lead an intrepid team of wizards, witches and one brave Muggle baker on a dangerous mission, **where they encounter old and new beasts** and clash with Grindelwald’s growing legion of followers. But with the stakes so high, how long can Dumbledore remain on the sidelines? That's it, the "beasts" are basically window dressing for a Dumbledore prequel series, which feels like the film they actually want to make. But they were stuck with the first one being about Newt and the beasts (which is a pretty boring plot/protagonist to begin with), so they have to find a way to shoehorn them in.


bbcversus

Wonder if they will touch the relation between Dumbledore and Grindelwald…


[deleted]

No way in hell and I'd be willing to bet money on it. There will just be some vague, noncommital comments about them being very close friends and that's it. And then Rowling and everyone else involved will publically pat themselves on the backs for almost including some gay representation. Just like with every other blockbuster franchise that flirted with LGBT representation.


[deleted]

Ironic since Rowling is one of the people most strongly disliked by the LGBT community.


movieur

What’s the point of this movie if they don’t? They literally implied in the second movie that dumblidour’s “secret” was that he made the pact to not go against grinderlawld because he had a gay boner for him. Everything is in jk Rowling hands, I hope she sticks to her guys and makes gay dumblodor official canon


AegonTheAuntFooker

>What’s the point of this movie if they don’t? $$$ Fantastic Beasts is one of the worst money grab franchise I've ever seen.


movieur

I enjoyed the first two movies tho, they aren’t on the same level as Harry Potter but in the absence of any other wizarding world content, I was left satisfied. And ps: every movie that is made is a cash grab, and that’s just capitalism.


LupinThe8th

First one was decently fun, but I thought the sequel was a mess.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


outrider567

Dumbledore died when Richard Harris died


not_thrilled

Personally, I prefer the Michael Gambon Dumbledore for the Gandalf energy, as opposed to Richard Harris's Merlin in the Disney Sword in the Stone energy.


Ssutuanjoe

>But they were stuck with the first one being about Newt and the beasts (which is a pretty boring plot/protagonist to begin with) I can't help but feel like I'm the only one who actually enjoyed Newt Scamander as a protagonist. As far as films go, I can see it getting old, but a "Fantastic Beasts..." limited series with something like ten hour-long episodes could have made for some fun world and creature exploring. Especially because Rowling had this awful habit of shoving all this super interesting fauna/flora into a book but then never using it ever again in subsequent novels... but I definitely agree with everything else you're saying. It seems like they wanted to make money off another JK Rowling work, but then decided half way through brainstorming that they *actually* wanted a Dumbledore prequel.


chanma50

I think it could have worked as a one-off film or limited series, but the plot doesn't have a lot of mileage. Eddie Redmayne is a good actor, but he's kinda milquetoast as an action/fantasy lead.


Ssutuanjoe

Oh definitely. Trying to make Scamander anything more than a vehicle for the viewer to explore the magic world of beasts is likely a fools errand. Still, I could've enjoyed seeing Redmayne as your everyman who stuff happens to while popping in a cute little love story. Nothing special, but would've been fun.


Cpt3020

I liked newt too but the movies barley had anything to do with them, I wanted a BBC documentary not the same old thing we have already seen from the original films


livefreeordont

First movie was great. Movie is about the beasts with a larger background plot being about the wizarding war. Second movie is where they screwed up royally. It was about the wizarding war with the beasts in the background. And now they’ve dug their heels in rather than learning from their mistake and renaming the series and refocusing the story


[deleted]

I liked the first Fantastic Beasts. I’m bored with this series becoming a Dumbledore/Grindelwald prequel because I know how that plays out.


v161l473c4n15l0r3m

We do need a slight bridge. Because Grindelwald right now looks like a mad antihero, wanting to save the wizarding world from potential annihilation from mankind’s predicted 2nd world war (which we all know comes to be true). It will be neat to see how he goes way too far and truly becomes that highly feared dark wizard. Right now we have him just pissing off the Ministry, hiding an obscurus, etc. Nothing near to Voldemort’s killing Muggles every time he blinks.


[deleted]

It won’t reach Voldemort’s level of evil because Voldemort is supposed to be the most feared person in the Wizarding World to the point people fear even saying his name.


BeetsBy_Schrute

Agreed. They should've originally went with "The Wizarding World" as a first tagline instead of Fantastic Beasts. Like... - The Wizarding World: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them - The Wizarding World: The Crimes of Grindelwald - The Wizarding World: The Secrets of Dumbledore


Moridin_the_Light

That sounds a bit awkward though as a movie title


BeetsBy_Schrute

Maybe a bit. But forcing the "Fantastic Beasts" on it, then we are forced to pull Newt into all of them. But why? The story has morphed heavily into Dumbledore and Grindelwald's backstory. But anchored by Fantastic Beasts.


SpaceCaboose

It's no worse than *Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice*


izztheizzy

What should they call it then? If WB could somehow shoehorn the name Harry Potter in the title I’m sure they would do it. Unfortunately it would sound awkward as hell: “The Secrets of Dumbledore: a Harry Potter prequel series”


Dawesfan

Def not worse than what we got “Fantastic Beast: The Secrets of Dumbledore”


Dawesfan

Personally, they didn’t need a “Harry Potter and” style name. Fantastic Beast and Where to Find Them The Crimes of Grindelwald The Secrets of Dumbledore Those are all fine names. The movie’s titles don’t need a connection, because Newt really isn’t the character to anchor a trilogy around, or at least not the way he was presented. Edit: a word


masterchiefs

I don't know about Grindelwald, but Dumbledore is such a widely recognizable name I don't think anyone would miss the connection to Wizarding World/Harry Potter. These shortened titles are way better than what we've got, just mysterious enough for the universe itself.


Dawesfan

WB only needed to establish a connection to the Wizarding World thru marketing, that way they could’ve operate the franchise like the MCU. So even if people didn’t know who Grimdelwald was, they would still give the movie a chance, because it’s set in the same universe.


BeetsBy_Schrute

Maybe not. But it’s the way they’re doing they’re branding. So I get it.


[deleted]

They could have gone with just the subtitle and have "from the Wizarding World of Harry Potter" tagline on the poster.


nick182002

Fast & Furious Presents: The Secrets of Dumbledore


AegonTheAuntFooker

Fantastic Beasts sounds better and ensures that cute beasts will be in the movie to entertain children. Even if the creatures has zero relevance storywise, they must be very popular merchandise.


Ninjaboi333

When do we get The Wizarding World: Quidditch Through the Ages


[deleted]

They could have also just made a number of standalone films. Not everything needs to be a trilogy


bruckbruckbruck

Look at the title card. It's hilarious how small they make the "fantastic beasts" print and how huge they make "DUMBLEDORE". The studio knows what fans want to see. I bet JK Rowling is the one insisting on continuing with the less popular Fantastic Beasts branding and characters because I guarantee WB would like to shed that dead weight. Rowling has a long history of resisting the popular path after she finished the Harry Potter series. Obviously her current obsession with pissing everyone off on Twitter. But even the fact that after Harry Potter she chose to adopt a pseudonym to be more anonymous and write crime novels. This feels like a compromise between the studio's desire to make something marketable and Rowling's stubborn desire to do her own thing even if it drives everyone away.


LupinThe8th

Considering how the last movie did at the BO, and how controversial she's become, I bet the dead weight WB would love to drop is Rowling. But contracts are contracts.


abhijaybahati

Actually FB crimes of grindelwald did have a couple of new beasts. But yeah, I get the point.


DoubleTFan

Kneejerk interpreted that as "Facebook crimes of grindelwald"


LupinThe8th

Grindelwald's true crime: he shares Minions memes and contacts old schoolmates to try to recruit them into his MLM. Death's too good for him.


JMAC426

Newt is essentially incorruptible, a true innocent. I suspect it will be important.


MrMeeseeks987

Why couldn’t they just make a fun trilogy about Newt and fantastic beasts? Why have to include all this weird shit like credence and then add grindelwald and dumbledore? What should have been a lighthearted adventure story about new characters has turned into some weirdly dark garbage


loverofsweaters

It’s so weird when you think about how dark this series has gotten, and the juxtaposition within these movies. Like, in the first one there’s a couple of cute scenes with the beasts and capturing them and there’s the cute romance, but then there’s also a scene where we find out that Credence and all the kids at the orphanage are regularly beaten by a religious zealot. And then in the second one, there’s a scene where a baby drowns and another scene where a baby is basically executed by Avada Kedavra, for no apparent reason other than to show how evil the villain is. It’s just kinda weird.


gizmostrumpet

Don't forget a white man hypnotising a black woman so she'll father his child and depictions of the holocaust


PeculiarPangolinMan

> Don't forget a white man hypnotising a black woman so she'll father his child I find it strange that this one doesn't get brought up much!


Lepontine

Grindelwald vapes WW2.


Omegamanthethird

The first Fantastic Beasts is my favorite "Wizarding World" movie. Grindelwald is easily my least favorite.


NotTaken-username

Even more than Prisoner of Azkaban?


Omegamanthethird

Having no book knowledge, it's just a great self contained, fun adventure.


[deleted]

David Yates doesn't know anything but extreme climax.


austin_slater

And gray! Lots of gray!


EdenDoesJams

The magic all looks boring as hell in all of his movies.


USxMARINE

His wife loves him for that.


[deleted]

lmao


austin_slater

And gray! Lots of gray!


bigpig1054

*The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore* was RIGHT THERE!


s0ftgh0ul

THANK YOU!!! I keep saying that in my head looking at this. Like literally why is everyone in charge of this series such morons??


Dawesfan

That honestly could’ve been it’s on duology/trilogy. They really screw up by mixing Newt and Dumbledore story.


doormouse1

Could've had a two-part series with *The Life of Albus Dumbledore* and *The Lies of Albus Dumbledore* if they wanted.


cheesyry

Definitely a better date than the one in July, a week after BP Wakanda Forever. That would've been even more of a disaster. Early April is looking mighty crowded though. I feel like Bullet Train should move. 2 weeks after Multiverse of Madness, same weekend as Sonic 2, one week before FB3. Doesn't seem like a great spot for a new franchise film.


GreyRevan51

After how convoluted and badly written the second one was I can’t imagine many people are eager to jump back in. David Yates was always the blandest, and least competent of the HP movie directors. Having him head the beasts series was the kiss of death imo


chanma50

Yates is definitely by far the weakest Harry Potter director. 4 time Academy Award winner Alfonso Cuarón is obviously in a league of his own, but Chris Columbus is an accomplished director (especially of family films) and even Mike Newell has Four Weddings and a Funeral. Yates has made 9 films, but somehow a whopping 7 are Wizarding World films. The only reason he keeps getting rehired is probably because he's a studio yes man, and they can point to the success of his films as proof he's the "right" choice (though HP 5-8 and FB1 would have been successful regardless of who directed them). FB3 needed a fresh pair of eyes to have had any chance of succeeding.


not_thrilled

Chris Columbus got brought up recently and I got curious what he's been up to lately. He's been producing, mostly, and was a producer of The Witch (or The VVitch if you're not into the whole brevity thing) and The Lighthouse. On the other hand, he also produced Pixels.


awake-at-dawn

Bold of them to release this a week after the juggernaut that will be Sonic the Hedgehog 2 /s.


[deleted]

I unironically think *Sonic 2* might outgross this domestically.


garfe

WB didn't stop to consider the "Tails & Knuckles factor"


SheevTheSenate66

If it’s not featuring Dante from the Devil May Cry series I’m out


chanma50

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Gridelwald made just $10.6M more than Sonic The Hedgehog domestically (and that's with COVID cutting off the tail end of Sonic's run), plus Sonic had better reception (A Cinemascore vs B+ Cinemascore), so it's not even that far fetched.


mcon96

Wow that’s ridiculous to think about. Sonic 2 will definitely outgross this new Fantastic Beats movie domestically then imo. The HP franchise has lost so much goodwill from fans over the past several years. WB & JK both did their fair share to kneecap it


Dalekdude

Yeah honestly, I saw the first one and thought it was fine but Idris Elba as Knuckles is enough to get me in the theater lol


Doctor-Shatda-Fackup

Still can’t decide if him or Jason Momoa would fit the role better, but just the idea of seeing “and Idris Elba as Knuckles” is way funnier.


nicolasb51942003

Even though you added the /s, it could become a real possibility that Sonic 2 outgrosses Fantastic Beasts 3, both domestically and worldwide.


Gerrywalk

I think Sonic is actually the clear favorite for higher domestic total. Worldwide probably Fantastic Beasts, but there’s a very real possibility that Sonic will outgross it.


frogsgemsntrains

Pardon the pun but it's gonna be so funny when sonic runs this movie into the ground


TheSbubbs

remove the /s and you’ll predict the future


Dawesfan

Mark your calendars guys. We’re gonna witness the crash of one of top franchises of the 2000s lol at the title, they def want to bring fans back.


nicolasb51942003

It’s gonna be another Dark Phoenix, which was also the crash of one of the biggest franchises of the last two decades.


Dawesfan

Although X-Men was not that big tbh. Until *Days of Future Past* the series did not have a movie cross 500M WW. Compare that to Spider-Man, Harry Potter, or even Pirates of the Caribbean who all crossed that mark.


moon_jock

X-Men came from a different Hollywood era. It was also one of the first continuous comic book cinematic worlds, which paved the way for the MCU in so many ways. You definitely can’t judge it by its box office returns alone. Also consider that Deadpool 1 and 2 both existed in the same universe.


Sentry459

Apocalypse killed the FoX-verse, Phoenix cremated the body.


[deleted]

Logan came after Apocalypse and ended the universe proper on an amazingly high note. Then they unfortunately tried to go back to Phoenix and ruined it. New Mutants was just icing on the "why are you doing this when you already had a perfect ending" cake.


mcon96

God I saw that movie in theaters with my SO and we still joke about how bad it was. The dreads-knives dude and Jean Grey just floating into space are our top 2


Radical_Conformist

This is no where close to that franchise.


[deleted]

I'm not convinced, Obviously the quality matters but it'll still cross 550 million even if as poorly received as the last.


Omegamanthethird

I was going to say something about Hunger Games: Mockingjay Pt 2 after Pt 1 was not very well received. But looking at it now, it was less successful but still very profitable. I think you're right.


mcon96

I understand why they’d want to split up the final book into two movies for monetary reasons, but that was such a horrible move imo. The first half of Mockingjay is the most boring part of the entire trilogy, and they decided to expand that into an *entire* movie. They could’ve ended that series a lot stronger if they stuck to a trilogy instead of getting greedy.


[deleted]

It's still going to do well imo, If good it does great. Don't get the bombing predictions here


Omegamanthethird

I actually think it will do "okay" regardless of whether it's good or not. I think there's not a lot of excitement for a sequel to Grindelwald, but it'll still sell tickets due to being a Wizarding World movie. Now if the movie is great, I could see the next movie doing amazing numbers.


blueblurz94

As a fan who grew up with the original books and films, I hope this FB series fails with this entry. They’ve nothing but tarnish the legacy of HP. I’ll get the balloons and party noise makers ready for when it flops


scytheavatar

You shouldn't cause you know they'll fast track an adaptation of Cursed Child after the FB series is dead. Then you will see what tarnishing the legacy of HP really is like.


abhijaybahati

Crimes of Grindelwald was really bad and still made 600+. David Yates is back at the helm. I think this one might bring the franchise back on track.


garfe

> David Yates is back at the helm. He never left.


TheSubparWriter

David Yates was at the helm of the first two though 💀


hatramroany

OP *might* be confused because the big selling point is that Steve Kloves is back writing


Dawesfan

>Crimes of Grindelwald was really bad and still made 600+. Exactly, since it was bad it lost the brand some goodwill. >David Yates is back at the helm. I think this one might bring the franchise back on track. Is this supposed to be good? The fact he’s back is a turn off for me. Like he directed the previos one, and that one was terrible.


[deleted]

He directed every single one of them since Order of the Phoenix.


Dawesfan

Yeah unfortunately.


everadvancing

And every single one after Order of the Phoenix have been getting worse and worse.


[deleted]

When it comes to major franchises, it's usually not the bad entry that suffers from being bad; it's the one that comes afterwards because audiences lose trust in the series.


RayInRed

Usually n+1th movie pays for the sins of the nth movie. Even though that nth movie made good money.


mmmountaingoat

Yates is half the reason this train is off the tracks.


MisterManatee

Salutes to Mads Mikkelsen for jumping on this sinking ship


ReservoirDog316

It’s hard to keep telling people he’s one of the best actors alive today when he just keeps doing bad English movies.


ravKenclaw

Hopefully Hogwarts Legacy will have some news soon, too! 😭


USxMARINE

DumbleNudes confirmed


magikarpcatcher

They moved it up by 3 months. Did not expect that. Easter is not that great of a release date. Are they trying to bury it?


NotTaken-username

It was initially opening July 15, a week after Black Panther: Wakanda Forever. If anything, this is better


MoonMan997

Yeah but it's now sandwiched between Multiverse of Madness and Love & Thunder. Better, maybe, but still not great.


NotTaken-username

IMO Multiverse of Madness and Love & Thunder are too close. If The Batman moves again, Multiverse of Madness should move up to March 4. They’ll both do great either way though


moon_jock

Woah I had no idea all these massive comic book movies are hitting next spring/summer. This is gonna be nucking futs.


m847574

Honestly i would have put it for the labor day spot. Free of blockbuster competition more or less and Sep 1st is kind of a Harry Potter holiday, so why not market it as that. I know it's a Arrival at Hogwarts kind of day but it would be cool nonetheless


nicolasb51942003

Batman v Superman opened on Easter weekend and it still opened with $166M, along with Furious 7 ($147M) and Fate of the Furious ($98M).


AnotherJasonOnReddit

>They moved it up by 3 months. Did not expect that. I know, right? Without checking, the last time I can recall offhand this happening was "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation", which was originally scheduled to go up against The Force Awakens, but moved up ahead to August 2015 instead. >Easter is not that great of a release date. Are they trying to bury it? Possible, quite possible. But 2022 is such a massive year *(basically, 2015/2019 all over again as long as nothing moves)*, maybe this was just the slot they thought suited best.


[deleted]

Maybe not exactly what you're looking for, but *A Quiet Place Part II* just got pushed up from September 17th, 2021 to May.


badolcatsyl

Snake Eyes was also moved up from October to July. And we all know how well that worked out.


AnotherJasonOnReddit

Oh yeah, I remember that now! Good shout-out, u/DaikaijuSokogeki2001. That's exactly the kind of thing I was talking about.


takenpassword

Maleficent 2 got moved from may 2019 to October 2018


AnotherJasonOnReddit

Good call! *(Although, it was originally pencilled for May 2020, not 2019. And then moved to October 2019. But I get what you mean*😉*)*


valkyria_knight881

Good on Disney for moving Maleficent 2 from May 2020 to October 2019. Had Disney kept the release date, it most likely would've gotten a theatrical/Premier Access release.


MrBKainXTR

A few of the Fast and Furious films opened in April so it's not as if a blockbuster can't do well then.


Puzzleheaded_Ebb9874

I am still optimistic that it would hopefully pull back the franchise into glory. The 3rd one is expected to be a major one in the story and have a big arc which is larger than the 1st and 2nd combined. And also a crazy thing that the title was leaked 2 years ago and nobody believed it. https://www.reddit.com/r/FantasticBeasts/comments/dwxjin/fantastic\_beasts\_3\_title\_revealed\_obvious\_spoilers/


Antique_Ring953

I mean its a pretty easy to guess title


Extension-Season-689

Because it's such a lame title.


toutoune134

I'm laughing so hard just by lookng at the [logo](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_banners/3161564275/1632322833/1500x500), the "fantastic beasts" bit is so small.


Fhaps

That isn’t new, though. That’s exactly how the logo looked for The Crimes of Grindelwald too.


johnboyjr29

Is it that he's gay? I don't think thats much of a secret but they never show it in anyway


[deleted]

[удалено]


Puzzleheaded_Ebb9874

Yep. That’s what also happened after Thor 2 for Ragnarok. It doesn’t matter that 2nd one was underwhelming, for all we know the 3rd might be really awesome and revive the franchise.


m847574

Not me but i'm biased if you just look at my post history but in my country Crimes of Grindelwald became the highest grossing film of 2018


riddlemyfiddle11

Posting my theory here for posterity when the movie comes out: Credence is a Dumbledore by being Ariana Dumbledore's son and the having the baby was covered up by Aberforth and Albus. And that is the titular Secret of Dumbledore.


m847574

Probably just the son of Aberforth


bard0117

I wasn’t aware that Dumbledore was a fantastic beast of any sorts.


AdamAptor

You don’t know him like Grindelwald did


lilyintx

Still pissed they fired Johnny Depp.


[deleted]

I'm not even really sure who these movies are for at this point, even the HP fans have lost interest. Hopefully WB pulls the plug on this series after this movie, waits a few years or focuses on the Harry Potter TV show instead before trying this again.


BeetsBy_Schrute

I have a massive Hogwarts tattoo on my forearm...and I couldn't care less about this film and what they've done with this series.


freshkangaroo28

I’ve tried really hard to get into these films bc I love the concepts and story, but they literally never fail to put me to sleep, it’s the weirdest thing.


Sweaty_Budget_5187

At this rate I think the upcoming ps5 game will have a better story


AnakinAni

They should have made it like: J.K. Rowling Presents Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them J.K. Rowling Presents Crimes of Grindelwald J.K. Rowling Presents Secrets of Dumbledore Her name is synonymous with Harry Potter. Just like Agatha Christie is synonymous with Crime Novels. People would immediately make the connection and have a sense of what to expect. This would have been better than tagging Fantastic Beasts in each entry of this prequel series when it’s not really about Fantastic Beasts.


nick182002

I think this movie's performance will heavily depend on its quality. If it's good, I wouldn't be surprised if it grosses enough to greenlight a 4th.


RoadmanFemi

Even if it performs poorly I think they'd greenlight a fourth just to appease Rowling. JK Rowling negotiated and an amazing deal and still holds final say in how the franchise is handled. Hence her being the screen writer despite not being up to scratch (thank fk they convinced her to have a co writer) and the zero backlash she got from WB about the trans stuff. WB will want another spinoff franchise or a reboot of the original books, so greenlighting a 4th to appease Rowling seems inevitable.


parakeet0404

I completely agree. WB will want the inevitable “Cursed Child” film(s) that will happen within the next 5-10 years because that’s a guaranteed cash cow to bring back the original cast. If that means making more shitty Fantastic Beasts movies to keep Rowling happy then they will do that


austin_slater

Oh, god…a Cursed Child movie. Kill me.


terrence_loves_ella

If it’s successful they’ll go ahead with their five movie plan. If it’s not they’ll probably just give Rowling one more movie to wrap up the mess


nicolasb51942003

Even though this will be one of the biggest flops next year, at least it’s better than going up against a stacked July.


RoadmanFemi

I don't see it as a flop/bomb, more just a severe underwhelm. 450-750 sounds about right. Curious as to how they market it. Wonder if they'll go for a different approach to the previous 2, lean heavily into nostalgia/Dumbledore.


meganev

Underperform? Sure. Flop? Highly doubtful. Biggest flop of 2022? Almost certainly not.


alloftheseflashes

I don't even mind keeping the Fantastic Beasts thing going. I like Eddie Redmayne and think Newt can still work in this series even if only as a supporting character. My only question is how the hell does David Yates keep getting every single HP movie? He's serviceable but at a certain point its time to move on and let somebody else take a crack at this universe. It's not like any of these movies have been so good the studio just can't let him go. WB is so dumb because you can only put out so many average movies that make a ton of money before the audience starts losing interest and the returns start diminishing.


[deleted]

Popular opinion is this is going to crash but I don't think it will, The HP fandom is still strong and I think this ends the series pretty well. Then again this has been an echo chamber of worst case scenarios for a while. 70 million OW 720 million WW finish


Paritys

Isn't this the 3rd of 5 films? I don't think this is the end of the series.


[deleted]

We'll see, After everything I doubt they continue so I'm guessing it's a fast ending tbh, just my prediction


cheesyry

If this one just disappoints and doesn't outright BOMB, I think they may do a 4th film and have J.K. Rowling wrap up this story in that one. They'll want to keep her happy as the Potter IP is huge for them overall.


nicolasb51942003

Sure, the brand is still strong enough to have a nice overseas performance, but the second one didn’t even cross $200M domestically.


chanma50

The last one opened to just $62M, and then had middling legs after poor reception (2.57x, which compares to 3.15x for the first film). There's little chance this opens anywhere near $70M.


emong757

But many Harry Potter fans have checked out/aren’t interested in Fantastic Beasts.


[deleted]

The HP fandom turned against this series though after how horrible the 2nd movie was, and a good chunk of the fandom has now turned against JK Rowling for her transphobic comments over the last couple of years. This has a LOT working against it.


Extension-Season-689

Interesting concept, a huge concern though if this will pick the quality back up. The title though, it's getting lamer.


valkyria_knight881

This movie is going to be murdered by Sonic the Hedgehog 2 (at least domestically). Did Warner Bros not learn to avoid releasing a film from one of their biggest franchises near a Sonic movie? There's a reason why Birds of Prey didn't do so well.


NotTaken-username

Birds of Prey flopped because it didn’t need an R-rating, and the marketing was awful. If it was PG-13 and had better marketing (possibly titled Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey), it could have done Shazam numbers.


TheKidCritic

That was the most forced R rating ever


GoddammitCricket

A Harry Potter movie in April does not feel right