Review: Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them

Character poster courtesy of fantasticbeasts.co.uk

As some of you may know, I absolutely adore the wizarding world created by the brilliant J. K. Rowling. I have grown up reading and watching the Harry Potter series, and whilst I'll admit I was a little sceptical when it was first announced that there would be a new spin-off film. Take 'Star Wars' for example. Now I'm not personally a fan of that franchise, but I've often heard my Dad complain that the director should have left well enough alone instead of creating more and more films. We both shared concerns that maybe Jo should have stuck to her guns about not releasing any more Potterverse-related material because how could anything improve the world that is already so loved by fans?

That all changed when the trailers were released. The creatures were brought to life in a way that I couldn't have anticipated. Just look at the niffler in the gif. It's great! Furthermore, the changes in environment clearly separate this new spin-off series from its predecessor (or would that be successor?) - we're in America in the 1920s, and the advances available to film creators nowadays allows audiences to be fully immersed in the Big Apple, much like we were all once immersed at Hogwarts.

Gif courtesy of fantasticbeasts.co.uk

Of course, the trailers do not compare to the film itself in much the same way that the Harry Potter trailers never really captured the entirety of the film. How can they, when the films are hours long and the trailer only a couple of minutes? Still, the trailers were excellent appetisers and the film exceeded all my expectations. 

The great thing about Fantastic Beasts is that you don't need to know any of the Harry Potter books or films inside out to enjoy it. This new series of films will allow for a new generation to be filled with wonder at the on-screen magic. Knowing the Harry Potter films allows for little clues to be picked up on and jokes to be made. I think my favourite pun in the film is where Newt admits that he's "more of a chaser" than a seeker. 

Seeing a certain auror with a certain familiar symbol made me distrust the character for much of the film, so perhaps my viewing experience, and that of other Potterheads, is altered a bit in this way but I don't think it's a bad thing. There is so much new material that a few suspicions here and there are hardly going to spoil the experience, and so much more to discover. Not only this, but it kind of means we're tormented by the things we pick up on that aren't necessarily yet explained. Throughout the entirety of the film, a few cogs in the back of my mind were turning, trying to work out what relation Newt's Lestrange tied in with the Potter's Lestranges.

My only complaint, and really this applies to some of the Potter films as well, is that the spells people use all seem to emit the same colour. We know from the Potter books that spells are streaks of different 'lights' so why was everything white in the 1920s? As far as I'm concerned, the odd flash of red would have dramatised things even more but perhaps that's just me. Nevertheless, if the only fault I could find was the lack of imagination for the colouring of spells then I think things have gone pretty well for the entire cast and crew. 

Overall, I give this film 5/5 stars. It is complete testament to J. K. Rowling that cinema screenings are still so full. When I saw this film two or three weeks ago, at the end of my Christmas break, the matinee screening was sold out and we had to go back to the cinema that evening, an even then I think there were four seats left available when we went to sit down. Adults and children alike can enjoy this film, and I cannot wait the next instalment of Fanstastic Beats and Where To Find Them. In the mean time, I'll keep trying to get tickets for the play!

Until next time...

Film review: The BFG

On Thursday I went to see 'The BFG' at a local cinema, and as I had no Pony Club this weekend (which means a month of no riding - can you feel my pain?) I figured I may as well use the trip as a blog post.

When I was little, I absolutely loved 'The BFG'. I had the book and the DVD (of the 1989 film), the latter of which came with a newspaper that my grandad had bought. It was one of my favourites, so I was a bit apprehensive of seeing a live-action remake. I was aware that throughout the film I was making comparisons from the film I remember fondly to the new, big screen production. I'm just going to go ahead and say it right now that I prefer the old version. It may be a case of I saw the original first (similar to the Monster Inc films - whichever one you watched first is probably going to be your favourite of the two), but there were multiple things that I missed and/or felt critical of in the Spielberg version.

I'll be honest with you, I didn't particularly like Sophie. She came across as too arrogant for my tastes. Yes, it's great that she's strong willed, but the whole scene at the beginning when she's talking to the drunkards just felt very unrealistic. And the orphanage as well; she got away with wondering around in the early hours of morning with no repercussions, which begs the question of what punishments are for if she can collect post at 3am. Furthermore, she never seemed to really show much emotion. Part of this is probably directing, but I am much more accustomed to the girl who is scared but overcomes that, rather than the girl who seems a little arrogant. I don't know, maybe I'm being too picky? Regardless, not liking her definitely made the film a little harder to watch because there didn't seem to be a genuine friendship between Sophie and BFG for much of the film. Whilst her reactions at the Palace were quite funny, it also came across as her being ashamed of him so I didn't really like that too much because they are meant to befriend each other, and care for each other equally.

The CGI and special effects were fantastic though, so that made up for the character disappointment that was Sophie. I loved how the dreams were portrayed, even if I was expecting the cloud-like realm from the original. The reflection of the tree was pretty cool though, and definitely fulfilled the dream-like quality needed. The giants were created brilliantly. Mark Rylance, who played the BFG, was recently on the One Show, and he gave a brief overview of how it all worked in terms of there being a computer version and actual version of the set. All I can say is that the behind-the-camera teams deserve a massive round of applause for some truly stunning work. The make-up teams were fantastic as well. Additionally, credit must go to the script writers for getting the BFG's language so spot on. It's such a fun play on words, and I'm really glad they did it so well (even if it took Sophie way too long to appreciate the BFG's way of speaking).

The element of humour added to the film were very welcome as well. For example, the cat sitting on the bed covers as Sophie walked was amusing in the simplest of ways, and the corgies towards the end were brilliant. It made up for the lack of the creature in the 1989 adaptation - which I cannot remember the name of - who loved Snozzcumber. Much of the breakfast scene was also very good, particularly the giant deciding to spit out the coffee onto three of the people who were serving his breakfast. The comedy was light-hearted to say the least, but it was welcome, especially after the somewhat intense scene involving the other giants invading the BFG's cave. It was also quite fun to have the giants hate the water so much, which made the sudden onset of rain so great earlier on in the film.

Another thing I didn't really like was that there had been previous humans that the BFG had taken. It kind of felt like it undermined his guilt at taking Sophie in some ways. Part of his guilt is that he took her, but it makes it a bit darker to assume that his guilt is primarily based on the fact that his last ward died via giant. Also, surely the giants would be more suspicious if they suddenly smelt a human in Giant Country? Wouldn't it be a case of "who do we know who brings back humans every once in a while to live with him in his cave?". Apart from showing how old the BFG is courtesy of the Queen Victoria picture, it did very little else. I much prefer the first adaptation which had the BFG use the bedding to make a dress for Sophie, rather than the Spielberg version of the BFG handing her the clothes of dead children. Speaking of, I don't think it ever showed the giants in the human world stealing children. On their way isn't really the same thing as seeing them actually taking someone.

Overall, I would recommend the original adaptation of the BFG rather than the current cinema release, but it does come down to a matter of taste and how close you would like the film to be to the book. The currently-in-cinemas film is good, I won't deny that. For an audience who has no prior experience of Giant Country and all that jazz, it is very appealing. In terms of my own, personal preference however, I wouldn't really give it more than 3.5/5 stars. Sorry to those of you who love it, but there were too many flaws for me!

Until next time...