Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them
FANTASTIC BEASTS AND WHERE TO FIND THEM, adventure, rated PG-13; in 2-D and 3-D; Regal Stadium 14, Violet Crown, and DreamCatcher; 2.5 chiles
The year is 1926. The place: New York City. The mysterious destruction of an apartment building is blamed on an atmospheric irregularity, though an eyewitness claims to have seen the place ripped apart by a black cloud with spooky eyes. Policemen called to the scene chortle, but we know better. The script is by J.K. Rowling, author of the Harry Potter books, and the movie is directed by David Yates, who helmed four of the Potter film adaptations. Magic is afoot.
With Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, the Rowling-verse takes a step beyond adaptation and into the original-screenplay realm. A book by this film’s title does exist — it was published in 2001 as a facsimile of a bestiary studied by students at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry and written by one “Newt Scamander.” This film, which tells a story about the writer of that book, marks Rowling’s debut as a screenwriter.
Eddie Redmayne (The Danish Girl) plays Scamander. He arrives in New York bearing a worn leather case that bulges and creaks as whatever’s inside it strains to escape. Moments later it does, and we meet the first of the film’s magical beasts — a fuzzy platypus-like critter that thrives on filthy lucre, picking pockets and stuffing coins and assorted jewelry into its pouch. Inevitably, other creatures emerge from the case as well, setting off a cascade of antics that wreak havoc on lower Manhattan. Along the way, Scamander makes a few friends: sister witches Tina and Queenie Goldstein (Katherine Waterston and Alison Sudol) and Jacob Kowalski, a muggle or “no-maj” (magic-free person) played by Dan Fogler.
Scamander is probably supposed to suggest a young man with an enigmatic past, but Redmayne plays him as a near-caricature of faltering, twitchy Britishness, muttering what may be important dialogue — who can tell? — from beneath an unruly shock of wiry hair. Waterston’s character isn’t well drawn — she’s a bit bland, but her heart’s in the right place. While these two fret about important things, comic relief comes by way of Sudol’s effervescent Queenie, a sort of Jazz-Age Marilyn, and Fogler, whose wide eyes and full jowls dominate the screen. Mostly he mugs protracted astonishment in reaction to all the beasties and wand-waving, but it works, and between this and his flirtation with Queenie, he’s among the film’s biggest crowd pleasers.
While this quartet scrambles to return the residents of Scamander’s portable zoo to the magical case, there are reports of a dangerous warlock named Grindelwald on the loose, and there is plenty of trouble right in New York. As the head of a cultlike anti-magic movement, Samantha Morton embodies the forces of intolerance. Her day job is serving as the cruel mistress of a home for orphans. We also meet Graves, a high-ranking member of the Magical Congress of the United States played with inscrutable menace by Colin Farrell. He’s up to something — we don’t know what, but it involves one of the orphans, a withdrawn boy (Ezra Miller in an understated, disquieting performance).
Scamander’s magical menagerie is a MacGuffin. Much screen time is devoted to the mayhem unleashed by various computer-animated beasts, but the real magic is generated by the actors, sets, and costumes. The atmosphere of 1920s New York oozes charm, and the cast makes an effective vehicle for the warmth that infuses the central relationships in Rowling’s tales. The themes that fill the Potter books — respect for diversity; the value of learning and open-mindedness; the importance of supportive, loving friendships — all resurface here, infusing the flawed narrative with a sunny glow.
Though though this movie goes for the odd mixture of sentimentality, physical comedy, and creepiness that went into the Potter films, the scrambled plot plays like handfuls of clues being dropped for further exploration in future movies. Perhaps all will be revealed, but this story doesn’t hang together well. The fun of seeing the actors ride wave after wave of cartoonish, zany action sits uneasily alongside the darker elements and the many loose ends, making for a whole that is less than the sum of its parts. — Jeff Acker