Fantastic Beasts And The PROBLEM With Prequels
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 10. 2021
- Thanks to Keeps for sponsoring this video! Head to keeps.com/Nerdstalgic to get 50% off your first order of Keeps hair loss treatment.
In today's modern age, it seems we're in a transition from the sequel era into the prequel era. Movies like Fantastic Beasts, Alien Covenant, and Black Widow have been made to take audiences back to the inception of their favorite franchises. But there's one big issue with prequel films like Fantastic Beasts, trying to create new adventures within stories we already know.
#FantasticBeasts #MoviePrequels #Nerdstalgic
Written by Mark Rennie
Edited by Dan Smiley - Zábava
Thanks to Keeps for sponsoring this video! Head to keeps.com/Nerdstalgic to get 50% off your first order of Keeps hair loss treatment.
Bumblebee is NOT a "souless cash in" you jerk. It's the only good live-action Transformers movie. Anyone who says otherwise suffers from brain damage
X men how first class is literally the best x men movie how is it a soulless prequel?
@ Wow literally calling someone brain damaged for not liking the same entertainment as you. I'm not sure you can get any more "internet cliche".
@ amen to that Bumblebee is the best film since The Transformers The Movie.
Fantastic Beasts COULD have been all about introverted and gentle hero Scamander studying and harnessing his empathy to rescue rare magical creatures from poachers and maybe through the oscurus learn to connect with other people better before ending the series with him going through his notes to compose a guide.
And yet.
An adventure series with that premise would have been so much more fun to watch
Rowling is the worst
good idea, wish they had gone that route instead, sadly, hollywood writers don't seem to think that way
@ShadownetZero because some people grew up watching animal planet.
@ShadownetZero
It's almost as if taste and interests are subjective 🤯
I think the Fantastic Beasts movies would be better if it was about Scamander going to different parts of the world showing us this beasts and on the way liberating others with his soon to be fiancee and Kowalsky (a.k.a. the best character ever created). Think of it as a Steve Irwing documentary, but with a ball of anxiousness that is developing to beeing less anxious thanks to his friends
Tbh I thought that would be what this franchise would be, cause the title was fantastic beasts and where to find them. I was still excited after the first film but the second film was just bad. It had very little to do with actual fantastic beasts
If it was full of adventure, with no retcons or negative impact to the previous lore.
But Rowling's R is for retcon.
I think this was what everyone expected and then they ruined it by making it a prequel instead. I tend to turn film one off before Colin Farrel turns into Grindlewald cause that to me is when the movie should end imo. I'm never watching the second film again.
That would have worked so much better. Single stand-alone stories, Indiana Jones style. Even if you just keep Newt and have him meet different friends and allies in different movies, that would still work. Just send him to different parts of the wizarding world so you get to explore new corners and she can focus on all the world building that she does so well. And WB could use that to just keep making movies for years set in that universe. If one movie with some certain characters or locations really resonate with audiences, then they can make spin-off movies focusing on those while Newt moves on to explore other new things.
But the series we got isn't about Newt. It isn't about the Fantastic Beasts even. It's basically retelling a similar story to the original series with a different wizard Hitler and a set ending. And worst of all, it's contradicting her own lore. These could have been so much more.
Instead of either a light hearted series about Newt and his animals or a darker story about Grindlewald gaining power and Dumbledore trying to stop him they forced 2 inconsistent stories and tones into the same series.
It's hilarious how Crimes of Grindelwald depicts a younger Minerva McGonagall in 1927, when she wouldn't be born for eight more years! 😂
Also Newt is a cuck. Same with Jacob.
@@michellefernandez3155 how is he a cuck hes just nice
@@clarencehemphill3403 Porpentina trash him in the second movie. OOF at least watch the movie brah
@@michellefernandez3155 why does that make him a cuck?
@Trina Q for the Addams Family Musical profile picture such a fun show
I think my mom is a good snapshot of how your "average" Potter fan is feeling about this franchise - she's read all the books, she loves to buy cute stuffed animals/tie in books/toys/etc for herself or her family, and she likes to rewatch the movies when they come on TV. She doesn't care about anything that happens with the author on twitter and has no real idea about the drama with JKR or Johnny Depp.
I took her to see the first Fantastic Beasts and she adored it and was so happy that there was more to watch, and we took our first trip to Wizarding World of HP in California. Then, she saw the second one and she was massively disappointed. She hated that it was so dark and long and confusing and was very upset that all the monsters were gone and that Newt didn't really matter anymore.
You would think that a big time fan would be okay with that because yay more Dumbledore and he's a big important character she knows from the books but it became obvious that "Dumbledore is in this" isn't enough to keep people interested, especially if he's barely in it at all and the rest of the movie surrounding him is a bunch of nonsense. Maybe JK should have written these as a book first and then let someone else write the screenplay.
Screenplays are a lot shorter than books. Not 'easier' to write per se, but they can be a lot faster to write.
@@charliericker274 I'm aware. JK badly needs someone else to take her long books and condense them into movies, she's obviously not that good at editing out stuff she wrote when trying to write a movie script. I don't think it would have fixed all the issues because "Dumbledore's secret brother" speaks for itself about what a mess this is, but at least a lot of dead weight would have been removed in the second movie.
Fuckin' A!
@@noakai Also, it feels weird to introduce a secret brother into Dumbledore and Grindelwald's conflict when Grindelwald already killed his sister (or at least she got caught in the crossfire of their fight). Seriously, how much family drama do you need?
@@noakai I think she either A. Didn’t have any set plan for these movies and made stuff along as she goes Or B. The studio wanted more recognizable characters to earn more profits so she changed the story or C. Since this is supposed to be a 5 part series (I think) she didn’t have enough material for a movie actually since the second one really feels like a filler with unnecessary drama
I remember seeing Beasts 2 with some friends. After the movie I asked “did anyone understand what happened in that film?” We then had about an hour conversation trying to piece together senses that seemingly had nothing to with each other. We then decided the movie was bad and have never spoken about it since.
This is why it failed. If you have to turn to the internet to make sense of your movie you've failed as a screenwriter. Even Matrix back in the day didn't leave me this confused and that was back when the idea of computer simulations being so real it could trick you was fresh ground. This movie was just confusing because JK was cashing in. You can tell she just got to the end of that script and was like boom 20 min exposition dump right at the end of the movie. A exposition dump that oh by the way doesn't matter at all to the plot. Seriously cut the guy with the misguided vendetta out of the film and 20 minutes simply doesn't need to exist at all. Thats shit storytelling.
To be fair to the hobbit prequels, the book wasn’t a prequel. The Lord of the Rings was a sequel
Yeah... I haven't read the books, but I thought it was like so.
Me and my other half enjoyed the Hobbit for what it is but there's no denying it is deeply flawed. I think the reason for that is they wanted an epic trilogy prequel to lotr and their source material was a single short whimsical children's fantasy book. The Hobbit just wasn't designed to be an epic fantasy war trilogy, it's designed to be a short coming of age quest where a lil Hobbit goes on an adventure and finds his courage.
@fee foo Could have been 2 movies and it would have worked so much better :(
@@aprophetofrng9821 Could have been a single movie. The Hobbit isn't exactly the thickest book. The movie adaptation was mostly just filler and pointless action that felt completely out of place because Hobbit just isn't that kind of a story.
@@SaHaRaSquad Could have been a single ya. But they'd have had to leave out a lot of the book for it. It takes a good 8 hours or so to read. That'd be a lot to take out if you're shooting for a 2 hour movie.
She didn't respect screen writing. Imagine going in for surgery and your surgeon is one of your local fire fighters because he reckons both jobs help people so they're the same
MEDIC!
She REALLY didn’t understand writing for theater. Cursed Child was a huge disappointment and was an indicator of things to come.
@@choreomaniac she actually hasn't written cursed child.
It is more like Rowling does not understand the difference between a novel and a film.
Like in the Wizard of Oz novel, Dorothy gets send to see the Wizard by the Witch of the north, but in the end, it is the Witch of the South that helps her get home. The movie mixed both characters into one. This creates a minor plothole, but it makes the film flow better.
Applying this to Crimes of Grindelwald, the guard that barely survived Grindelwald's escape should have been Newt's brother, who later tries to recruit Newt for the effort to stop Grindelwald. Having them be different characters is okay for a novel, but having them be the same character works better with the more rigid structure of a film.
It should have been a Mandolorian-esque western where Newt travels and helps animals on the way
No way Monsters University falls into the same "desperate" category as those other examples. It did well standing on its own, and the only continuity it "ruined" could simply be excused as Mike's sense of humor in Monsters, Inc. anyway.
Agreed. That movie was great.
Bumblebee is a soft reboot and the same could be said with X-Men first class. So its like the person didn't actually watch these movies. Just saw the titles to the movies.
@@stevenstygles255 yeah the examples were pretty inconsistent
It's just shows how Mike and Sully met and got their jobs
@@stevenstygles255 exactly, they were just being a whiny idiot
Why doesn’t anyone talk about Interquels?
*cries in Phineas & Ferb: Star Wars*
The Lion King 1.5
🙌🙌🙌
Actually... That's a good point...
@@ArtamisBot Thankies.
@@Water_Me_Loan there are a lot of really good ones, and a lot of really bad ones. I think it would be good to compare, and find out why the good ones succeed.
I feel like this entire trilogy was a bait & switch for fans. Going into Fantastic Beasts was supposed to be a fun romp about how Newt collected his fantastic beasts to make a text book for students.
Life. my friend
To be honest, what I wanted out of the Fantastic Beasts movies are two things: More magical beasts, which ALWAYS fascinated me in the original series, as well as a greater look at the wizarding world outside of Hogwarts. The first gave me exactly what I was looking for...while the latter didn't really. Although I still enjoyed Crimes of Grindelwald, it definitely wasn't nearly as good.
I would like to see more quidditch, and I think that could be tangled with these beasts...
I agree with you. Lets hope the later movies are better
@@Jokervision744 Oh yeah, the quidditch scenes were honestly some of my favorite scenes in the first two HP movies. It would be great to see some professional teams play or something~ Like the one we got robbed of in Goblet of Fire. xP
Tbh, the fantastic beasts filmed are going to be remembered for how not to expand an established universe. Casting was great, story was utter tripe. I don't even know if Rowling is to blame for how poor the FB films are. I think there's an element of "Hollywood" incorporated into them and it just doesn't gel with, well anything that already exists.
Idk, she has SO much creative control I don’t think studio influence is to blame.
@@mj7087 But although she's officially writing them, I feel that there's an undercurrent of "What ifs?" From a production standpoint that weren't present when she wrote the series. Maybe a team of screenwriters or something if you get me? Maybe I'm just biased and don't want to believe she'd write something so crappy, lmao.
@@Jopeymessmusic I think the series really suffers from Rowling being predominantly a good MYSTERY writer. Deathly Hallows falls a little flat too because she didn't seem to know how to wrap up her large story without the strong mystery elements present in all of the former books - hence the introduction of SIGNIFICANT additions to world-building in the final two installments of the series that are leaned on in the finale (HBP: wandlore, horcruxes, all of Voldemort's backstory; DH: the Deathly Hallows and the Peverell family, all of Dumbledore's backstory).
She turned Fantastic Beasts (which could be a wonderful, environmentalist globetrotting journey through the Wizarding World) into another lore heavy, exposition heavy pseudo-mystery story because that's what she's used to writing. It could have been an adventure serial, a la Indiana Jones or Tintin, with Newt traveling across the world to save magical creatures and the people who care for them, but Rowling thought people wanted grand/epic narratives, so she tried to make another one. That's my take at least.
im fine with blaming rowling for all of my problems (as a nonbinary person
@@abigailw7146 Absolutely fair. Outside of writing the books, she seems like a batshit insane person with awful perspectives on things.
I'd prefer the "Clone Wars" approach. In the original media, vaguely describe a past event and if the media makes enough money to deserve a prequel, make one
The Clone Wars have the exact same problem, though.
It's an overarching problem with prequels. There are no true stakes. Yoda, Obi Wan, and Anakin are all going to be alive, and you know it from the start.
You know Black Widow is going to be completely fine and you know how she's going to be in the future, because of the six or so movies she was depicted in beforehand.
Origin stories are much the same, for already established characters. We know Batman's parent's died, we know Spiderman got bitten by a radioactive spider, we know Superman came from another planet. It's just pointless exposition to fill time.
Prequels hold the same problem, but it's stretched across an entire film instead of 5-30 minutes.
Yeah what terra said. Ultimately the adventures are pointless. It's like if you could travel through time, and living at some point in the past instead of living at the furthest point you could travel to (assuming that was a random limit and not the end of the world lol)
@@KingNefiiria That's like saying that 99% of movies have no stakes or aren't interesting because you know the main character wont die.
You dont need to fear the characters dieing for it to have stakes.
@@KingNefiiria The clone wars series is possibly one of the best prequels ever made proving there was so much story potential before the og trilogy. Star Wars rebels is in the same boat. The issue with the movies is Lucas tried to cram so much into them with so little time to develop the themes, ideas and characters. It would have been better if the entire story was told through the show. Anakin's tragic fall is amazing, basically a Shakespearean tragedy set in space. The movies aren't great, but the story is - it's just executed poorly. I for one am glad the movies exist because we likely wouldn't have the clone wars and rebels without them. I've personally always had more of an issue with sequels - the Star Wars sequels just cemented that.
Like the first wizarding war? We know a fair bit about it but there's still a lot from it to explore. Would be great to see James and Lily Potter in action, and their dynamic with the rest of the Order of the Phoenix.
To me. Bumblebee isn't a Prequel. It's a new universe. It literally can not connect to the original 2007 Movie. In anyway. Mainly why would all the Autobots besides Bumblebee leave earth, return to the war on Cybertron, when they already have there new home on earth, then return in the 2007 movie? Why not stay.
It's actually confirmed its a reboot. Search it up.
HISHAM A.N I know. It's more of a soft reboot however. From what has been revealed, it's mainly going to carry on the Bayverse story style, with the G1 Style of characters.
@@HeavyTanker-vx4oq Alright.
Why Fantastic Beasts exists is beyond me (I know the answer is “because money”) but it should either have been Newt simply travelling to different countries encountering new creatures with his own side characters along for the ride, or it should be about the rise of Grindelwald and how he was defeated, rather than the mix of both we seem to have
Not sure why Bumblebee and First Class are getting hate. Bumblebee was the first film in the franchise to really humanize the Transformers and give them personalities outside of jingoistic war machine and racist caricature. First Class (despite the way they did Darwin dirty) was a fantastic reevaluation of Charles and Eric’s relationship, as well as how Charles is kind of a clout-hungry prick.
Totally agree with Bumblebee (haven’t seen First Class). Bumblebee was the first actually decent live action Transformers film so I’m not sure why it was presented as a bad movie here. I’m a long time transformers fan (cartoons not films) and it overjoyed me to watch one that cared about character.
So, today is the day I realise that the 'Credence is a Dumbledore' Thing was actually serious? I just didn't believe it when watching the movie, I thought it was just something Grindelwald lied about because, y'know, that's what he does.
For some stupid reason they thought a guy too young to be related to Dumbledore somehow being a secret Dumbledore brother made any sense.
@ShadownetZero Oh, that's a relief. The way it was phrased during this video made it sound like it has been confirmed. I probably should have checked myself , but oh well.
@@kriemhildxbrunhild nothing is confirmed yet but there are a few fan theories that are absolutely mind blowing.
For example the homoculous/philosopher stone theory that basically says that credence was created by Albus in an attempt to bring Ariana back to life. So he tried to create a living body (homoculous) and put Ariana Obscurus in it, but it failed and so he brought the child to america.
The only version I could get on board with is if the Dumbledore Family had at one point different parts of the family and if Aurelius is a missing younger (great-)cousin or something like that. If JK pulls another timeline crap (like McGonagall), I am done with the prequels. If she can't get her timeline straight, there are lots of people who could help her out. Instead she warps her universe to pull rabbits out of hats that shouldn't be there under the best of circumstances.
@@tom-nb7dk the whole obscurus thing is bullshit from the start. It was never quoted in the original books, nor in the cursed child. Furthermore, i think it wasn't even listed on the fantastic beasts book! Like cmon JK, you said that Ariana Dumbledore sometimes would lose control of the magic inside herself and such but the movie version of this possible scenario is way too ludicrous to be taken seriously
You're really saying that Bumblebee is more soulless and more of a cash grab the preceding live-action Transformers movies? If anything, it's the first live-action Transformers movie to HAVE a soul. It's also something of a reboot...
Honestly the worst part for me was the breakup off screen...we spent the first movie rooting for the two main characters to get together, and then we do the same in the second. I have always hated the breakup off screen.
The 2nd had other problems too, but that bugged me the most.
Also what on Earth is Queenie's logic in CoG when it comes to her realtionship with Jacob.
"Hey the evil wizard warlord said we could marry if we join them."
"I don't believe him, he kinda wants to kill or enslave 90 % of the Population including me. i won't follow him."
"Fine than I will break up with you and join him on my own out of the sole reason so we can be together my love."
@@noahs.6209 I couldn't be frustated enough of how they treated queenie
She could have been a loving and sweet person but nope they just gonna make her desperate and numb enough for me
@@noahs.6209 I think it was all based on the "Muggles cannot marry wizards/witches (in the US)"-believe of Queenie, but as Newt said in the first one "you have some rather backwards laws concerning Muggles". Emigrate to the UK, get married there, marriage between a Muggle and a witch not a problem. Queenies character was kind of ruined for me too, her agenda doesn't make much sense to me either.
@@victoriakaren2324 Totally agree. Queenie was such a great part of the first movie, I loved her character. She was complex in her own way and her relationship with Tina was enough drama for me there.
The movie should have simply been about Newt vs some poachers.
Rowling is notorious for ruining her own lore. Considering that, in addition to all the vicissitudes of writing a prequel that were mentioned in the video, I think a lot of franchises could be better served by writing a prequel where the main story and main characters of the original are really secondary or tertiary. The wizarding world was unfortunately small before the prequels, but it is acknowledged that there are entire other countries with wizards. If you're going to write a cash grab movie it makes sense to place it in the us, but they didn't have to put in younger versions of anyone. They could have put in relatives, friends, and the ridiculously long lived characters like Dumbledore could have just not played much of a part. Honestly, Dumbledore has always been a coward who finds young, less erudite men to do what he should be doing. A brief cameo would have been sufficient.
Because she's a bad writer. She struck gold with the first Harry Potter book, but she clearly had no plans with its direction until Book 4, arguably Book 5 even. Book 7 feels like nothing but "this serialized series should be interconnected instead."
Add that with the facts that she both A. Didn't even create it all from scratch on her own in the first place, and B. Doesn't know how to leave a finished product alone and constantly goes back to it, she was guaranteed to ruin it.
@@Richard_Nickerson and that’s not mentioning Cursed Child which is just the worst example of a cash grab ever.
@@KPT437
Yes, that book/play falls under the B at the end of my point.
@@Richard_Nickerson this. With Harry potter she wrote a book about a wizard boy and built a universe with a vague premise to tie together several books if she wrote them. She wrote more because the first one was popular and then they became a massive hit and she tied them all together into a series.
It looks like she started that way with fantastic beats. But as soon as more movies were confirmed, she realised she wanted a huge epic, and tried to write a big massive story, without just focusing on making entertaining instalments. And she's never written films before, and hasn't written an epic before? Her skill is worldbuilding, the plots have never been great and she'd probably have been better directing.
@@abijo5052
I usually get bombarded with hate by stans for saying that, I'm glad others see it too.
Excuse me, X-Men: First Class is a great prequel; how dare you show it casually like it was like any other prequel!
I’m sorry, are we really gonna act like X-men first class wasn’t the best X-men film up to that point?
Exactly. It was the best X-Men movie, the third one destroyed the trilogy tho.
@ShadownetZero I don’t what you’re talking about the first X-men movie sucked ass
X men first class and X2 are by far the best
Days of Future Past was also really good.
@@aprophetofrng9821 that and Logan are my 2 favorites. First class is after those
Warner Bros counting the seconds when they can remake the Harry Potter series
They need to turn it into a TV series this time to actually fit all the content
Personally, I was really excited to see more of the wizarding world in the US. I really wanted to see Ilvermorny, and have the main four cast's lives be fleshed out more. With a menagerie of magical monsters.
Instead, we got Fantastic Beasts cast to the side, for a plot no one asked for, and a nostalgia and Johnny Depp cash grab.
I actually really liked Monsters University. Are there plot holes? Yes.
Do I like the workaround they made at the end to tie them to where they were at the start of the first movie? Also, yes.
Yeah I went into the first *FB* movie expecting it to basically be *The Wizarding World of Pokémon* - not…the thing we got.🤷♀️
Glad to hear Rogue One getting some love.
Why? It's awful.
Best Star Wars movie imo
@@terrellnewbill4273 it has 1 cool scene but imo it is a pretty terrible movie, probably even worse than aotc in terms of story.
I never understood how Rogue is considered by some, the best star wars movie, despite lacking entertainment for the first half of the film
I saw The Crimes of Grindelwald in theaters when it came out. A couple months later, I realized I had no idea what happened in the movie. A year or two ago, I watched the movie for a second time. Now, again, I have pretty much no recollection of what happened.
I always dreamed of a movie/series about the James Sirius Lupin and Peter at Hogwards maybe leading into the first war against voldemort and finishing with Harry' scar. But now I'm scared JK Rowling will ruin that too '-'
The only prequel I’ve liked is X-men first class maybe because you have to know the events of it to understand the ending of the series
"you have to know the events of it to understand the ending of the series"
I'm going to be honest, If I had to think of 20 things the X-Men franchise did well, continuity would not be one of them.
@@RorikH they were pretty good all things considered I mean they set up a threat in 2000 that we only got to see in 2014 it’s not like they just winged it
@@rosshauler7688 There's a lot of weirdness with the timelines and ages and who is and isn't good and/or related, especially if you factor in X-Men Origins Wolverine. Mystique was clearly not Xavier's sister, for instance.
@@RorikH origins is barely cannon but yeah, idk the series is always first to get judged by their continuity and I honestly don’t think it’s that bad I mean look at the mcu they’ve changed the rules of their universe every project at least with X-men the most confusing thing is how they stayed young throughout 30 years
@@rosshauler7688 Yeah, the time skip gimmick was weird, and also largely unnecessary, since I don't think any world event past the Cuban Missile Crisis played a large role. If Origins was declared Non-Canon at some point then that would make more sense, since it's at the center of a lot of the weirdness. Not all, but a lot.
As a big Potter fan I couldn't even watch Crimes of Grindelwald. I didn't feel excited about the prequels because I knew they could be really bad and spoil some of my love for the OG books, but the plot also seemed spoiled from the start. Like so many people, I thought there could be some joy and charm in a story about a young Newt globetrotting around the wizarding world, getting peeks into other wizarding cultures and discovering magical beasts and fighting to protect them....THAT could have been a lot of fun.
So…if you’re going to do a prequel, it’s probably best to treat the original material as a vaguely worded prophecy, and nothing more. That way, when you write or film the prequel, you can just do whatever you want, and just have it fulfilling the history from the original material in only the most technical sense.
Prequel character (talking about his past exploits in present time): “Yeah. I cut off the future big baddy’s hand, but it’s not like I meant to. I was actually trying to (insert completely unknown and unrelated event), and (future big baddy) came out of nowhere.”
Listener frowns, confused and asks a “but” question.
Prequel character: “No. It was just a fight. (Future baddy) caught me doing what I shouldn’t have and tried to stop me. We scrapped. And as we were rolling around on the floor (random thing happened) and his arm was suddenly short a hand.”
Listener says something like: “Really!? What did you do, then?”
Prequel character: “I ran the hell away.” (Then proceeds to grumble about how the whole-unimportant to the listener-event had been more trouble than it was worth.)
Looking back at Smallville, my favorite live action TV show of all time, on its' 20th anniversary, they've inspired not just superhero franchises but several movie/TV franchises in general to do their own prequel of some sort. Gotham, Pennyworth, The Carrie Diaries. There are even shows like Smallville that were prequels that took place in the modern day like Bates Motel and Taken.
Edit: shout out to Monsters University, one of my favorite Pixar movies and one of the best movie prequels. And to the whole franchise on its' 10th anniversary! Can't wait for Monsters@Work season 2!
Smallville is like Buffy with Clark Kent as the main character and meteor freaks instead of monsters. Not saying that is a bad thing, I like both shows. But I always felt Smallville was heavily inspired by Buffy. It takes it's own direction though, especially in later seasons with less monster of the week and more overarching plots connecting to the greater DC lore.
It's a shame that Rowling couldn't curb the ego enough to just be a consultant or story writer while letting a more experienced screenwriter lead... it would have led to a better on screen outcome while still being seeped in lore.
steeped*
She's just not a good writer to begin with. Tons of HP stuff is lifted from older, better fantasy work. And it's quite obvious to me that she had no intention of tying it all together until book 4 or even book 5. Book 7 feels so obviously like a "wait this should've all been connected from the start" rather than "I knew what I was doing this whole time."
@@Richard_Nickerson Everything you just said is wrong. Jk Rowling is a very good writer who created the most successful book series of all time and got a lot of prizes for her work. Also the fact that she just copies from others shows me that you have not an idea of what you are saying. No book is 100% original, not a single book, even classics like lord of the rings are heavily influenced by older literature and folklore. That's basically what every author does including JK Rowling. You said she had no idea how her series would end? She actually revealed one of her biggest plot points from the last book in the philosophers stone so another wrong statement of yours.
I understand the need for sponsorships but I just wish u would save them for the beginning or end 😥
Yeah I feel the same on that.😅😓
Or at least said at the start of the video that it was sponsored by Keeps, so we'd at least be expecting it in the video, rather than it just coming out of nowhere. Then once the ad read comes in, say "and now a quick shoutout to today's sponsor, ___" or something along the lines of that. The way the advert was edited into this video didn't really feel Nerdstalgic at all, compared to other ad placements that have been in other videos. I don't know if that's due to the different host/narrator, or the editing.
One thing I hear come up a lot when discussing prequels I the idea that "nothing interesting can really happen because we know how the story ends". I have a hard time meshing with that idea since a lot of well received shows use flashback episodes which have a lot of impact of how we see the characters and comics have countless retconned in backstories that come out years later (if they're popular enough, multiple times for a single character over a few years) and we eat that stuff up.
The "knowing the ending" thing seems to effect movies way more than any other medium I've experienced. And even then (for myself) not much more. I've seen the endings to plenty of movies before watching them from the beginning and I was along for the ride the whole time. Since it's Hollywood, I can predict most of them from the opening scene (Hell, I predicted every episode of Arrow season 1 from the pilot and was only tong about which character would guest star in a late season episode).
Does anyone else feel that the importance of not knowing the ending is overblown? I'm genuinely curious.
Just sending some love for X-Men First Class, Bumblebee, Monsters University, and the Star Wars Prequels
The Many Fantastic Beasts of Newark never had the making of a varsity wizard
Can we just acknowledge that Grindelwald "evil" plan was wanting to use magic to stop World War II?
It's unite both wizarding and muggle worlds with the wizards dominating them, he just used the visions he had about WWII to convince the wizards that the muggles should indeed be dominated.
How can you missed a so obvious thing?, I ask...
@@RodrickMarsMoon how can you be so stupid so miss the obvious half assed writing that was used on both of your arguments, using ww2 at all could be used to justify the means because you'd have to be a pretty shitty person to not want to stop Hitler just saying
If anything, Grindelwald's past makes Voldemort look like an even less ambitious & calculating villain ONLY obsessed with immortality, with the whole wizard supremacy of it all existing as just an inflated superiority complex he could use as a way just to rally up some loyal lackeys from even beyond the grave
If Voldemort was truly as cunning as he really thought he was, he'd've borrowed a page out of Grindelwald's book, & convince not only House Slytherin that wizards deserved to share the whole world with muggles & rule them to prevent anymore world wars but other wizards that that was a better reality to just remaining content sequestered in a magical Halloweentown-esque reality of sorts--ESP if he'd used a false flag magical attack on the humans or vice versa, had every Slytherin out on a girls trip & dropped a literal muggle BOMB on Hogwarts to force his race war into reality, w/all the wizards more likely to side with him to prevent their extinction at the hands guns & nuclear bombs of the magically inferior but technologically superior human race.
@@vollied4865 Aaand you just proved my other argument: FB haters have no arguments beyond "I hate this 'just because' and I'll just offend anyone who doesn't hate it too!!!"
Did you miss the part of the plan that involved wizards overthrowing the Muggle world? Stopping the Nazis by becoming the Nazis tends to be seen as a bad thing.
Hey, what the hell? The first FBaWtFT was probably the best HP movie of all. Also, at least two of the X-Men prequels were amazing.
I love monsters. I've always loved monsters from day one.The first movie in the franchise was lots of fun and at its best when Newt and his friends were the focus. The incessant need to add other elements to connect back to the main line films was messy, contrived and distracting from a wonderful story that was right there. Newt is my favorite Harry Potter character, I wanted to see what creature he would discover next. Give me more NEWT and his bag of magical beasties.
Agree they should've gave Newt justice
we just wanted a series about the marauders, man..
The reason The Godfather part 2 works so well is that Vito's story was in the original novel by Mario Puzo, so Vito's rise was already established before the first film that Coppola could cherry-pick. Puzo was already working on the sequel before The Godfather even premiered so most of what was written was Michael's story and how it reflected Vito's.
I watched Fantastic Beasts and thought the scene where Grindelwald "revealed" a heritage to Credence, was simply an evil manipulative lie.
I think the thing about your videos I love the most is your hair loss ads that yank you right out of your comfortable seat. Great stuff
Oof, it hurt that you included clips of The Hobbit when bashing prequals. Yeah, they did that series dirty in the movies, but it was at least an established prequal book before hand and not made up by Hollywood to follow LotR
It’s up in the air whether Bumblebee is a reboot or not, most G1 fans such as myself consider it a reboot for now so it isn’t really a prequel
100% not a prequel to the Bayformer abominations.
Love the video as always, but my only little nitpick was calling "Bumblebee" a prequel even though it seems like it's heavily implied to be a soft reboot due to how it ignores a majority of the Michael Bay's movies. Plus even if it was a reboot, putting it on the same level as "Minions" is pretty harsh considering how good Bumblebee was.
I had so much faith after the first Fantastic Beasts movie focused so heavily on Newt and his animal compatriots. I liked the dynamic of him and Kowalski. I liked the legilimens aspect of Queenie. I liked the silly romance between the two leads. I even enjoyed the surprise-Johnny-Depp. I really thought they could do something interesting and new in the wizarding world. But we all know what happened next.
*shudder*
We did know that everyone was going to die prior to Rogue One's release. That was already a canon fact. To move into Crimes of Grindlewald and Fantasic Beasts, the problem with these movies, in my opinion, is that they're not an expansion on the wizarding world. Instead its part of the mystery about Grindlewald and Dumbledore and how exactly Dumbledore won against the former.
Imaging we instead were to go on an adventure with Newt to see a new beast thought to be extinct or too mythological even for the wizarding world. That's what these movies should have been about, but instead Rowling thought it was better to tack on a false name to tell a different story.
We didn’t know the main cast all died beforehand, just that their fates were up in the air due to not appearing in any other media. You may be confusing the line from Return of the Jedi about Bothan spies.
I am so glad that this video has been made
I loved many aspects of the first Beasts film, mainly the main cast and the creature designs. Everything else was meh though, and there were many problems. I didn't even bother seeing the 2nd film after I heard how bad it was. I don't wanna see anymore of JK's film after she came out as a terf anyways. It's a huge shame because I love Newt and Jacob, their characters and how the actors portrayed them.
I'm a big fan of the concept of wizards and witches living amongst normal humans like in shows and movies like Bewitched, Sabrina, Bell Book and Candle, Bedknobs and Broomsticks! I would have loved to have seen more stuff like that!
Hey I usually don't comment but because of the burnout situation lately around youtubers, I just want to thank you and this channel for bringing us so much quality content. The dedication and work shown on this channel is definitely noticed by us fans, and we genuinely, deeply enjoy the content here. Excited for the next video. :)
was so happy to see saul peek out right as you were mentioning the good prequals.
A discussion of good prequels should include a mention of Better Call Saul.
In fairness to JK, the HP setting/lore/mythos changed to suit the needs of the latest book. We let her get away with it for 7 books/8 movies, so why would she expect people to suddenly become pedantic
I genuinely enjoyed this series more, I wasn’t a Harry Potter fan of the books or movies when they first released but when fantastic beasts and where to find them came out I was so interested to know more about this world! It definitely got me hooked and now I am a fan of Harry Potter because I know a bit more about the background of it all. I do agree it’s being “juiced” but if you’re curious and a bit more open, maybe you’ll learn to like it ..? Though thanks for the videos! Love watching them (:
I hate the blood pact, I much preferred the idea that his lack of action against Grindelwald was due to Dumbledore's complicated feelings for his old love, this was so much more in keeping in with Dumbledore's character because he was ultimately a very complicated man, but no, there had to be a twist, there had to be a specific reason why Dumbledore couldn't go after him, so fucking stupid
wait, you didn't know the characters in Rogue One were all gonna die? they were never mentioned in the prequels or original trilogy. i knew it was gonna be two hours of waiting for them to die. you're right, it is the best Disney era Star Wars, K-2SO's death hit me more than the humans
I hated these films so much. The first I can just about tolerate but the second one, absolutely dreadful. It felt like I was watching a daytime soap opera with how dumb and random the twists and logic were
It's because the script of these movies were written as If they were books. J. K. Rowling was the one who did it . It's why there are so much exposition and set ups, but no pay offs
Warner Bros already confirmed that the new Part in the series will discuess the role of the Wizarding world in WW II - aka why the wizards let the Holocaust Happen. I think we can all agree that neither is J. K. Rowling the kind of author that should touch such heavy themes nor that they should be discuessed in a setting like the Wizarding World. So yeah I have pretty high hopes that Crimes of Grindelwald will be remembered as one of the better fantastic beasts movies.
@Roberto Vidal Garcia Not only that, but the original books already served as an allegory to events like the Holocaust. With Tom Riddles obsession of removing the "impure" from the Wizarding world. Despite the fact that he himself is one of those "impure" wizards for being half-blooded.
So having a new story set directly in WW2 is redundant.
@Roberto Vidal Garcia the harry potter books have always covered mature themes like that. And besides that they never said something like you will learn why wizards didn't stop the holocaust or something. The same way the potter books grew with the readers, fantastic beasts does too, soo the films logically get more mature.
Rogue One was a great example of a prequel.
The approach of the cost of the Greek tragedy seems to be the safest way to write a prequel. It's not about whether they'll win or lose, but how much they lost in the way.
MPB is caused by having too much testosterone, so going bald actually means you're more manly than guys with full heads of hair.
Embrace the baldness, just don't be a George Costanza. I used to worry about the thinning I'm going through, but now there's also a lot of sporadic graying, so I've decided I'm just going to start shaving my whole head when the hair gets too thin.
That is a myth actually. It has all to do with genetic disposition.
@@zmudilago
No, it's based on science
I think this movie could have been a good serie on some streaming platform. They could have made a serie about Newt and his friends going around the world, maybe seeing, together with the magic creatures, the schools. Also, there could be some episodes where the Grindelwald plot is covered.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them should've just been a Pokemon-esque story where we follow Newt on his travels collecting a bunch of peculiar magical creatures so he can write a book on them. He meets many friends who help him on this journey, wanting to protect the magical wildlife, and many foes who only seek to ruin Newt's progress. Newt is such a sweet empathetic nerd and his interactions with the magical creatures are the best part of the movies. Just let him live out his best Magical Animal Crossing life, dammit
The Planet of the Apes prequels are amazing and I'm glad to see them referenced. Rogue One, Monsters University and X-Men First Class are all strong installments even though none are the best in their series.
tbh when i read HP then watched the movies. i always felt if 'Fantastic beast and where to find them' really existed as a book, it will be an awsome book. even better than the HP book series. It will be a book about exploration, adventure, and all other beautiful things. we all might have watched documentaries about the ocean, we see how amazing some creatures from the ocean can be: unique, queer, beautiful, extremely large, small etc. i honestly thought or rather hoped magical creatures might even up this scale.
But i was extremely Disappointed. There was not enough beasts, nor where there sufficient habitats for the beasts. instead of a movie showing the uniqueness of beasts that are FANTASTIC. they tried to make the People Fantastic. so my Fantasy was crumbled.
I still am a big fan of the first Fantastic Beasts film. I just kinda watch it as a standalone movie at present. I hope they manage to get back on course with more beasts and more Newt and supporting characters going forward.
Stay well out there everybody, and God bless you friends. :)
i'm still not sure what the worst part of the crimes of grindlewald was, between Nagini being a person, Queenie turning evil, or everything having to do with Johhny Depp
I couldn’t agree more. Rowling is adding way too much.
If she wanted to tell Newt’s life story without having him incorporated in Dumbledore’s story, with most of the events in the first FB that still goes on, going to New York, wanting to take Frank to Arizona, meeting Jacob, Tina, and Queenie, getting his book published, that would be fine.
But don’t shoehorn him into what we know these movies are leading up to: the duel between Dumbledore and Grindelwald.
Crimes of Grindelwald was just so problematic.
@@endgame7856 yeah exactly. i actually liked Newt as a character, Eddie did a good job, and i liked Queenie and Jacob was ok, in the first one anyway, it was all the stuff having to do with Grindlewald and Dumbledore and that orphan kid (can't remember his name he's so forgettable lol) that really ruined it
@@professorbaxtercarelessdre1075 Yeah, I honestly really don’t care about Credence, tbh. I just don’t. His role in the later movies had better be a good one instead of being Dumbledore’s other brother? *sigh* I have a feeling there’s going to be so much more retconning.
@@endgame7856 yeah Credence is pointless as a character, kinda boring even, and i don't have high hopes for that series, much more interested in Hogwarts: Legacy, espeically since J.K. Rowling isn't involved
The best thing about the whole thing was Colin Farell. Tragic, yes. I normally don't like him, but here he was the only one whose perfomance could be called "acting".
Why don't you like him?
Thank you for breaking this down and looking into prequels for us! Another banger by Nerdstalgic!!
Paid shill
@@senditcars you guys are getting paid?
Personally, I believe prequel movies that have no connection to each other would have worked better here. Like a prequel movie featuring the Marauders, maybe another one with a young Tom Riddle, etc. I just don't think Newt is a strong enough character to carry more than a movie.
About the reveal,
1)Grindewald could be lying
2)Grindewald never said that Credence was Albus' brother. He implied this to Credence by showing Albus' image when he was talking about Credence's brother, but he never said "this is your brother". And we don't know anything about Albus' parents apart for the fact they had 3 kids, for all we know they could have siblings themselves and those siblings had kids, so Credence could be a cousin, or even a more removed cousin.
only thing I can think of is that the weird way that death eaters move in the original movies (wraith-like clouds) has no explanation or similarities to anything other than the way some of the "hidden suppressed power" stuff looked so maybe they are trying to do something nagini(/SOLO)-esque and take time to belabor the mundane to pretend it was planned all along
The funny thing is the fantastic beasts films had wonderful spell creation and imagery that we should have gotten in the main series like dumbledor vs Voldemort instead of pew pew laser guns everywhere
Wait, is this video actually trying to argue that X-Men: First Class was bad? That's incorrect on so many levels.
I think what was so jarring was the tonal shift between films. The first Fantastic Beasts movie is one of my favorite Harry Potter related movies because it felt unique, it worked as a standalone story (although towards the end it certainly implied it was setting things up for future films) and it introduced new and intriguing lore. The second one aimed to be much more like the old Harry Potter movies with Grindlewald as a stand in for Voldemort, threw in countless sloppy ploy twists, and added lore that directly contradicted existing Harry Potter lore. It just felt like the second movie would rather play things safe and stick to the classic story beats, but in doing so hurt its own immersion by contradicting the books with pointless connections for the sake of relevance. I have hope that later movies will turn things around and explain some of those missteps in a way that makes sense, but I'm going to be cautious in my optimism.
I got half way through the first fantastic beasts movie and I gave up when Eddy was dancing with the rhino thing. Not many films make me give up halfway through, but it was so souless garbage. Haven't seen the next one and I have no interest in anymore wizarding movies, it was clear they're just trying to make money by pumping out a bunch of pandering drek.
Just like the rest of the entertainment world these days.
That was the exact scene that made me turn it off too 😂😂
Fantastic Beasts was exactly the movie this franchise intended to be. Crimes was a badly handled forced departure attempting to make over the series into Potter prequels. Both films were good, but the fun and heart that made the first one so good was barely seen in Crimes because JK now wants to shove the Dumbledore/Grindelwald relationship into the mix. if we needed to see any of that on screen, she should've brought it out in the books in the first place. she didn't, so I have no interest in seeing it here distracting from what this series was originally presented to be.
Ehm whatcha talkin bout Willis? Bumblebee is the only live action Transformers movie to date!
That's a pretty great example of taking the wrong lesson from something. Deathly Hallows part 2 is the highest grossing Warner Bros film. What does that mean? A) It's the culmination of an 8 film series and the excitement has built up for years after already doing so with the 7 books these films are based on so people came out over and over to watch our heroes fight an epic battle for survival and enjoy the final film in this franchise as many times as they could before it was gone. Or, was it B) Audiences are telling us they want another 7 movies about characters they don't know or have any investment titled after a fictional textbook most audience goers won't even know exists with a story not based on a popular series of novels we're making up as we go and casting with actors who are already saturating the market that audiences have had enough of who will become problematic just as the story is picking up making it too late to recast with the author writing the scripts for some reason even though that rarely works out and whatever good we get from her name recognition will be destroyed when she announces herself as transphobic and sticks up for one of our actors after they abuse a woman which, in an an unfortunate twist, more than one of them will be accused of and the one who isn't guilty will not be the one you expect. So, is it A or B?
Imagine if Fantastic Beasts were about actual magical beasts
Don't know why there were references to The Hobbit movies.... Because that was already a book, all they had to do was adapt what was already written, much like the LoTR trilogy. But they didn't do that. The path was already laid for them, they didn't have to do anything extra.... However.... They had to put in extra things that didn't even exist, even characters.
Really enjoyed the first Fantastic Beasts film but thought Crimes of Grindewald was absolutely awful
awesome video! don’t know what that minion stuff was about but we’ll done
What makes Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom possibly the greatest prequel ever made is because it's more of a sequel rather then a prequel. It was marketed as a sequel and many fans of the Indiana Jones franchise do not see Temple of Doom as a prequel or simply forgotten it's a prequel. The Last Crusade never references Temple of Doom and neither does Raiders of the Ark although Last Crusade does reference Raiders when Elsa ask Indy what's this symbol and he says Ark of the Covenant. Elsa: you sure? Indy: pretty sure!
I wish they just made it completely seperate. The Fantastic Beasts book has plenty of information about the creatures. I'd prefer a TV show that develops the wizarding world for an adult whos left hogwarts beyond someone whos an auror/order member. Newt is a great character and I enjoy all the others too - would much prefer to see them just going around writing the book. The involvement of Dumbledore/Grindelwald to make it more similar to the HP movies, cash grab and make it more of a blockbuster movie irritates me because I feel like they're re-writing the history of Dumbledore's character to involve the new ones.
Bumblebee had more passion and heart than all of the Transformers movies combined. Calling it and First Class soulless cash-grabs is simply wrong. The Transformers movies were more concerned with dirty jokes and panty shots than actually creating a compelling story, so calling Bumblebee soulless seems very biased. Not to mention that it's actually a reboot.
The problem is these seem to be more about Grindelwald and she seems to try to try and introduce him in similar fashion to Voldemort in terms of late introduction to the actual character. We don't get to see Voldemort in his full glory until very late into the story. But we had so much prior to this to build him up that we didn't need to see him to feel like he was always the villain and would play major part in the true plot of the whole thing. We love Newt, they didn't do him justice 😭😭.
The Harry Potter books and movies presented a whole universe, that you wanted to know more about and explore beyond the main characters and their school. The X-Men series is probably a prime example of how not do a franchise. Also, I have head canon that because of time travel and interference with the past and decisions that get made in the present, the future and it's continuity got changed, I think that applies mostly to Doctor Who or Star Trek, but maybe some other things as well.
I’ve seen Crimes of Grindlewald and I legit couldn’t remember the reveal. Also, still irritated what they did to Queenie.
I kept seeing the Hobbit but like, the Hobbit IS in fact the book that was written first. The movies just bloat that story trying to make it like the Rings. There's a pretty good movie buried in the Hobbit... And it involves just the stuff that was in the book.
All potential for the wizarding world movies ending when Newt started doing a silly "fart sound" dance with a CGI rhino
The worst part about prequels that you know how it's going to end is when you know it will end tragically. You're pretty much waiting for everybody to die
That’s Crisis Core in a nutshell. You know Zack is fated to die but the journey he goes on, the people he meets and knows, make it so much more likely you’ve invested yourself in his story that when it reaches that fateful battle with The Price of Freedom playing, you’re crying.
How is X-Men first Class desperate?
Thanks for this vid