Les Animaux fantastiques

Un film adorable avec des personnages adorables à la tête desquels s’illustre un Eddie Redmayne incroyablement bon et sympathique. J’ai Malgré tout un reproche à faire et non des moindres : la ligne narrative de base est trop simple, limite faiblarde, et manque de pêche. Aussi j’espère, peut-être un peu naïvement, que Johnny Depp améliorera les choses dans le deuxième volet. Il n’empêche que j’ai passé un bon moment ! (30/06/2019)

For me, this film perfectly fits the term "producer's film." There’s craft certainty, but also inner nihilism. The logical nonsense (why doesn't Scamander use his wand right away in the hunt and instead lets everything go to the extremes?) hidden under Yates' confident direction will lull you into a sense that everything is fine. When you want to recapitulate the plot after the end, you can’t. (21/11/2016)

If you expect to go see something that will expand the universe you’ve identified with your entire childhood and that you still swear by to this day, you tread lightly – even on the cinema carpet itself. You have no clue just how enchanted you’ll be in the upcoming minutes. You do not make a sound and suspect that it all ends well. But suspicion isn’t automatically a win. Sometimes it all goes bad and it can be a real mess-up. But not in Newt Scamander’s case, who has originally introduced himself to me with zero emotions and via a book that I’d gotten as a Christmas gift that winter, that I haven’t touched since and that’s been collecting dust somewhere. But film studios are a superpower and money needs to come from somewhere. And when one brand is squeezed dry, another one must replace it and so Newt came to the stage, starting with movie number one and ending with god-knows-what number, all according to the earnings and creative possibilities, of course. But personally, I gotta say that Newt and the other characters have all left a mark on me. During the movie, I realized that once again, I was in the world of witchcraft and wizardry, just a few years earlier than before, which isn’t bad at all. I was also happy to watch Katherine Waterston and Alison Sudol, both of whom I hadn’t even known before. The muggle Dan Fogler also didn’t disappoint me and so didn’t Johnny Depp at the very end. I feel like I know the direction it’s all going to go and honestly, I’m glad Johnny Depp will be a part of it. It’s almost as if my childhood was coming back… And with these kinds of movies, that’s never a bad feeling. (28/11/2016)

In general, I appreciate the excessive patience of Potter fans who wait until you know who turns into you know who, but I don't suffer from such a lack of imagination that I can't imagine thousands of better ways to waste 134 minutes of my life. Yes, the film is as long and self-serving as the previous sentence. And it has a nice soundtrack. Your Universal Platypus. (16/11/2016)

Nice surprise. The collaboration between David Yates and J.K. Rowling turned out great again. The film has only details in common with Harry Potter (the opening soundtrack, the orcs, the newspaper with the video, the names of the spells and the magical effect after the clash of wands), but in any case the film has a similar atmosphere of mini references as The Hobbit films. Eddie Redmayne is really a class act, at first I found his speech strange, yet he shows that he has his acting qualities, the two cute little sisters and the hilarious Dan Fogler were also great. I liked the whole concept of catching monsters in a trunk throughout New York, I wonder if there will be a different city in the next installment. The creatures are filmed brilliantly and are something to watch. Colin Farrell as the bad guy is also decent. Story 8/10, Atmosphere 9/10, Gore 0/10, Visuals 9/10, Action 8/10, Suspense 7/10, Humor 6/10. Entertainment 8/10, Scares 0/10. I'm glad to see the start of a decent series again, all the good ones are over. 85%. (19/11/2016)