Nearly five years after the last Harry Potter film hit the theaters, I thought they had finally finished off this series for good. But lo and behold, apparently the guys at WB thought that there was still some leftover cash to scrape out of the Potterverse barrel, and so they created another movie based off of a fictional encyclopedia! Riveting! Expecto Patronum!

Directed by David Yates, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (Whew! That is one mouthful of a title.) was a movie that was written and produced by J.K.Rowling herself, so that was an immediate contrast to any of the book-based films of the past. Starring Eddie Redmayne, Katherine Waterston, Dan Fogler, and Alison Sudol, the film has released on November 18, 2016 in North America, and has drawn pretty good reception upon debut.

Okay, maybe not as well-received as another magical movie released also in November, but still, the initial reactions and trailers did leave me quite excited for the film. I admit to being a big fan of the Harry Potter franchise, but this one got me hyped for another reason; it was the first Harry Potter verse movie without Harry Potter. That opened up a lot of potentials, and I couldn’t help but raise my expectations again. Thankfully this time, those expectations were solidly met. And regardless of what I said in the beginning, this is a movie that is ultimately satisfying to me as a Harry Potter fan and just a moviegoer in general.

The premise itself speaks volumes about this movie. Don’t get me wrong, the last eight movies were great to watch, but Fantastic Beasts is the first HP movie that isn’t bogged down by school drama or prophecies about the chosen one. Yes, Hogwarts was very interesting and all that (and admittedly broke my heart on my eleventh birthday; don’t laugh – I know you’ve all been disappointed that you didn’t get a letter at some point!), but this film explores what the book or the movies have never deeply explored; the magical society itself, and how it’s run. Setting the stage beyond the old castle or camping forests was a wise choice, and having no talk of destiny or chosen one drama was also a nice thing.

So there’s that already, but how does the actual film hold up? To put it simply, remarkably well, but let’s settle down and dissect this thing piece by piece. You won’t find Daniel Radcliff in this one, but the film doesn’t need it when it’s got the strong backing of Eddie Redmayne, thankfully having gotten past the Jupiter Ascending phase of his career. (The Wachowskis can ruin any premise or talent, my god) He’s not exactly the most charming or charismatic person to convince you to put in charge of dozens of fantastic beasts, but he shows that beneath his rather awkward exterior, he has a true passion for his job and real experience on that department. He just makes the film a whole lot more enjoyable, seeing him give off random details of beasts that only a true talent could give.

Other wizards and witches bring their own charm into the mix. The Goldstein sisters, Tina and Queenie, are good stuff, with one being a more strict, work-driven type while the other one is an almost-eccentric, free-spirited witch. Both of them have their own interactions with the cast, and I did like seeing them meet Newt and gradually warm up to him in their own ways. Ezra Miller (The Flash? Dammit, I knew he sounded familiar!) gives off a haunting performance as Credence Barebones, showing a boy who is looked down upon, beaten, and filled with anger and hurt. When he is angry, I could understand why he was so angry, despite the lesser screen tiem devoted to this guy, and he serves as a perfect way to showcase the long-standing Harry Potter theme of prejudice and oppression. As for Colin Farrell…similar to Redmayne, he’s gotten past the Bullseye part of his life. He is the closest we can get to a bad guy in this film, but even so, he does that with a quiet charisma and a rather compelling motive behind it that leaves me wanting more of this character. Oh well, perhaps in a sequel…just not as Farrell…

But the best character out of all of them is surprisingly not even magic at all. Jacob Kowalski…man, I don’t care you don’t even have a wand and can’t go expelliarmus on Grindelwald, no one’s quite the scene stealer as you. He’s a great comic relief to start off with, but more than that, he has his own story arc that is simple, but rather relatable. In fact, I felt like I was watching this movie from his perspective; as a no-maj. (Muggle, whatever.) This is his first time seeing all these magical things, and I somehow found myself also becoming awed at what he gaped at. Seeing him build a friendship with the rest of the cast was quite sweet to watch, and when the time came that he had to get his memory wiped, that was genuinely touching. He has experienced all these wonderous things and made good friends, but can’t even remember them anymore. He’s also the guy that made me wonder if we should have had more muggles involved in these movies that are less Dursley and more Kowalski.

Like Doctor Strange, I got mention the visuals. It seems like November is just putting CGI-haters to shame at this point with how gorgeous-looking these effects are. Each fantastic beast’s design is creative and they all have a quirk that distinguished them from one another. In fact, they are what makes the film’s action so charming. Like the niffler. Especially the niffler. God, I love that shiny-things-hiding little adorable furball, everybody did. Other beasts are also fun to watch, as we see their interactions with the city and Newt. It almost makes me feel like I’m watching a wizarding world creature documentary, only normal documentaries are never this fun. It also leads to some very humorous action scenes, and combined with Jacob and Newt, this is a whole lot of fantastic beasts and people in the casts overall.

In fact, I wish these beasts got the full attention of the filmmakers, which unfortunately, they did not. And yes, like Doctor Strange, the film’s biggest issue would be its plot, though not quite for the same reasons. Seeing this film’s story is like watching an obscurus. Highly unstable, with two things that shouldn’t be mixed trying to go together, which leads to disasters sometimes. While not quite so sinister or atrocious, Fantastic Beasts does have a serious issue with the consistency of its tone and its material.

It’s as if I’m constantly alternating between two entirely different movies; one a fairly spirited adventure in New York involving magical creatures, and another a dark character drama about an oppressed individual and wizarding politics. Sure, both stories work well on their own; each have a good sense of escalation, humor, drama, and climax. But they never come together into a single coherent film. One moment, Newt and Jacob are struggling to deal with nifflers and aroused Erumpants (Yes, you heard that right), and just ten minutes after, Newt and Tina are scheduled for execution. The film feels like it is suffering from split personality disorder, and sometimes it get real ugly to watch, even more so than an obscurus ripping up the New York underground.

Personally, I think it’s mainly because they were aiming to start another series. Sure, they weren’t too blatant with the fact that there are going to be four sequels to this film, but the plot about Credence and Graves seem like they were pushed in simply because they had to give some indication that they were aiming towards that one duel between Dumbledore and Grindelwald…all the way in the fifth movie. Uh, yeah. That’s my biggest problem with so many of the film series out there that were made just to be a series; even the MCU, which I wholeheartedly love, aren’t exempt from this, as every movie nowadays has to have some sort of event or plot thread leading up to Infinity War.

And Fantastic Beasts is no exception from this problem. Why did we get that plot thread about Grindelwald? Couldn’t this film have just been solely about the fantastic beasts and where to find them? With the creatures getting loose and with the threat of the magical society being exposed instead of the dark wizarding politics? Wouldn’t that have kept the movie’s tone more consistent, and made me invested in the story more?

Because it tries to tell its own story but be a prelude to the rise of Grindelwald at the same time, what we get in the end is a rather unfocused narrative. Which is a real shame because separately, those narratives are done well; I like the story about Newt and his endeavor with the fantastic beasts, and I also like the insight into the oppressed and shunned sides of the wizard society. But if you have two perfectly good story ideas already, don’t try and forcibly mishmash them, or if you’re gonna do it, then do it so that the story’s tone is consistent, and don’t abruptly alternate between dark/moody and spirited.

Again, I’d like to state that this movie is far from bad. Oh no, it’s definitely another charming edition to the HP verse with a cast of likeable characters, stunning visuals, and plotlines that ultimately work out somewhat. But the issues about trying to make a balanced storyline, as well as the problem of it being the first of yet another series, bog what otherwise would have been an excellent film for me. I would definitely want to watch it again should I have the chance, and this does its job in getting me excited for what other films have in store for us, and how they are going to explore the wizarding world; but I do hope that they arrive with a more focused narrative than this one.

Final Verdict: 4/5

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them combines a captivating magical creature adventure and an insightful drama about the wizard society into an inconsistent but enjoyable mixture.