2018 in Movies [that I saw]

At the start of this, I was thinking... I'll be lucky if I even saw 10 movies this year because we did not see that many.

I went through all of my blog posts this year and through the Word doc where I'm actually tracking all the movies I see... yeah, I'm kinda nuts... 

Ultimately, I saw 28 movies this year... 8 of them involved going out to a theater to see them... 
I don't know if this is just me being lazy (since we no longer have a movie theater down the block from the house) or lack of interest in movies in general... but it's pretty sad. Makes me wonder sometimes why I'm still maintaining this blog. But I try to add to it whenever applicable. 

So theater movies first... I guess I can do them backwards from 8 to 1 about which I liked least to the ones I loved most. Mind you, I don't remember what I scored every movie and this isn't about the BEST movie of the year from a technical standpoint. If this were figure skating, I'd be dealing more from the artistic/emotional components score.

8. Fantastic Beasts- The Crimes of Grindewald 

I'm still hurting over this one... I'd never been disappointed by any Harry Potter movie. Even with the Order of the Phoenix, where they cut A LOT out from the book, they had at least had an entertaining, cohesive movie that had a point. Heck, all of the Harry Potter series, each movie could stand alone and they were fine as is. Same with the books. But it felt like with Grindewald, they really dropped the ball by dropping a lot of hints about what's coming, but it left you with even more questions than it answered. 
Like I said in the actual review, every other time there's been a movie in the middle of a series, it had its own storyline that could stand alone from the others in the series. There were cliffhangers, yes, but the movie is solid otherwise. 
Whether I think this movie was worse than Mockingjay part 1... that's a tough call... because I really didn't like Mockingjay as a book. I didn't like having to sit through two separate sessions to see it on the big screen. And there wasn't much to part 1- Katniss makes propaganda videos, we learn about the people in District 13 and they rescue Peeta and Johanna from the Capitol... I'd call it a virtual tie. 

7. Solo- A Star Wars Story

I'm not going to be one of those people who hates on this movie so much that I don't think they should make any more Star Wars side projects... although I do agree since Skywalker Ranch reopened (it's a metaphor, not actually talking about the actual place) the market has become quickly oversaturated with Star Wars stuff. But I guess that's what happens when Disney's behind it... they've done the same thing with Marvel, ironically, over the last decade. Ever since the original Iron-Man. But with Star Wars, it was almost like that they did it in half the time.
Anyway, I thought the movie was brilliantly cast and well acted. And it had a good story. But somewhere along the line, it lost all of us. Without giving too much away, the last half hour is full of betrayal, lack of honor among thieves and you don't know who is whom. It was like they got 3/4 through the movie and realized they didn't know how to end it. And crucial details like how Han got the Millennium Falcon or did the Kessel run in fewer than 20 parsecs, the stuff of Star Ware lore, they were just thrown into the script haphazardly and I don't think a lot of fanboys appreciated it. 

6. Fifty Shades Freed

My feelings about this series will forever be complicated. The movies definitely have more revisitability (if that's not a word, it should be- just saying...) than the books because they trim a lot of the fat and things got much more cohesive. 
I'll admit, I was tempted to rank this one a little higher, but I just couldn't justify it. With "Fifty Shades Darker," it was a lot easier because I enjoyed that movie a lot more than the first one. And by enjoyed, I don't mean in that way, although the sex scenes were easier to watch because they weren't as graphic or belligerent (no joke- I'd never used this word before, but it came to mind randomly and I googled it to make sure I a) spelled it right and b) used it correctly... I don't have to look up spelling that often, but that's a fun phenomenon when it comes up, using random words I hadn't before). 
Anyway, over the last two movies in the series, it felt like the movies settled into a good pocket. Where they kinda know the writing's bad, but they make due with it and don't take themselves too seriously. I will say that "Freed" had one of the better story arcs because it involved even more of Anastasia standing up for hers. Heck, the kidnapping plot ripped off from "Twilight" was the most compelling part of the whole series, I think. It took us away from Christian and showed Anastasia being more than just another damsel in distress. But for Christian Grey, it wasn't his finest hour. I'm not still sure if I like him less in this movie or the first one... 

5. Christopher Robin

This movie was in the middle of the pack for me... it's not terrible, but it's not exceptional. It did a lot of things right, but other things could have been done better. Casting Ewan McGregor was a great move just because I don't feel like I see him often enough. And also great to see Hayley Atwell step away from Agent Carter and do a different role. It had a lot of the same heart that the A.A. Milne stories and the corresponding Disney cartoons had. Not all of the characterizations were perfect (but it was also hard to do some characters justice because their voice actors had since passed away) and there were parts of it that were a bit depressing. But it's important to note that it got things right where they mattered most. 
Also- I didn't know much my sister enjoyed the movie, even though it was her idea to see it (and I was right behind cuz I loved the trailers and the idea of it)... she didn't seem as enthused coming out of it at the end. But the fact she asked for the movie for Christmas says that it did its job ;) 

...and this is where the rankings get a little trickier...

4. Avengers: Infinity War

This was the easiest to rank next... just because of that ending... WHAT A DOWNER... a lot of us are still not quite over it. (Again, I'll say as much as I am ready for RDJ to hang up the suit, I didn't want to see him go out like that and I would have been upset if he had).
It was really cool to have the All-Stars, all of these characters across the galaxy coming together. It was kinda like the original Avengers, but 10x greater of a nerdgasm... although maybe not quite as satisfying because there were so many characters. 
I think I need to see this one a couple more times just to take everything in. But Sherlock meeting Sherlock was still the best part, I think... RDJ and Benedict Cumberbatch. Also the tension between Star-Lord and Thor, it (i.e. Chris Pratt) was kinda stupid, but it was pretty hilarious. 

...now it's getting harder... but when all else fails, you gotta go with your favorites... and #1 will certainly be that. It should be noted, though, that none of these movies are 100% perfect, but they were extremely enjoyable and their vision was achieved very well. 

3. Mary Poppins Returns

It would have been so easy to put this at #1 just because it was the most recent of the movies. 
This movie has some amazing effects and visuals. The characters were lovable and memorable. It was very entertaining. The one catch that might separate it from the other two is that the songs probably won't stand the test of time. Or at least they won't be songs I'll be singing along to years from now like it's second nature. Aside from the lead role, the one thing that will always stand out more about the original Mary Poppins is the songs. I don't know all the words to any of them, but if you asked me to do a few bars, I'd be able to. And I hadn't seen that movie more than maybe 5 times in its entirety in my whole life. 

2. The Nutcracker and the Four Realms

If this movie and Mary Poppins get into fisticuffs over Oscars for Best Art Direction and Visual Effects, I hope Nutcracker sweeps because I thought those visuals were exceptional. It'd been some thing since I'd marveled (haha) at the visual effects of a movie. You see enough sci-fi/super hero movies and they start to become less impressive over time because you get used to this. This was a cinematic experience that I felt needed to be seen on a big screen so you can truly appreciate every nuance. 
The story itself, as far back as it goes, is ulimately about escaping into a fantasy and being enchanted by it from start to finish. This version also had some added heart at its core. That it's ultimately about the importance of family. Mary Poppins had a lot of that too, which is why both movies were so close. 
Adding to the Oscar discussion, the Nutcracker needs to win for Best Makeup. For Costume Design, the nomination would be nice, but i don't know for sure if it'll win. 

It'd be funny the joke was ultimately on me and that Steve Carell "Marwen" movie sweeps the artistic awards :P my dad read an article saying it was the worst Steve Carell movie ever because it didn't earn back even a 10th of the money that went into making it. But I think it has a really good story and a cool concept. Plus, it's inspired by a true story. What's not to like? (Of course I'm talking about a movie I haven't even seen yet... but I love the quirky look of it)

1. A Star is Born

Anyone who knows me certainly wouldn't be surprised by this :P 
The one thing about this movie that's a drawback is the length. It felt after a while it was starting to overstay its welcome. Which makes it a little harder to rewatch multiple times. But there's definitely room to revisit. I just got the soundtrack for Christmas and I'll have to give that a listen soon. I didn't even realize until looking at the back how many songs it had. 

The funny thing about this list... I'm looking at it now... there weren't a lot of movies I saw this year that had a lot of big names. If they were lucky, they had one or two. 
Fantastic Beasts had Johnny Depp and he was the bad guy.
Christopher Robin had Ewan McGregor
Mary Poppins had Emily Blunt and Lin-Manuel Miranda
The Nutcracker had Keira Knightly, Morgan Freeman and Helen Mirren and they were secondary characters, not the protagonist.
Avengers was the only other one on the list that had a lot of star power to it.

Which ultimately (gotta stop using that word, lol) means that what's bringing me the movies now isn't the stars, but the story... or whether or not it was part of a franchise we'd already invested a lot of time and money in. 
I just thought it was an interesting observation.

Anyway... what more can I say about "A Star is Born" that I hadn't? 
Bradley Cooper should win an Oscar for Best Director, but maybe not Best Actor... although it was another of those great roles where he just disappeared- he does that so well, it's crazy. 
Gaga NEEDS to win an Oscar for this... cuz I don't think that opportunity is going to come again. I'm still a little livid that her song for the "Hunting Ground" documentary lost to a Bond theme. Sam Smith's vocal on it is chill-inducing, but there have been better Bond themes. "Goldfinger" set the standard, but in recent history, I still think "Skyfall" is the best and probably won't be topped anytime soon. I'm not the biggest Adele fan (the radio plays her songs WAY too much), but that's an amazing song and she does it spectacularly.
The music is really good, lots of great songs and the on-screen chemistry was magnetic. 
...

Now for some of the other movie highlights for the year... 

Girl Trip
This was so much fun. I think this was the movie that kinda put Tiffany Haddish on the map because she'd been literally everywhere since. Not complaining, she's hilarious. Loved her in this movie. And after hating (well, loving to hate) her as the villain in "Gotham," it was fun seeing Jada Pickett Smith is a different role that goes against her strong personality. 

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
Sure, the ending is a little anticlimatic and disappointing. But it was a fascinating watch. Frances McDormand and Sam Rockwell definitely deserved those Oscars.

The Shape of Water
Definitely not your typical Oscar winning film... I had to see this just because I got curious and it was another fascinating watch. The one ick factor for me was that it was a little too R-rated for my liking. The relationship between the creature and the mute woman is beautiful and could teach us a lot about humanity. But did it have to turn sexual? I didn't really think so... Also it was kinda cool seeing Octavia Spencer in this. She's good in everything she does, but I love her in the side-kick role. Especially when a dry sense of humor is involved. The ending is both predictable and unpredictable, so I won't say much. I will say that I got choked up when the credits started rolling-- dammit, it was a beautiful ending tied up in the prettiest bow. I was literally a wreck for 5 minutes afterwards and I'm getting teary just thinking about it. 

Chef
I'd wanted to see this movie for years because it's another RDJ movie credit... he's only in it for maybe 5 minutes, but whatever... I can at least check it off my list.
I know this movie had been around a few years, but I'm glad to finally have the opportunity. I thought it was a really cool concept. Where a chef wants to make the food he wants to so he quits his restaurant job and buys a food truck. And it becomes a hit via social media. It's about food as much as it is about family. And it was kinda cool to see Sofia Vergara in a different role, a little more grounded, as his ex-wife. 

Love, Simon
I heard about this movie because of its groundbreaking plot- about a gay teen who strikes up a friendship/relationship with someone who came out on a popular social media site. Between this and "Everything, Everything," I'd been seeing a lot of Nick Robinson this year. Funny thing is that I'm not seeking him out, but he's randomly appearing in these movies. I'm not attracted to him or anything (which typically happens with guys I follow from movie to movie) but I don't have anything to dislike about him. Except maybe how he was in the Jurassic World movie where he was the obnoxious older brother. But he did this role really well. And it was written where this wasn't just your typical gay teenager movie... I felt like it could become a classic teen movie that could stand up to John Hughes' heyday. It could certainly compete with Ferris Bueller and Sixteen Candles. Breakfast Club- if you're familiar with my blog, you know my particular affinity for that movie. 

Ready Player One
Another fascinating watch... cuz this one makes you think a bit about social media and virtual reality. I don't know how old the book is or how close it is to the movie (or vice-versa), but I knew from the trailers that this was an experience to be had. Maybe one I should have taken up in the theater. The visuals were so cool and I loved the intriguing plot and how it relates back to our world. 
The only negative is that I felt like it ran a little long. I'm at the point now where I feel like 2 hours is a lot of time to commit to a movie and if it's not a well-spent 2 hours of movie time, I half wonder if I shouldn't be off doing something else. Life is only so short, right? It seems like Steven Speilberg, it's just impossible for him to do any movie that's shorter than 2 hours. Other than the time, it was really cool and I'll have to watch it a couple more times.

Crazy Rich Asians
We just saw this the other week... it lived up to the hype. My mom got it for dad for Christmas because it takes place in Singapore and he'd been there a bunch of times for business. They were watching it and recognizing all of the sites. 
It takes social media to another level and it's the darker side of it. Basically, this young man is dating a guy who's from a rich family and when his fans find out they're together, they trash her all over social media... it's really cutthroat stuff. 
Her friend, played by one of this year's break-out stars, Awkwafina, was a major scene-stealler. I'm just glad that her antics didn't cause any issues between the two lovers.
What I didn't like about the movie was that they drove a wedge between the couple with brand new information the rich family dug out... it just felt very contrived and thrown in just for the sake of more drama. 
But it's definitely an experience worth repeating over and over. A lot of flash and glamor and a lot of great actors in this all-Asian cast. 

Ok, that's it... 

oh, we just watched Spiderman- Homecoming...it's a lot to process, a lot going on. Michael Keaton was a great villain. Still trying to get a handle on this new Spider-Man. I'm still partial to Tobey (in fact, we watched the original Spider-Man a few days ago). There wasn't enough RDJ in this movie for me, but whatever. I think part of me was just watching the clock and how much of the night I'm losing just to one movie...

here's hoping for 2019 to be a better year.

Also, R.I.P.

1) Stan Lee-- heck, I should probably thank him for this blog because Iron-Man gave RDJ a second lease on his acting career and RDJ was the one who got me really into movies, but I know he's meant so much to all the comic fanboys of the world

2) Aretha Franklin- enough said

3)  Avicii- I'm not a fan of "Wake Me Up" (arguably his best known hit) but "Sky Full of Stars" owes its production to him... actually, I looked up the song and Coldplay not only collaborated with him on it, Avicii actually played the keyboards on that song... that is my favorite Coldplay- simply magical

4) Burt Reynolds- definitely one of those Hollywood sex symbols we'll never forget

5) Stephen Hillenburg- he gave us Spongebob... I know the show's gotten really played out over the last several years, but it was a huge phenomenon when it came out. I didn't know until after he passed that he was a marine biologist. Considering that was my major in college, I'm just really impressed with him and I'm sorry I didn't know that sooner

6) Verne Troyer- you will always be our Mini-Me

7) Margot Kidder- forever our Lois Lane

8) John Mahoney- my sister became a huge Frasier fan about five years ago because she liked Eddie, but she also really likes Kelsey Grammar (might be the reason why she'd become a huge Simpsons fan later on too)... anyway, his passing was kinda sad for us cuz he gave a lot of great dry humor moments on Frasier. 

Theatrical Review: Mary Poppins Returns

Date: Saturday, December 22 2018
Location: Cinemark Theater in Stroud Mall
Time: 11am
Party: 3 (my mom, sister and I)

Director: Rob Marshall (of Pirates of the Carribean and Into the Woods fame)
Writers: David Magee, Rob Marshall and John DeLuca (screenplay), P.L. Travers (for Mary Poppins book series)
Composer: Marc Shaiman

Notable Cast:
Mary Poppins- Emily Blunt
Jack the Leery- Lin-Manuel Miranda
Michael Banks- Ben Whishaw (Q in the latest Bond films and the voice of Paddington)
Jane Banks- Emily Mortimer (I know her best as the voice of the heroine in "Howl's Moving Castle)
Ellen- Julie Walters (Mrs. Weasley is back!)
Cousin Topsy- Meryl Streep
Wilkins- Colin Firth

Write-up:

Opening Remarks

This is one of those movies we'd been looking forward to all year and for me at least it was worth the wait. My sister says she really liked it, but she wasn't speaking as enthuastically about it as I did afterwards. And my mom thought it was a little too depressing and dragged in places. 
The theater was mostly empty when we got there and by the time it started, at least a dozen other people showed up. But it wasn't a terribly enthusiastic audience. The two of me (my sister and I) wanted to cheer and clap after a bunch of the musical numbers, but it was so silent in the theater we were only comfortable softly clapping to ourselves. Nobody even cheered at the end and I felt like this movie warranted that. 
Was it as good as the original? No. The original is such a classic and Julie Andrews is so adored in this role that it's hard for anyone to do it that same level of justice. But I thought it was a nice homage to the original film and will help introduce a new generation to it. Hopefully those who hadn't seen the original will do and those who hadn't seen it in years will become more inclined to revisit. I know I will have to... I think the last time I saw it was on TV a couple years ago... they tend to show it this time of year on ABC, which is one of the many apparatuses owned by Disney these days... 

Trailers: 
...and we're back to the stand-by 7 trailers...

Breakthrough- this movie brought me in immediately on the fact the mom is being played by Kate from "This is Us"- it's based on a true story where a teenage boy is playing with his friends and falls through the ice and faith alone is helping to keep him alive. Looks like a bit of a tearjerker (well, obviously) but it looks like it'll be a good movie overall

Detective Pikachu- the first time my sister is seeing the trailer and I'm not even sure what she thinks of it. I know she asked for (and got) the game for Christmas and has watched the walkthrough on YouTube a number of times already. 

A Dog's Way Home- my sister run out of the theater so she didn't have to see the trailer again... we love dogs, but we hate dog movies because they're ALWAYS tearjerkers. And the dog almost always dies at the end.

The Secret Life of Pets 2- I still hadn't seen the first one and it's been on TV a bit over the last week (let's just say we have other plans so we keep missing it). This one is another teaser, this time about the cat trying to wake up its owner and the one thing that does is her hacking up a hairball. Then after the title, she's on the sofa dealing with catnip and talking to the little white dog

Where'd You Go, Bernadette?- I'm not quite sure where this movie is even going, honestly... it's about a mom who suddenly has this urge to do something and just disappears and I guess it's about finding her... I really can't make heads or tails of it.

Dumbo- after a bunch of teasers, I think this is the first proper trailer we've gotten of this movie. I'd seen the original maybe once and it was years ago. And it's a pretty rough movie to get through... I still don't quite like the fact that this movie revolves around the people trying to take care of Dumbo and make him a star to help save the circus, when in the animated version the humans are the bad guys that took away Dumbo's mom because she was hurting people (they started it- stupid kids teasing poor Dumbo)... it looks like in this version Danny Devito is the ringmaster and there is some homage to the pink elephants scene, although I don't know if it'll be a full song and dance number... I remember Nostaglia Critic naming that scene one of his top 11 nostaglic mindf**ks cuz it's one of those things that doesn't make sense when you're a kid and there's usually drugs involved. 

The Lion King- omg, cannot wait for this one... and also can't wait to get more than just a teaser trailer of this cuz it looks like it's gonna be AMAZING. The one thing they've got right for sure is James Earl Jones as Mufasa. Nobody can top that. 

So I made a note on my phone, where I record all these trailers for these posts...there are 7 and I don't write the post for a couple days after... it'll be too easy to forget if I don't write them down... this was 17 minutes of previews... and the movie time is slated for 11... the movie itself should START at 11, not the trailers and millions of commercials... if I wanted to see commercials, I would have stayed home :sigh:

Ok, moving on...

The Main Event

One thing before the movie starts, we get a greeting from Emily Blunt and Lin-Manuel Miranda to thank us for seeing the movie, to enjoy it and have a good holiday. I thought that was kind of a nice touch.
The opening is pretty nice where we see a lot of paintings of scenes from the movie as the overture plays with all the songs to come in the movie. 
It should be noted that all of the songs are brand new, no encores from the first movie, but certainly a bunch of references to the original. 

The bad news first- the movie starts with a bit of a double-whammy... the second generation of Banks children (Michael's children) lost their mom a year ago and now the bank is threatening to repossess their house unless they can play the loan in full. And for the adults, grown-up Jane and Michael (the kids from the original movie), their quest is to find the certificate that their father owned shares in the bank. And the three children, Anabel, John and Georgie want to help as well. But then Mary Poppins shows up and her job is to help them to remember how to be kids... because they'd done so much growing up after their mom passed away.

It's a Disney tradition that we've all gotten pretty sick of at this point... the moms are always dead or die in these movies... seriously, what the hell... but on the other hand, if they were going to do the widower angle, they did play it right. The big issue with the house is that Michael's wife took care of all the finances and he's not sure how to take over. Now, had they gone the other way and said it was Jane's children and her husband had passed away, it'd be more typical... the husband doing the finances and the wife not knowing what to do about them... this kinda paints the deceased Mrs. Banks in a strong female role and it certainly shows how times have changed. 

The songs weren't quite as memorable as "A Spoon Full of Sugar," "Feed the Birds" or "Let's Go Fly a Kite"... but they had that same sense of fun and feel like they come from the same songbook. A number of the scenes do harken back to the original. And of course the characters do as well.
Best place to start is the Leeries- the people in London who light the streetlamps at night and snuff them out in the morning. They fulfill the role the chimney sweeps do in the original movie. Their song about tripping the "Light Fantastic" may not be "Chim-Chim-erie" but it lends itself to the Leeries doing an outrageously fun dance number including bike tricks and parkour. 
Of course a lot of people complained back in the day about how bad a Cockney accent Dick Van Dyke did for Bert the Chimney Sweep and the accent Lin-Manuel Miranda does is sorta in line with that. Then again, I've never been to that part of London so I can't judge what is or isn't a good Cockney accent. (Being a part of "My Fair Lady" in high school certainly doesn't make me an expert.. even if I had been cast as Eliza or even had a line or two). But the man behind "Hamilton" was brilliant in every scene he was in. He made this movie fun and he always lit up the screen when he came on. Of course I know of "Hamilton" but had never seen it and I really hadn't gotten to experience him outside of him writing songs for "Moana"... but the dude is brilliant. 

Emily Blunt may not be Julie Andrews and nobody can really touch her in this role (or any she had done over the years for that matter), but the important thing in the end is that she fulfills the role these kids need in this trying time. I just thought to myself how crazy it is how far she'd come as an actress. I first saw her as Emily in "The Devil Wears Prada" and I'd since seen her in a bunch of other roles. She proved she had a flair for musicals in "Into the Woods" and this is just more of that. 

Another homage to the original, of course, is everyone being transported into an animated world. Instead of a painting on the street, it's the paint job on a priceless vase that the children cracked in a fight. The penguins make a comeback, but they're comic relief more than anything else. Among the musical scenes, they had a Vaudeville performance where Mary Poppins and Jack talk about how "The Cover Is Not the Book"... and it's kind of about not judging a book by its cover.
A message that does wind up coming back into reality... one thing I will say about this movie was how every detail is important and if you pay attention, you can see what's coming before it arrives. That's always a fun touch. 

Meryl Streep is mentioned among the cast... because she's bloody Meryl Streep. Even if she only has five minutes of screen time, she always gets billed on the first page of the cast list. Not to say she isn't great in this movie- her character is fun and memorable. (Not to mention Rob Marshall did the same trick with Johnny Depp in "Into the Woods"- putting on the first page of the cast list even though he doesn't last more than 10 minutes on screen). They take the vase to her to fix because she can fix anything, but she says she cannot because it's the second Wednesday of the month and on that day for 3 hours, the world "turns turtle"... flips upside down. To me, this felt like a homage to that scene in the movie where two men are floating on the ceiling because they're laughing so much. But then they get depresssed and manage to right themselves. They do the reverse here where she realizes that she loves "turning turtle" and it's all about looking from another perspective. 

Not sure how more I can say without giving too much away about the movie... it's definitely worth a watch, though.
I'll also say that another good homage they did to the original... the tuppence Michael wanted to give to the bird lady in the original movie do wind up going to good use... I thought that was particularly important because "Feed the Birds" was a scene Walt Disney himself REALLY wanted to stay in the movie because it was his favorite. 
For me, it was the one scene in Mary Poppins I really didn't like... it was dank and depressing and as a kid, I didn't really understand the point of it. I think because it was one time in the movie where it stopped being a kid friendly movie and became more adult. But as a kid, I also did not watch a lot of live action media whether it was on TV or in movies. I always preferred animation, which is probably why I didn't really like Mary Poppins all that much. But as I've gotten older, I'm gotten to appreciate it a lot more. I also really need to see the rest of "Saving Mr. Banks"... I really liked however much I saw of that movie and I still need to see how it all ends. 

At some point, I'll have to see both movies- Mr. Banks and the original Mary Poppins and write about both of them...

One more thing... it's a trite random comment... the Banks' use a lot of the same names as they did Peter Pan... the Darling children are Wendy, John and Michael. The Banks children are Jane and Michael... and in the sequel, they use the name John as one of the children... were there not a lot of names around back then in London? 
I would understand if Peter Pan (the J.M. Barrie story) predated Mary Poppins by a lot of years, but... I don't know if that commonality annoys me or not... 
Jane was the name of Wendy's daughter in "Return to Neverland" but that came out LONG after any of these movies (or the books they were based from) came from... 

Reading the trivia, Julie Andrews did turn down a cameo (there were some others, I'll say that much) and she also gave her blessing to Emily Blunt to succeed her... that's so great to hear, especially after Angela Lansbury said she didn't approve of them remaking "Beauty & The Beast"... it's not as good as the original, but I liked it a lot. Also Emily Blunt played the character, purposely, much closer to how she appeared in the books, so I thought that was a nice touch.

And also forgot... it was great seeing Julie Walters on screen again, it's been a while... she was so lovable as the Banks' housekeeper.

Grade: A
(not practically perfect... but it came pretty dang close, at least I thought it did... whether or not it's Best Picture material like the original, not quite... I'd rather "A Star is Born" sweep all the awards)

25 Lessons You Learn from "That 70's Show" Christmas

I'd been wanting to do this for a while and now that I have my list, I'm ready to go. I'll also try to fill in some space with photos from the different episodes. Because everything's more fun with pictures, am I right?

There are five Christmas shows from this series and I tried to get the same number from each episode. It just didn't happen... but I did the best I could. In the end, this was all for fun anyway. This is something like what they do on Buzzfeed with a bunch of GIFs to illustrate each item... 

Ok, here we go:

From the first Christmas- episode title The Best Christmas Ever

1) Don't give your teenager money to buy a Christmas tree-- especially if they're planning on having a Christmas party.

2) Never underestimate the power of hot rollers 

3) Some other tips on getting your girlfriend a Christmas gift when you don't know what to get her: pay attention for hints, get something personal, or all else fails, ask her mother.

4) Lite-Brite is the best Christmas gift ever... you can make anything with Lite-Brite ;) 

Hyde's Christmas Rager

5) There are five food groups (Kitty said this to Hyde's dad after she found out they only had a jar of olives in the refrigerator) 

6) Beware of drinking games, especially if your friends know you're not good at them

7) also be wary of funny smelling presents, especially if you were recently intoxicated 


"Ho Ho Ho... dumbass!"

8) If you're trying to pick up an older guy at a bar, be careful if he says you seem familiar... it might be for a reason other than you looking like Gidget or Elizabeth Taylor


Christmas

9) Bacon-- it's not just food anymore, it's a statement!


(This isn't from that episode, but it speaks for itself)


(This IS- Donna used a sample of "bacon" to emphasize her DJ name- "Hot Donna"... she always used it later to "grill" Eric for not meeting her at the radio station)

10) You can learn a lot about yourself at your high school reunion... Eric learned high school girls are more impressed with you after you graduate, Fez learned that the football players will still stuff you into your locker if given the opportunity, and Jackie learned she didn't need the approval of her fellow cheerleaders and she's better for it. 

11) Listen to your first gut instinct, not your ego... after going down memory lane, Kelso realized he really wanted to spend Christmas with his baby mama, Brooke. And Eric learned the hard way not to let his newfound celebrity among the high school crowd get between him and Donna.

12) It is possible to be too jolly to play a mall Santa... Red was cast as Santa because Bob was fired over this excuse



13) an ambush is a "pretty bush with yellow flowers"

14) Don't ask for a pony for Christmas



 An Eric Forman Christmas

15) Be nice to the director of your Christmas play, especially if they have low self-esteem... this counts for Eric Forman as well as Charlie Brown

16) You're never too old for Christmas specials 


17) Love thy neighbor




18) If you want a tape deck for Christmas, ask for a tape deck... otherwise you'll just get stuck with another raincoat 

19) Chances are the same person will always get cast as the shepard, even if you've never herded sheep in your lilfe


20) Don't lit up in the church basement-- you're very likely to get caught... Pastor Dave fired Eric from the Christmas play after finding the gang in the basement

21) Jesus is the son of a space man... Kelso kept wanting to make various characters in the play a "space man"... then when Jesus comes up, Eric is skeptical. Then Kelso is like "Yeah, well, where do you think God lives?" Then Leo adds, "It's true, man" as he subtly points upward... think about it... kinda makes a lot of sense

Winter

22) Needy kids always get better toys. Just let it go.



23) Never go down a chimney without checking for a back door first... Hyde told Eric to jump down and when he asks for him to throw down the toys, Hyde says "It's ok, Foreman, we'll just take them through the back door." Then he's asked that there was a backdoor and he says "Yeah, I saw it on the way in. I just wanted to see someone go down the chimney"  

24) Never play with your kids' toys before wrapping them for Christmas... Eric kept asking for an Evil Knivel action figure, but he never got it because Red kept playing with it and breaking it. 

25) There's always a way back to the top-- Kitty was demoted as the leader of the Ladies of Point Place (LOPPs), but after having success with the donated toys, everyone else gave her the top position again. Much to the chargin of Patty Riles. 

...and one more thing...


...maybe next year, Kitty

Eclipse (2010)

Director: David Slade
Writers: Melissa Rosenberg (screenplay), Stephenie Meyer (based on her novel)
Composer: Howard Shore

Returning Cast:
Bella Swan- Kristen Stewart
Edward Cullen- Robert Pattinson
Jacob Black- Taylor Lautner
Carlisle Cullen- Peter Facinelli
Chef Charlie Swan- Billy Burke
Renee- Sarah ChalkeBilly Black- Gil Birmingham
Mike Newton- Michael Welch
Jessica Stanley- Anna Kendrick
Eric- Justin Chon
Angela Webber- Christian Serratos
Alice Cullen- Ashley Green
Jasper Cullen- Jackson Rathbone
Emmett Cullen- Kellen Lutz
Rosalie Cullen- Nikki Reed
Esme Cullen- Elizabeth Reaser
Jane- Dakota Fanning
Quill Atera- Tyson Houseman
Embry Call- Kiowa Gordon 
Newcomers:
Victoria- Bryce Dallas Howard 
Riley Briers- Xavier Samuels
Bree Tanner- Jodelle Ferland
Leah Clearwater-
Seth Clearwater- Booboo Stewart (he later was cast in the Disney Channel movie "The Descendents"- one of very few people from Twilight who had notable careers after these movies, which is a real shame)

Write-up: 

A lot of thoughts on this book/movie... 

First off, I don't know why this is, but whenever I read "Eclipse,' it seems to take me forever. I was at it for at least a week or two. I get maybe halfway through and I just check out and don't pick it back up for a while. I remember the first time I read it and how long it took me. And ultimately I think the reason is that I just found it boring... very little seems to happen in it and we're only waiting for this huge showdown with Victoria that's been hyped up for a long time. The craziest part is that Eclipse takes place only over a couple of months. Either April or May and it ends in mid-June. Twilight took place from January to May or June. New Moon took place from September 13th to April or May. And I believe Breaking Dawn takes place from August 12th to just after Christmas. 
I guess this is me saying that Stephenie's writing for Eclipse could have been abridged a bit and thankfully the movie does a great job of it and makes it helluva lot more entertaining than reading the book. I think I'd only read it maybe 2-3 times ever. But I'd seen the movie a lot more. But that doesn't mean I don't remember everything that happens in the book or the aspects of the story that the movie completely screwed up. As an adaptation, though, it's a job really well done. Plus Kristen Stewart keeps improving in this particular role. I'd had some harsh stuff to say about her as Bella in previous installments, but the more I watch, the more I do like what she does with it. Even though Bella still comes off sassier to me in the books than she ever brought to her in the movies. 

I don't know... I think as far as "Twilight" goes as a series, I sometimes feel like I prefer it had just took place in one book and never mind about with the sequels. New Moon is miserable cuz Edward leaves and Eclipse takes a long while to get through. At least for me. Breaking Dawn... I'll have my thoughts on that for when I get to the movie. I just don't remember if I'd ever read it more than once- probably twice, though. 

One thing I should also add is that this the only movie in the series my sister watches with us wheneve we have them on. Heck, I think she's watched it on her own when it's on TV. I think she might be Team Jacob because he's less intimidating than Edward. And I can totally see why. But even now and then, she'll say 'I'm Switzerland, ok?" just out of context. Also Jacob saying "I kissed Bella" to Charlie and the scene before the fight and she says "Jacob, kiss me!" Thought those details were worth sharing.

I also remember in the theater a few moments that got a lot of laughs. Although at the moment, I just remember the scene where Charlie tries to tell Bella about "being safe" and it's super awkward for both of them. It's always good for laughs when a father and daughter in a movie are having this talk cuz it's not really something dads are comfortable with. 

Anyway, there's one huge thing about this movie I need to address because it's the one thing that bugs me. And it might extend to the whole movie franchise. 
I'm the kind of person who loves continuity and it throws me off when certain characters look different from movie to movie or from one season of a TV series to the next. And nothing upsets me more than changes in casting. I stopped watching certain animé series because they changed the cast (Pokémon in particular- I checked out of it for years because nobody can play Ash better than Veronica Taylor- meeting her at Comic-Con 10 years ago was a huge trip). 
While Victoria isn't a character I love (obviously cuz she's the villain with a vendetta against Bella and Edward because she thinks Edward killed her mate, James), it annoys me to no end that they recast the role at this juncture of the series. If it had New Moon, fine... she has no lines in that movie at all and just appears in the scenes where she's being pursued by the werewolves before Bella cliff-dives. But this is her big moment, her big showdown with Edward and Bella and to me, it's never going to feel right watching it because it's a different actress. And this movie started a line of movies where I just plain didn't like Bryce Dallas Howard because of the roles she plays. I'm not convinced about her playing Victoria or feel any connection to her at all and it makes the character almost out to be a joke because the acting looks comical. (Twilight as a whole really isn't known for having Oscar-level acting, but still...). I also did not like her because of her in "50/50" as Joseph Gordon-Levitt's girlfriend or her role in "The Help"... thankfully, she got cast as Claire in the "Jurassic World" franchise because while she doesn't start out as the most likeable character, Claire does grow as a person as the story progresses. 

And with this movie as a whole, it's my time to really address the cosmetic changes with the characters. I keep reading trivia where Robert Pattinson hated waxing his eyebrows in the first movie so he refused to do so in the sequels. And I think he comes off better as Edward in the later movies. I can understand Nikki Reed not looking completely the same as Rosalie because dying her hair in the first movie ruined her hair so she had to wear a wig. 
However, Jasper is where my issue kinda lies. His hairstyle and look is different in every movie and the lack of continuity is really distracting to me. And maybe it's because this is a fact that was revealed more about his character later on or he didn't have as many lines... but I find it distracting that Jasper all of a sudden has a Southern accent in this movie. His backstory was that he was the youngest officer in the Confederate army at the age of 17 and he was changed into a vampire by Maria, who was part of this huge phenomenon in the southern US where rival vampires fought each other with newborn armies. And after two movies where it was tough for him to say more than a sentence to Bella because he's still getting used to abstaining from human blood, he's suddenly more talkative. Granted, I like listening to him and find him extremely fascinating explaining his area of expertise. But it seems like too many random pieces thrown together that weren't there the last two movies. 
Also, don't know why, I really didn't recognize Esme in the movie at all. There's the scene we see the whole Cullen family in the field waiting for the newborn army to show up. She has her hair tied back and her hair color looks different. Maybe it's just me, but I feel very nitpicky when it comes to continuity. 

Again, the adaptation from the book to movie was really well done. The book spent way too long with Edward being super controlling and not letting Bella see Jacob and the two guys not wanting to cooperate. A lot of that got streamlined for this. There are multiple times Bella see Jacob in La Push and they almost always are fighting about something. And meanwhile, she's agonizing about her decision, whether she's ready to become a vampire and not wanting to hurt those around her. A couple of times it's completely fine, but there are way too many of thsoe instances in the book, I even get exhausted. 
Then again, I also spent a lot of this book wanting her to just stop seeing Jacob because all he's doing is getting between her and Edward and trying to change her mind about her decision. 

The following train of thought happened when I was watching the movie for the first time- I was kinda annoyed with Edward, if I'm being honest. Because he wouldn't let Bella see Jacob. Then I was reveling when Jacob showed up at her school and helps her play hookey. Of course, not much time passes where I'm annoyed with him again... him hating on Edward and saying he'd rather Bella be dead than become a vampire. It was like a switch in my head- one pointing to Team Edward and the other to Team Jacob- was flicking on my head forcefully in either direction and it was distressing how strongly it switched from one direction to the next. 
I had said in my New Moon review how reading the book had me really leaning towards Team Jacob, more than I typically do, but it evenutally went back to the default Team Edward position by the end of the story, where Bella rushes to Italy to keep Edward from getting himself killed. 

I watched the movie the other night... and it feels like a while since I'd seen it. There's a strong chance, among the movies, that it's the one I'd seen the movie other than Twilight. And the switch in my head was coming into play again. I can't say exactly when it happened, but I was leaning so far towards Team Jacob, Edward was almost completely off my mind. I think it was around the scene where Jasper is showing the werewolves how to fight against newborn vampires and Bella is chilling with Jacob when he's in his werewolf form and continued to where he's carrying her through the trail to mask her scent. And also when he's keeping her warm in the night. Of course, I'd always go back to Team Edward cuz I just cannot help myself.
I have a suspicion that my mind was having this debate because I'd read the end of the book earlier that day and Bella was finally releasing part of her loves him too. And if Edward had left her alone and never came back the first time he ran off (he was out of school for a week in Twilight because he couldn't stand how strong her scent appealed to him), she would have ended up with Jacob... eventually. And that'd be absolutely fine. I can see the appeal of that. However, it's hard not to side with Edward because he is the man of mystery fantasy. It's like choosing someone who's one of the kind extraordinary opposed to the everyday boy-next-door nice guy. 

Another thing about the adaptation that's really good... I may be a hypocrite here because I hated the way Twilight diverted and added more scenes with the nomad vampires to fill out the movie when the book only focused on Bella's perspective... but I really like how they filled out the storyline in Eclipse, showing Victoria's interactions with Riley, the vampire she creates to in charge of her newborn army. We start the movie with how she attacks and changes him... that really helps set up the character. Don't know why, I always remember Xavier Samuel played Riley (although I remembered his name as "Xavier Samuels"... maybe cuz his character's name is Riley Briers). But we got to see more of his interactions with the army and also we see more of Bree Tanner. She plays a small role later in the story, but she sadly doesn't have much face time. 
There was a novella Stephenie wrote about Bree and it shows more about what happens with the newborn army and it offers more insight. But I'd only read the book once and I really don't feel up to it at this current time. Even though I probably should read it again at some point. 

And here's another paragraph of issues I have with the adaptation. I'm sorry, but I just can't help myself. 
First off- a positive- one of the biggest scenes a lot of us were looking forward to was the chapter called "Fire & Ice" where Edward and Jacob were having a candid discussion about them and Bella. 
Negative- the scene where Rosalie tells Bella about how she became a vampire and why Bella should not... in the book, Bella is staying over at the Cullen place and Rosalie actually goes out of her way to talk to her. I thought that was a really great moment for her character, showing that initative and willingness to talk to her, especially when she spent the first two books (except the end of the New Moon, of course) being really hard on Bella. I didn't ever hate Rosalie, but I don't particularly like her that much because she's such an ice queen. In the movie, Bella goes out of her way to talk to Rosalie because she storms off after a conversation about becoming a newborn. I can kinda see how both sides work well because it shows each character being stronger than they're given credit for, whether that lens is through the reader/viewer or each other. That being said, Rosalie's telling of her backstory to Bella was photographed really well. However, there's one piece I always kinda felt was missing... Rosalie talks about having a run-in with her fiance and his friends and he's drunk and it's alluded that he sexually assaults her in front of them and leaves her in the street to die. Because the writing and shooting of this scene was very discrete and doesn't show a lot because a certain rating needs to be upheld. In my mind, I interpret as "she was sexually assaulted and it was violent, but it doesn't translate to her being on the brink of death"... how it had been said or written that she was subsequently beaten, had ribs broken that pierced some of her internal organs or her skull was cracked on the pavement, that would make more sense and translated slightly better. 
It is nice, though, that Rosalie gets more opportunities to win over the parts of the Twi-hard fan base that weren't generally fans of her. People like me. 
And there are small things- like the valedictorian at graduation. In the book, it was Eric, but in the movie, it was Jessica. Yes, it's a small detail, but I feel like it was a blatant rewrite just for the sake of capitalizing on Anna Kendrick's career skyrocketing. I mean, she's awesome and the reason I'd seen a lot of her movies. I guess it's kinda on the same level as giving Dobby's roles in the various Harry Potter movies to Neville... although it takes a little more effort to animate Dobby than just giving someone's lines to another character. The funny thing about the graduation scene is that I remember a lot about her speech... but I never realized that it was written by the writers as yet another message to Bella to really think about her decision to become a vampire. The sentiment of the speech was that this was not the time for rash decisions, it was a time for mistakes and nothing is permanent. Don't know why I just suddenly understood it, but I did this time. And it's even cooler to look back on. 
Bree Tanner had a short time in the book, but there's an aspect of her part in the story that was completely left out of the movie. The movie just makes her seem innocent and nervous about what's going to happen to her. But the book has her seeming a little less civil and screaming that she wants Bella (meaning to drink her blood) and asking how they can all stand close to her. And Bella also looks at her a few times and wonders if that's going to be her future... Bella barely acknowledges Bree at all, either during the scene in the clearing with the Volturi (who convenientally show up AFTER the fight... like true politicans not wanting to get their hands dirty, ugh!) and during the aftermath. The aftermath is spent between her and Jacob and Edward. 

One thing that also stood out to me this time around... the scene with Bella and her mom. That was really well written and offered a sweet moment amidst all the crazyness. Her mom talks to her about Edward, talking about how she moves around him like they're magnets and to make sure she's making the right choice for herself. At the end of it, she gives her a quilt made from all the T-shirts they got from traveling. That wasn't in the book, but it was such a nice touch that added more to their relationship. It just made me wish Stephenie wrote a prequel novella or something that talked about Bella's relationship with her mom when they were growing up as well as what she was like in school. When she says she was awkard and none of the guys ever asked her out because they saw her go through all those awkward adolescent stages. It might explain that low-key part of her personality, the introverted part. Or maybe I'm just trying to find even more connection with her as a character. I feel like my own personality is a little off beat because I don't know how to act around people unless I know them well enough.

...I'm sure there's something I missed, cuz I often do... but I think this is as far as I'll go with this. 

Theatrical Review: Fantastic Beasts- The Crimes of Grindlewald

Date- Sunday November 11 2018
Time- 11:35am
Location- Cinemark at Stroud Mall
Party-  2 (my mom and I)

Director: David Yates
Writer (book AND screenplay): J.K. Rowling
Composer: James Newton Howard

Returning Cast:
Newt Scamander- Eddie Redmayne
Jacob Kowalski- Dan Fogler
Tina- Katherine Waterston
Queenie- Alison Sudol
Credence- Ezra Miller
young Grindewald- Jamie Campbell Bower

Newcomers:
Grindlewald- Johnny Depp
Theseus Scamander, Newt's older brother- Callum Turner
Nicholas Flamel- Brontis Jodorowsky
Nagini- Claudia Kim
Albus Dumbledore- Jude Law
Leta Lestrange- Zoë Kravitz
Duration: 134 minutes (+8 trailers)

Write-up:

Opening Remarks

There was a bit of hype leading up to this movie... at least among Harry Potter fans. First off because it's another of the series. And it also includes a younger Dumbledore and shows some scenes at Hogwarts. It's somewhat of a homecoming, even though it's only for a few short scenes, including some flashbacks. 
The theater was kinda empty at first, but it quickly filled up in that half hour we were sitting there. And it got pretty quiet once the movie started... but we also had to get through tons of commercials and trailers first.

Trailers:

I'd been saying the last few posts that 7 seems to be a common number because it's happened several movies in a row... well, we finally broke the pattern and got one extra trailer. Are any of them worth seeing? ...not really sure. I was expecting a lot of repeats from previous theater trips, but only one repeated. 
And it was the "Kid who would be King"- where a bullied 12 year old in private school pulls the sword from the stone and it brings all kinds of monsters (and Morgana) from Camelot into modern day England and they have to fight them. 

As for the other 7: 

"The Secret Life of Pets 2"- a teaser trailer, really... Leonard the poodle is left at home again and as soon as his master leaves, a dance party ensues with tons of other dogs. And there's this little Chihuahua tries to put on Copacabana and it falls on deaf ears. 
(Have yet to see the first one, but I'd like to at some point)

"Mortal Engines"- funny how quickly this trailer started circulating... we saw it and when we got home, it came on multiple times. It's directed by Peter Jackson (of the LOTR/Hobbit franchises) and it looks like his work... really huge visual effects. What I gather is that it's a post apocalyptic story about cities becoming moving machines and London is the bad guy. And the female protagonist has scarring on her face and her mom was involved in this conflict in the past. Nothing about this really grabs my attention- it could be a huge success or huge flop, depending on how many people see it and how well it's written.

"Spider-man: Into the Spiderverse"- this is animated and it's about a bunch of Spider-men in different alternate universes trying to defeat some bad guy. It looks like it'd be fun for kids, but as a superhero movie, there doesn't seem to be a lot to it. Although not every movie has to be as jam packed as the last Avengers film. 

"Bumblebee"- this is another installment of the Transformers franchise. And this time, it's a girl (Hailee Steinfeld) who bonds with the machine. But instead of a Camero, like Shia LeBoeuf found all the way back in the first Michael Bay film (15 years ago, I think... wow, a lot's changed), Bumblebee is an old yellow VW beetle. And Michael Bay isn't directing, so it may have a chance to be halfway decent with its story and not being completely overtaken by effects and explosions. 

"Five Feet Apart"- kind of an interesting teen movie... it's about a couple of kids who are in the hospital all the time, sick with cystic fibrosis and they fall in love. The guy is Cole Sprouse, who was Cody from "The Suite Life of Zack & Cody"... dang, that feels forever again and he looks so different now, it's crazy. But he's kind got a defeatist attitude about the whole thing and they start taking their meds together and falling in love, but they can't really interact physically cuz they could catch each other's germs and die. It has potential to be good... I just don't know how good. 

"Detective Pikachu"- yeah... so many feelings about this one. This is one of those movies that could either be good or be a complete disaster. There's a video game that's been out for a while, my sister has watched playthroughs on YouTube, where Pikachu actually speaks words with kind of a deep voice and he's a detective, obviously. They actually brought Pikachu and the other Pokémon into the real world and they're animated so they kind of look like animated stuffed animals. I cannot begin to say how much I love this franchise, but depending on how this is done (I doubt I'd get to a theater to see it even if I wanted to), I could love it or really hate it. I'm already kinda weirded out about Pikachu talking like a normal person. The trick is that only this one teenager can understand him and they work together to solve a crime. Oh, and Ryan Reynolds is Pikachu, so there could be that whole self-deprecating Deadpool sense of humor (PG-rated, of course, this is a kid's franchise) involved that makes fun of the franchise. It's an interesting match-up, but I won't know until I see it if it's gonna work. At least for me... this is a side-mode game I don't see myself getting into. I personally just love the general franchise. Hard to believe next year will mark 20 years since I started playing the game, starting Blue and going onward. I actually took a break for a number of years, but I got back into it in 2015 when 2DS finally went down in price to $80... just in time for the Nintendo Switch, my timing totally rocks #Sarcasm

"Shazam!"- this has nothing to do with the Shaq movie from the 90's... it's another DC supehero where this teenager comes across this power and everytime he says the titular phrase, he turns into Zachary Levi and has super powers. It looks like it could be funny, but at the same time, I'm starting to get a little sick of superheroes. I don't know about everyone else. 

The Main Event- 

yeah, we're finally here... I'll put some mild spoilers about the previous Fantastic Beasts, but not so much for this movie... 
But I'll cut to the chase in saying that this was the first time in all the Harry Potter franchise that I left a theater disappointed... as far as sequels go, The Twin Towers (Lord of the Rings), Empire Strikes Back (Star Wars)... even the first of the Deathly Hallows movies, all of them felt like they accomplished SOMETHING even though their purpose was to set up for the bigger picture that would come in the follow-up installments. 

The title of the movie establishes, of course, that Grindewald is the villain and the whole purpose of this side franchise is to defeat him and throw him into Azkaban for eternity. And Grindewald does show up at the end of the prevous film. I just neglected to mention him (or Johnny Depp) in the cast at all because that would be a huge spoiler for that movie. But the HIstory of Magic, as told by J.K. Rowling (and Bathlida Bagshot, the character who wrote that particular Hogwarts textbook) states that Grindewald was defeated in an epic duel with Dumbledore. Heck, in the actual book, The Philospher's/Sorcerer's Stone, it says on Dumbeldore's Chocolate Frog card that he defeated the great Dark Wizard, Grindewald among his many accomplishments, including discovering 12 uses for dragon's blood and he and Nicholas Flamel studied the stone. I just looked it up... this duel takes place in 1945... meaning that we still have less than 20 years until this happens.
Of course, all of the movies will be leading up to this duel... I just hope more happens within this movies, like story progress, to warrant multiple installments. 

I think the thing that really got to me about this movie was that there were a million questions we came into it with. First off, we find out that Credence is still alive... he wasn't killed at the end of the previous film, which I thought was a sad moment because there was a chance he could have been saved. Now, this movie starts with him being revealed to be alive and he's going to Paris to find out who his family is. Multiple explanations are given and they connect him to various Wizarding families familiar to Potter fans... but Grindewald finally gives him answers at the end and we have no idea if he's telling the truth or he's giving him this identity as a way to use him against Dumbledore. 
That's just one example of several. But there were so many questions and by the end, very few of them were answered and more questions came up to take their place. Like trying to kill a Hydra. It's pretty dang annoying. 

We get to reunite with our old favorite characters from the last movie. Newt Scamander is trying to get his travel ban lifted... and Dumbledore more or less helps him navigate around that. In the end, it makes a lot of sense why he does it this way, but Dumbledore becomes even more engimatic than he already is. He has his reasons behind what he does, but he has a real roundabout way of going about that. The Deathly Hallows had this major conflict between Harry and Ron because Ron was skeptical about Dumbledore sending them on this quest to find/destroy Horcruxes to defeat Voldemort when he's given no clues how to go about it. The answers do become clear eventually, but the lack of a road map is frustrating to him. We're all taught to trust Dumbledore absolutely... and maybe it's because it's Jude Law  (who I really like, by the way) and it's a younger version of him, but it was hard for me to completely trust a younger Dumbledore. It's an uneasy feeling... 
It's kinda cool to see him teach at Hogwarts. He's actually the Defense against the Dark Arts teacher and he's teaching the kids how to defeat Boggarts- poltergeists that take the shape of what a person fears and they need to use the Riddikulus charm to turn it into something funny to finish it off. Interestingly, he is relieved from this position by the Ministry of Magic- they're trying to find out what Grindewald is up to, but he's not being cooperative. This brings back the running joke that no DADA teacher has lasted at Hogwarts for more than a year. Although we see flashbacks when Newt and his ex-girlfriend, Leta Lestrange were going to school and they were fighting Boggarts then too. So Dumbledore was in this position for a couple years. I do remember when Tom Riddle was in his 6th year at Hogwarts (based on the flashback in Chamber of Secrets) that Dumbledore was a Transfiguration professor. The whole running joke actually started when Dumbledore refused to hire Tom Riddle as the DADA professor... and the position became cursed. 

Anyway, I got away from the old characters. Newt is back and we find out the previous movie, he went to America because Dumbledore asked him too. We find out that the Muggle he and the other American wizards befriended... he didn't lose his memory like all of the other Muggles. And he and Queenie have been seeing each other. At the time, it was against the law for people with magic to be romantically involved with Muggles, people without magic. And of course, Newt has his suitcase full of creates and adds a few more to his collection. The Niffler also makes more appearances and it actually has a family now. (The theater was actually selling them for $12 and I was almost tempted to get one... they're so cute!) 
And Newt and Tina see each other again, but things are a little tense because she thinks he's engaged to someone else... his brother is actually engaged to Newt's ex girlfriend, Leta. She's alluded to briefly in the previous movie, but we get to know her better here and she's also on a search to find out more about her family. We already knew the Lestranges were pretty screwed up because Bellatrix is a psychopath. She was the reason why Neville's parents, respected Aurors in their time, were driven to insanity via the Cruciatus Curse. She's very sadistic. And her family really has a screwed up history... we did get a healthy amount of history, but some of it was hard to watch. Interesting thing is that she's nowhere near as evil as her descendant was. I read up briefly on Newt's history cuz I thought he was related to some other wizard (the only connection I found, and already knew, was that his grandson married Luna Lovegood). He was expelled from Hogwarts because of something Leta did that endangered other students and he took the blame for it. There were flashbacks with her and Newt and they were fun to watch. The actors they cast looked a lot like them and had the mannerisms down perfectly. 

The one thing amiss about this movie was that it is called the "Crimes of Grindewald"... he doesn't really have a lot of screen time and he's really not committing any crimes... not yet anyway. Sure, the movie starts with him being transferred from the American ministry to London's ministry and by extension, Azkaban and he escapes custody (the one thing we learn about prison transfers in movies and TV... they never end well) and a bunch of wizards are killed in the process... and he does have some people killed in Paris in order to lie low in their residence... but with that title, you'd expect something more.
Instead what he does is try swaying Credence to join him and he's reaching out to other Wizards and Witches to join him and commit to "The Greater Good"- that phrase has come up once or twice in the Harry Potter books and goes back to him. His goal is to get the Wizarding world out into the open, to stop all the secrery and hiding from the human world. He also shows visions to his brethen of what he sees is the future- tanks, Holocausts and atomic bombs. He more or less predicts the humans will bring the end of the world with World War II. Funny enough, 1945, which is around the time the war is ending... that's when he's supposed to face off against Dumbledore. 

Another character we meet is Nagini. Harry Potter fans know her as the snake that follows Voldemort and ultimately becomes a Horcrux. Here, she's an Animagus that's part of a freakshow cirus. The ringleader says to the crowds that she changes to a snake by night and there will come a time when she'll transform and never be able to change back. Whether that's true or just for sure, it's hard to be sure. I just know that she will eventually become a snake permanently to serve Voldemort. (Speaking of Voldemort, I checked on him and he was born in 1926, so he was a baby when this movie was taking place. And when the duel happens, he's 19... so there is a possibility then that Tom Riddle will appear in one of these movies at some point. There's nothing on his Wiki page that says he was inspired by Grindewald... but JK Rowling could still make a connection somewhere, especially if we see more of Nagini in later moies)

Those who pay attention will see some other cameos of characters that relate back to the other franchise. I noted Jamie Campbell Bower, despite the fact he has no lines, he is shown in pictures alongside Dumbledore and he played him in the Deathly Hallows flashback... I just liked how they kept that continuity... and that they changed his eyes to make him look similiar to Johnny Depp.
There's also a funny cameo from Nicholas Flamel... when Harry Potter was in Hogwarts, Flamel had just celebrated his 665th birthday. This is 70 years earlier, meaning he was just short of 600. He looks pretty ancient as it is :P which is crazy to think he's still alive, but he is staying alive thanks to the Elixir of Life from the Sorceror's Stone. He comments how he hadn't seen any action in decades, but we do see him later in the movie. We find him because he's in charge of the safe house Dumbledore told to Newt. So even then, those two were good friends. 

And to fulfill another curiosity of mine, I looked up Dumbledore because I thought Jude Law looked too young to play him when he looked so much older in the Harry Potter movies. I thought maybe he'd be as old as Nicholas Flamel because of how close they are... not even close... the wiki page says Dumbledore was born in 1881. Meaning he was 100 when Harry's parents were murdered and he was 116 when he was killed. So relating it to the Fantastic Beasts timeline, Dumbledore was 45-46.
Ok, that makes a bit more sense. 

Going back to the movie as a whole, though, it does start up really slow. A lot of exposition where we catch up with old characters and learn about some new ones. But I don't really know what the point of this movie was. Was it trying to stop Grindewald, and failing? Was it trying to kill or arrest Credence, and failing? From what I can tell, it was about drawing lines about what side everyone was on, the "Greater Good" as Grindewald puts it or was it to remain at peace with the muggle world. 
There's some great action with other beasts that Newt befriends, although so much is happening, it's hard to keep track of everything. We start to get some answers about things as we go, but more questions pop up to take their place.
All this movie sees to be is a set-up for future sequels. And I really hope more happens in the next movie to make up for the lack of clarity with this one. 

Grade: B- (I get the feeling a lot of other people, particularly non-Potter fans, wouldn't be nearly this considerate)