After he has been gotten by the Magical Congress of the USA with the assistance of Newt Scamander, Grindelwald could get away. He begins to make a gathering from his devotees to start his awful arrangement for ruling the world of enchantment. Now, Dumbledore calls his canny understudy, Scamander, to get him. Be that as it may, this time the mission will be so difficult and loaded with energizing occasions.
CRITICS OF "Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald"
More workmanlike than magical, "Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald" nevertheless feels like an upgrade from its predecessor, one that adds star power, introduces key characters and lays the foundation for a genuine "Wizarding World" franchise.
[Rowling's] script here is the worst thing she's ever written -- incomprehensible if you haven't seen Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, saddling the actors with endless pages of indigestible exposition, an inert, lifeless set-up for the next movie.
There's a mystery at the heart of this film, but it's not the identity of Ezra Miller's non-descript wizard, of the sparing use of Depp's Hitlerlarian sorcerer, rather why did Rowling think there was enough material to hang an entire second movie on?
Dash it all, even the devoted will likely struggle with the reams of expository talk and gobs of unearned feeling and scads of largely pointless beasties, plus some just plain lazy visuals (looking at you, magic cats).
It suffers a bit from being in the middle of a series and having to set up so many questions that don't get answered yet, but for every complaint I hear about this flick, I can think of something in it worth watching.