Fantastic Beasts has a problem with Newt Scamander

Warning! The following contains SPOILERS for the movie Fantastic Beasts: The Grindelwald Crimes. Read at your own risk!

Fantastic Beasts: The Grindelwald Crimes Announces it as the worst advertisement showing the release of the Harry Potter franchise. The sequel made the headlines as the first of the lot to be labeled "rotten", and its current box office numbers place it among the lowest of all movies. Although many fingers can point to the mistakes of this franchise that led to this, I think it's time for the public to admit collectively that Fantastic beasts has a problem Newt Scamander.

To clarify, this is not a hard blow against the performance of Eddie Redmayne. The actor did not bring anything other than his playing into the character of Newt Scamander, which is really a shame that his role often hampers Fantastic Beasts: The Grindelwald Crimes more than it helps it.

To argue this point, let's replace Newt Scamander's role in the sequel. Newt is offered a job on the recommendation of his brother by the Department of Magic in which he will be responsible for finding debt. Newt refuses because he is "neutral" and does not choose camp. Newt still ends up in Paris, but only because he wants to join Tina and inform her that a magazine article that she has read is incorrect, and that it's not going to happen. He is not engaged to Leta Lestrange.

This is the first major problem with Newt Scamander. This franchise is built around a guy who can not take a position on the witch superiority over Muggles, but who is willing to take the time in Azkaban to solve a mistake of fact. Beyond the fact that it is something that could have been explained with a simple letter or the various other methods of magic communication that the wizarding world has, is that why it puts all this into play?

Main characters in the Harry Potter The franchise has made immature and questionable choices in the past, but let's remember that Newt is not a child. Fantastic beasts apparently treated it as such, although later, the silly wizard was relegated to a story of adventure / near-love. It was a strange and somewhat meaningless parallel trip that seemed awkward next to scenes where babies are being killed and where great speeches about the superiority of wizards are being made.

Make no mistake, things will get worse in the wizarding world before you improve. This is a very serious moment in the chronology of the universe, which makes it all the more frustrating Fantastic Beasts: The Grindelwald Crimes was divided between the movement that was gaining strength in Grindelwald and an adult man who was trying to tell a woman that he had loving feelings for her. This is particularly troublesome when the last event of both is supposed to be the narrative of the main character.

In simple terms, Newt Scamander is a character too fragile and immature for all the dark things that will happen in the wizarding world. It seems that some decision-makers Fantastic beasts seems to take this into account, which may explain why David Yates' initial remarks that Newt was at the heart of the franchise were rejected by producer David Heyman.

These comments eventually led to Fantastic Beasts: The Grindelwald Crimes, which looked like a movie where Newt had plenty of screen time, but did not play any important role in the big dedicated events Harry Potter fans care about. He manages to choose a character at the end, but as we mentioned, his character is experiencing little growth, which shows that he is able to deal with dark wizards and mature themes that are emerging surely in future movies.

It's not Newt's fault, it's the franchise that chose to use a novel about magical creatures as a backdrop to the long-awaited narrative of young Dumbledore and Grindelwald. Newt's role as a hero of the first adventure is good, but now that the film has established Jude Law's young Dumbledore, it seems that passing the torch to his character to support the rest of the story would be ideal.

Otherwise, the franchise should turn to a handful of other movies that have trouble finding a story for the Newt character and random scenes of magical creatures to further justify the title. Fantastic beasts. Seriously, were there any other animal scenes outside the Nagini character that were not staged simply to remind people why Newt is important? Again, this is another thing that stands in the way of a story that fans are dying to see.

While reducing or reducing Newt's role in Fantastic beasts would be an option that would potentially improve the franchise, this is not the only option. Newt could still keep its quirks, but right here the next movie, it would be useful for the events that take place between The crimes of Grindelwald and the next adventure that allows him to realize what is at stake. Newt does not have to change completely, but he has to mature a bit and not be so childish and naive.

As mentioned before, Eddie Redmayne is a great actor and it would be shameful to get his character out of the central role. That said, we must also keep the Harry Potter far from the stories they want to see for a long time, so Fantastic beasts must find a way to better integrate it in the quarrel between Grindelwald and Dumbledore.

In all fairness, this plan could already be underway. There must be a reason why someone decided that Newt should play a role in this essential part of Harry Potter's story. Perhaps if this part were highlighted in the next feature film, his interruptions and the development of his character would be easier to forgive. Until then though, it's still the type that opposes my long-held dream of seeing the rise and fall of a man who ultimately influenced Voldemort.

Fantastic Beasts: The Grindelwald Crimes is currently in theaters. To learn more about the film, take a look at these 6 things you should know about the Dumbledore family that may be useful for the theories behind this crazy ending.