Warning: Spoilers ahead for “Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald.”
“Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald” is in theatres and there’s a lot to unpack in the sequel.
While you’re processing the many subplots of the very stuffed two-hour movie, you’re probably asking yourself a lot of questions. What is going on with Queenie? Is that final reveal for real? And did Tina really spend half the movie mad at Newt because of a typo? (Yes.)
We hear you. Keep reading to see the biggest questions we have after “The Crimes of Grindelwald.”
Why is Grindelwald even being moved at the film’s start?
The plan was for Grindelwald to be transported to Europe to confront his unspecified crimes, but no one explains why he needed to be taken across the pond in the first place. Couldn’t MACUSA handle Grindelwald on their own?
What exactly ARE Grindelwald’s crimes?
The title of the first film, “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them,” made sense because it introduced Newt as a magizoologist running through New York and trying to get a hold of magical creatures on the loose.
The sequel is set in motion by Grindelwald’s clever plan to escape while in transit to Europe to “answer for crimes he has committed,” but fans never learn specific details about his wrongdoings.
What happened between Leta Lestrange and Newt Scamander?
It’s clear there was something between the two of them at some point. In the first movie, we see Newt have a photo of Leta. At the start of “The Crimes of Grindelwald,” Leta appeared to have feelings for Newt from the moment she’s introduced, despite being engaged to his older brother, Theseus. Leta also told Newt she wished he would accept the couple’s invitations to dinner.
In a flashback, we learn that Leta and Newt grew close while studying at Hogwarts. Leta constantly felt judged because of the assumptions that came with her identity as a Lestrange, while Newt took comfort in befriending and caring for various magical creatures. They bonded over feeling like outsiders, but beyond that, it’s not clear if they ever became more than friends.
Before we could ever learn, Leta dies in the movie.
“I think Jo [JK Rowling] wrote something really interesting where it’s not so loud,” Kravitz told “E! News” of the love triangle. “You know, relationships evolve. Family is complicated. Love is complicated. And I think it just adds a layer of humanity to all of the scenes that we’re all in together.”
Who is that woman working with Grindelwald?
Her name is listed as Rosier in the film credits and although she doesn’t say much, she seems to be Grindelwald’s assistant. Rosier also tells Queenie that she’s “deeply committed” to Grindelwald.
In the movie, she’s often seen carrying some sort of magical skull that has the phrase “for the greater good” written in German.
The name Rosier isn’t new to “Harry Potter” fans though. It’s the name of one of 28 pure-blood families who exist (like the Weasleys and the Malfoys).
Was there any significance regarding who was killed in Paris before Grindelwald over their home as a safe house?
Early on, Grindelwald decides on a safe house for himself, Rosier and his followers. They kill someone in the house and a muggle child. It’s not made clear who they are, but Grindelwald takes a moment to look at the older person in a closed casket as they’re carried away. Is that someone Grindelwald knew of significance or was it random?
How does a wizard magazine get a caption incorrect on two popular wizard figures’ engagement?
Newt is accidentally referred to as Leta Lestrange’s fiancé in a magazine. It leads to one of the most convoluted subplots, where Tina, Newt’s actual love interest, spends most of the movie miffed that he never mentioned he was engaged (when he’s not).
Considering that Newt is now a famous magizoologist and Theseus is a former war hero who became the Head of the Auror Department, how could a publication confuse the brothers? And since they have magical abilities, couldn’t the error be fixed with a flick of a wand?
How and when will Nagini permanently turn into a snake?
We know Nagini is a Maledictus, a person with a blood curse which will eventually turn her into a creature. We don’t know how long it will take to turn her into a snake permanently, but we’re sure we’ll see it happen by the end of the five-film series.
Currently, Nagini seems sweet and nice and it’s tough to picture her as Voldemort’s obedient serpent. Perhaps if something happens to Credence it will harden her soul.
Does Nagini wear a special kind of outfit?
Nagini’s beautiful blue dress magically disappears when she becomes a snake and reappears when she’s no longer one instead of falling to the ground. How does that work? Is it made out of a special material which transforms along with her?
Does Grindelwald have unlimited magic?
There seems to be a lot of magic added into this movie that has never been explored before in the “Harry Potter” universe, like the kind of magic that Newt sprinkled across the streets while looking for clues. We already know that Grindelwald is one of the most powerful dark wizards, but the extent of his abilities is unknown.
Why are there “fantastic beasts” introduced in this movie that aren’t in the “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them” book?
The fictional encyclopedia, which is supposed to be written by Newt Scamander, doesn’t include the Matagut, Leucrotta, or Zouwu, which are all introduced in “The Crimes of Grindelwald.”
We consulted a new copy of the book after seeing the film and the three are nowhere to be found. Did Scamander conveniently forget to add them in? Is he going to be obliterated at some point so he forgets they exist? This feels like a cash grab to publish updated versions of the illustrated and hardcover books.
How was Newt able to use the Accio spell on an Niffler?
While Newt was gathering clues in Paris, he said, “Accio Niffler,” so his furry creature could stop chasing shiny objects and keep up with him. This is a major inconsistency, considering Rowling already said that the spell “only works on inanimate objects.”
Elaborating, she said: “While people or creatures may be indirectly moved by ‘Accio-ing’ objects that they are wearing or holding, this carries all kinds of risks because of the likelihood of injury to the person or beast attached to an object travelling at close to the speed of light.”
How does the pact that Dumbledore and Grindelwald made work?
In one scene, Dumbledore looks into the Mirror of Erised and sees the younger versions of himself and Grindelwald cutting their palms, pressing their hands together, and casting some sort of spell. Then they take the blood and put it into a pendant.
At the end of the film, we finally learn that Dumbledore couldn’t go after Grindelwald because they “swore not to fight each other” (as summed up by Newt).
The blood pact is a new concept to the “Harry Potter” universe, and the only comparable oath is the Unbreakable Vow. The process is a little different, but similar to the pact, a person who violates an Unbreakable Vow will die.
This new form of magic will likely be explored in the next movie, especially since Dumbledore told Newt that destroying the pendant could possibly mean he’d be able to fight Grindelwald.
Since we already know that Grindelwald and Dumbledore eventually have a historical duel in 1945 (with the latter winning) their blood pact must have been broken prior to that event.
Are we going to learn more about Dumbledore and Grindelwald’s past relationship?
Dumbledore says the two “were closer than brothers” in the movie, but that’s it.
Rowling hinted we may see more to Dumbledore’s character in the future, but it’s unclear to what extent that will deal with any relationship.
“You will see Dumbledore as a younger man and quite a troubled man. … We’ll see him at that formative period of his life. As far as his sexuality is concerned, watch this space,” Rowling said at a press conference for the first “Fantastic Beasts.”
It seems strange for a movie which is progressive about marriage between those with and without magic to not explore a relationship between two of the world’s most powerful wizards.
Why did Professor McGonagall pop up in 1927 and in flashbacks when she wasn’t technically alive during either time period?
Is this just another plot hole in the the movie? It seemed like a poor attempt to callback to the beloved character (originally played by Maggie Smith) that fans saw in the “Harry Potter” films. Minerva McGonagall’s age just doesn’t fit with the timing of events in this movie, since she was born in the ’30s.
You can read more about why the inclusion of McGonagall doesn’t make sense here.
Why does it have to be Newt to move against Grindelwald?
He’s a magizoologist.
Did Corvus Lestrange really drown?
Is Leta really remembering everything correct? When she summarises her complicated family history, which is tied to half-brother Yusuf Kama, it’s hard to keep up. She seems to vividly recall the image of the baby drowning, but is it possible that she missed a detail?
Why does Leta sacrifice herself near the movie’s end?
Leta’s death felt a bit unearned. Plus, a majority of her character arc revolved around longing for Newt and we never received a resolution as to what transpired between them. Did Zoë Kravitz just want out of this franchise?
Why does Nicolas Flamel show up late to the tombs when he started heading there before everyone else?
This is one of the most frustrating plot holes of the entire movie. Flamel is able to see what’s going to happen at the tombs before anyone else, leaves to warn everyone about it, and then just drops the ball by conveniently showing up after Grindelwald kills a bunch of aurors and gains a following.
Where was he? Shouldn’t he have been able to simply apparate there ahead of everyone else? Is he actually a bad guy working with Grindelwald? It didn’t seem like that while he was alone. Plus, Dumbledore told Newt to seek out Flamel if he ran into any trouble.
Why does Queenie side with Grindelwald?
Queenie was found by one of Grindelwald’s followers, Rosier, while crying in the street. Shortly after, she met Grindelwald, but he promised not to harm her. By the end of the film, he was somehow able to convince her to join his side.
It’s not clear what Grindelwald said or did to cajole Queenie into joining him, but throughout the movie, other characters mentioned that the wizard can be quite persuasive and “seductive.” He also seems to be a pro at captivating people with his words.
Is Credence really Dumbledore’s brother?
Or is Grindelwald just making this up?
Does Dumbledore know he has another sibling?
When Leta discusses the loss of her younger brother with Dumbledore he mentions his sister, Ariana, who died at a young age, but he never says anything about another sibling.
Is Credence a secret sibling or a half-sibling? And, if so, why doesn’t he ever name drop him in the “Harry Potter” franchise? Perhaps Dumbledore never learns Credence is his brother in this prequel franchise because he certainly never brings him up later in his life.