Well, it looks fantastic. Stage design, FX and costumes are top notch. It's also better than movie 2. But it's one hour too long.

The story isn't good: it's basically an action movie most of the time. I liked the magical creatures and how Newt studies them and how much he cares for them. Redmayne delivers a solid performance. Unfortunately, despite the trilogy's name, the beasts are rarely seen though. I still don't think it's a good idea to mix the "Newt with beasts" story with the story on Grindelwald. That's like mixing a David Attenborough documentary with *Die Hard*.

The movie feels strangely detached from the first two movies. Frankly, I don't always understand why everyone is doing what they are doing. Still don't understand the significance of Queenie and her motivation for side-switching. I really liked Queenie and Jacob in the first movie and Queenie was fun but I lost all interest in her persona by now. And where's *Tina*? Was she cut out off this movie for production reasons? Why is she suddenly not important anymore? Perhaps I have forgotten the content of the first two movies (it has been some time) but wasn't Credence supposed to be some sort of WMD? In this movie, he's barely mentioned and comes across pretty weak. What's the point of telling his story then anyway?

Honestly this is about as good as it could get, given the current situation this franchise finds itself in.
It’s less messy than the last one and they smartly sidelined/ditched some of the more boring characters (like, where’s Nagini?).
The first 30 minutes are nothing but exposition dumps recapping the previous films.
It’s inelegant and kinda bad, but also a necessary evil given what a mess _Crimes of Grindelwald_ was.
The story is fine, it’s still a little incoherent (the beasts and Grindelwald/Dumbledore stuff doesn’t really gel together), and you can tell it’s written by a novelist, but it’s also more fun and creative than some of the previous installments.
Some of the character arcs are once again very confusing though.
The acting is solid for the most part (Dan Fogler steals the movie again, Ezra Miller sucks again) and the new additions are all good, if not great.
I always liked the directing in these movies, and while the cinematography is still good, this one in particular has a lot of that fake Hollywood sheen that’s part of the reason why the majority of blockbusters suck now.
So, not awful, but it’s also far from memorable or something I’d recommend.
Watch it on streaming, they’re probably gonna cancel this franchise anyway.

4.5/10

The strength of this franchise has always been the beautiful, imaginative and whimsical world of beasts. The CGI is stunningly crafted. The interaction between actors and imaginary beasts isn’t always seamless, though, and the handling of the Qilin by either actor fell short of believability. Neither seemed to know where it began or ended. This was true of other animals as well, so, what were supposed to be tender moments felt like groping in the dark.

As much as I like Eddie Redmayne, his character felt trapped in his shyness this film with no highs or lows that contributed to the flow of the action. I felt Ezra Millers’ Credence was much better drawn this outing and I felt his struggle. The longing of Jacob for Queenie and her internal struggle were beautifully written and performed.

Overall, I feel this film was so much better than the last film, has many of the strengths of the first film, but the wizarding battles were so much just batting around wands and tearing things up (that eventually were magically restored) that there never felt like there was real peril. Similarly, I felt the plot and mystery was laboured and flat. Movies this grand have so much potential, that to turn out just “good” seems such a let down, but I give this film a 7 (good) out of 10. [Fantasy Adventure]

We just want Story. It felt like the entire movie was filler plot with no substance. Perhaps JK wanted it to be a trilogy and WB wanted more so they filled in a bunch of nothingness like the Hobbit trilogy or the Mandalorian.

Meh again.

'Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore' isn't any worse than the two films it follows, which is a minor positive at least. I'd actually put it above 1 but just below 2, though I'm splitting hairs really. I just feel all three are simply missing that little something extra, yet I'm not sure exactly what.

I also feel the same about the cast as I do for the preceding instalments, with the likes of Eddie Redmayne and Jude Law not doing much for me; though Law is at his best in the role here. I will say, however, that I did mildly enjoy Jessica Williams' performance.

The pacing is a tad iffy, if nothing super slow. The ending does feel delayed, I would've personally cut a decent chunk of it to be honest. The dialogue and humour is average, but one scene involving Pickett and Teddy did make me laugh in fairness.

All in all, I'm undoubtedly underwhelmed by these spin-offs/prequels to the great 'Harry Potter' franchise.