![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
potentiality_26) wrote2016-11-26 05:53 pm
Reaction Post
But I did go to see Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. It had a few problems that I’ve heard people talk about already, but it was an enjoyable movie overall and I liked it. There's one thing I need to get off my chest, though:
I’m a little baffled by the wizard-muggle (no-maj) relationship in the movie. It’s based around the idea that the American wizards are so determined to avoid something like Salem happening again that they’re completely unwilling to interact with humans at all.
That works, except (and I’m kicking this one over to the kind of people who reread the books all the time, because it’s been a while for me and maybe I’m just totally wrong about this) don’t I remember someone once telling Harry that wizards were almost never (or straight up never) killed in witch trials? That they just did spells to keep the fires from burning them and that one guy liked it so much he kept getting caught? Without the threat of a Salem-like event, the American paranoia makes very little sense. The vibe in the original Harry Potter series was that wizards lived separately from humans not because they were afraid of some X-men type shit if humans knew they were out there, but because they thought humans were kinda lame.
Again, I could be completely wrong about this and remembering some other book series, but there was nothing in Harry Potter up to this point that suggested that humans were (or could be) a threat to wizard-kind, and then this movie comes along and suggests that that wizards are genuinely worried that there could a war with humans???
Either humans are a threat to wizards or they aren’t, you know? And the original series doesn’t make a whole lot of sense if they are- and I’m way more attached to the original series than I am to this movie, fun as it was.Anyway, I did like the movie. Maybe I'll do a proper reaction post later.
no subject
As for the Graves question, some people are apparently interpreting JKRs comment regarding Grindel!Graves the way that Graves never really existed.
Yeah, I don't buy it. Like you say, some random guy isn't going to just get a job like that out of the blue. And the vibe I got was that Grindlewald was specifically interested in finding an obscurus, so it would make sense if he heard about one in New York and replaced the real Graves to check it out. Him spending all this time building this identity on the off chance that he could use it one day doesn't quite work. And anyway, hadn't Grindlewald been in Europe or the UK at start of the movie? Someone had to be doing Graves' job then, right?
So yeah, I'm holding out hope that he's alive. I just wish they had explained it in the film either way. Tina asking what happened to the real Graves after Grindlewald was unmasked and getting an answer would've been like two lines of dialogue. If he's dead, or there never was a Graves at all, it would have been better to just say so then than confuse people, so I'm holding out hope that it'll be a plot-point later on.
no subject
JKR did reveal that Grindelwald is a seer, so I’m assuming that he ended up in New York because he had a vision of the obscurus that told him where to look for him/her. Once there he looked for a suitable person to impersonate and chose Graves, because let’s be honest, who would not want to be Graves. ;)
I just wish they had explained it in the film either way. Tina asking what happened to the real Graves after Grindlewald was unmasked and getting an answer would've been like two lines of dialogue.
Exactly, that’s all it would have taken to let everyone know that Grindelwald did indeed impersonate a real person. It also seems weird that nobody asked this particular question. I do realize that they had other things to worry about as well (no-majes learning about magic), but nobody questioning what happened to Graves makes it look like nobody cares.
There’s still hope for more Graves in the sequels though. I did read a comment recently that the fact that Grindelwald used transfiguration rather than polyjuice potion gives JKR a lot more options to include original Graves in the sequels. IMO that’s a good point. If he had been using polyjuice potion Graves would either have to be a prisoner or a follower of Grindelwald and he would have to be in New York so Grindelwald can make more of the potion. Now he could be anywhere and show up at any point in the sequels.
no subject
Definitely. He and Tina seemed pretty close, and I find it hard to believe that she wouldn't want to know what happened to her boss.
If he had been using polyjuice potion Graves would either have to be a prisoner or a follower of Grindelwald and he would have to be in New York so Grindelwald can make more of the potion. Now he could be anywhere and show up at any point in the sequels.
Now I'm picturing Graves popping up at some point and saying, "So this is what happens when I go on vacation."
But I like the idea that he could be anywhere.
no subject
Yeah, from the way they interacted she seems to be the obvious choice to question what happened to Graves. Those two definitely have history whether it’s romantic or not.
Now I'm picturing Graves popping up at some point and saying, "So this is what happens when I go on vacation."
*lol* You have no idea how badly I want to read this as fanfic now.
no subject
There's a lot of really interesting stuff to read between the lines with them.
You have no idea how badly I want to read this as fanfic now.
Heh. I kind of want to write it, ngl.
Would you mind if I added you as a friend? We seem like we have several fandoms in common.
no subject
DO IT! :D
Would you mind if I added you as a friend?
Not at all. I’ll add you as well.
no subject