Fantastic Beasts (and how to monetize them)

Will the average CSU student enjoy “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them?” Well that depends – how steeped in Harry Potter lore are you? It’s not a movie that lends itself to new fans. A better question is whether the average college student is being targeted to help fund this multi-billion-dollar wizarding world franchise experiment, an attempt to create an expanded universe to rival those like Marvel and DC. Looking at why this movie exists provides insight into where the industry is going today, and why we have so many sequels ahead of us in the next few years. “Fantastic Beasts,” like most spin-offs, is an obvious cash cow following an established formula for guaranteed success - a bland, shy British male lead, a bumbling comic relief sidekick, and not one but two bright young attractive women (except now we have adults instead of jailbait, so it’s marginally less creepy when you look them up on fansites). Some of the beasts will even start to look like knock offs of those found in the Harry Potter movies if you look at them for too long. See if you can spot the off-brand hippogriff and dementor. But the movie is also a tremendous Hollywood gamble, a product that has to be compelling enough to justify its own existence. They asked themselves whether a movie without the benefit of preceding books or an already established fan base would succeed, decided yes, and then went for it whole hog – even standing by their cast choice Johnny Depp after allegations of domestic abuse arose, and announcing five movies before the first even premiered. Furthermore, the somewhat lackluster “Star Wars” prequels and “The Hobbit” movies were mentioned frequently before the release date – would “Fantastic Beasts” be nostalgic but fresh enough at the same time? Could they repackage Harry Potter – we’re talking about another plot involving dark lord tyrants here – yet scale it up to its aging base demographic, the so-called Harry Potter generation, while still reaching new audiences? Because of this, the creators needed to reach as many people as possible, leading to the movie’s greatest weakness: lack of focus. The CGI creatures are beautiful, and anyone would want a niffler or thunderbird after seeing “Fantastic Beasts,” but what’s really interesting is the inability of the movie to commit to an audience. Is it targeting children with whimsy, cute animals, a simple plot, and overly heavy-handed messages of discrimination, abuse, and ecological conservation? Or is the movie for adults who would better understand the complex politics and be interested in some of the subtler themes? Maybe it’s for history fans who want the most overtly 1920s movie possible, complete with gangsters, speakeasies, and flapper dresses? Or could it really just be for the aforementioned Harry Potter fan base as evidenced by name dropping Hogwarts and Dumbledore? The movie itself is marketed as adult, and there are certainly dark themes to be found. The magic is stronger, the property destruction is more catastrophic, and the political incompetency is further heightened. Yet at the same time, there are entire scenes where the characters do nothing except take care of animals. Does that mean the movies cannot be enjoyed? Of course not. If they are not taken too seriously, there’s still plenty of magic and surprises to the “Fantastic Beasts” series. Warner Brothers is banking on the fact that no one knows what will happen next to draw consumers like us in. Most Harry Potter fans already knew the spoilers; here, there’s potential for actual suspense. All that’s known is that the movies will take place from 1925-1941, climaxing during WWII. The next movie is headed to Paris – let’s see if the numbers will follow the beasts there.