Guess my expectations were too high, so the previews did their job.
I've enjoyed all of J. K. Rowling's work, both in the Potter series and her other efforts.
She's kind of the C. S. Lewis, Roald Dahl of this century, noted she's self produced this effort.
It's just that there is so much style over substance here. The film has a story, or story lines that never quite find identity, for me at least.
Pretty disjointed, be-bopping from scene to scene although the sets and wardrobe were top notch.
As a piece of movie making, it's enviable and awful too. The technical aspects are quite good visually, although the CGI does betray itself overtly too often.
The audio isn't great, bombastic score, and every effect having the same EQ node. Dialogue often indistinct too.
Eddie Redmayne, who can be riveting, kind of smirks and mumbles his way through most of it. Colin Farrell again, pretty good in a "dark heavy-ish" part.
Dan Fogler just shone as Kowalski, fine work, a high point.
Alison Sudol too, winning as true hearted Queenie.
Katherine Waterston equally solid as the gritty Tina.
Decent acting here as allowed by the direction, and pacing.
I also felt there was an overt attempt at allegory here, a couple of agenda being peddled, and none too suave about it.
Rowling's driving her money here, which is auspicious for an author, and brave.
Curiously it ends up in the hands of those less sympathetic to the story, and trying to over serve technology.
Blurry, that's the word.
There is a problem with your e-mail address and we are unable to communicate with you. Please go to My Account to update your email.
Please choose a username to sign your comments. Only letters, digits, dash - or period. Minimum 4 characters.
Your age and sex:
We publish all comments, except abusive, at our discretion.