First a word on how this all started:

I believe I've mentioned before that I have a coworker who has a particular focus on sorting us all into Harry Potter houses. To this point, she believes the Pottermore quiz, as vague as it is, to be the ultimate decision maker.

Depending on which questions I get, it gives me either Ravenclaw or Slytherin, and I was henceforth forced into Slytherin because "we have too many Ravenclaws." I objected to this as, although I have no problem with fanon Slytherin, canon Slytherin is in many ways the exact opposite of me, and there's not a single Slytherin I actually like. The response to this is always "but Snape!" ... you mean the judgmental slime ball who spends the majority of the books harassing a child over something his father, someone the child never knew, did?

From the start, this made me not the most fond of this set-up. Worse, we had a non-binary coworker who openly objected to Rowling, and their trans bf once tried to explain to this individual in detail how this can reinforce certain ideas, promote her work which generates money for her, as well as make trans individuals feel unwelcome. She didn't really seem to engage in this all that seriously, and now just adds a cravat that Rowling sucks.

This thankfully died down some, due largely to this individual going to maternity leave, but then it recently came back to light due to some newer coworkers who weren't part of the last wave of forced-housing mechanics.

That non-binary coworker quit out of stress some time back, but at one point afterward I did try to make the argument that, if we get a trans coworker, it might seem unwelcoming to them. (Or like we just have bad taste or make people assume stereotypes, like do I want people to assume I'm some kind of ladder-climbing magic racist? No.) I did reflect on this, as I felt like I might be that person they warn you about, being over-sensitive and considering people who may exist in the future to the point of ruining the moment, but then... I personally consider myself agender and was never part of these discussions. More recently, JK Rowling also decided to attack asexual people, and she has begun to paint gay men who support the larger LGBT+ movement - as opposed to the LGB only movement - as pedophiles, so I've had quite enough of this.

As such, I objected subtly this time, and when it was suggested we "bring the board back," I pointed out that not many people are really into Harry Potter, but since it did increase engagement, we have some AtLA fans and that might be less uneven since we, as a science lab, do have a lot of Ravenclaws.

As there are several people who adore AtLA, this was received positively by just about everyone but that person, and now we have an AtLA board. I somehow went from Slytherin to an Air Nomad. Not sure how that is possible, haha, but we all agreed that, not only is this board more even, but it reflects the people who got each one surprisingly well.

... but, I guess the way I suggested that could be seen as either Air gentle suggestion or Slyth manipulation depending on how you want to look at it!

Random aside, but it's kind of funny that Air Nomads are vegetarians, and the 3 of us who limit our consumption of meat to various degrees all got assigned air. And that was of the only 3/4 of us who got it!

I won't lie, I am honestly thrilled that it worked, as every single time we went back to the Hogwarts houses, I tensed up in dread. Whereas, in Avatar: The Last Airbender, every single group has heroes and villains, and it's more about ideology and how you approach different situations and problems than the base and weirdly inconsistent traits in Harry Potter.

Still, I decided to see if the films focusing on adults, outside of all this hogwarts house nonsense, were less frustrating.

All of this is relevant because it highlights two of the core problems that have always existed within Harry Potter's writing:



1. The rigidity of black and white thinking
and
2. Rowling's complete lack of curiosity, she's effectively the anti-Ravenclaw which is why she can't write them

I'll focus on 1 here and 2 in the next post as it's more relevant after movie 3:

Number 1 starts out fine within the first couple of Harry Potter books, as their nature as relatively simple children's stories allows the battle of clear vs evil to exist in a functional way. However, as the series goes on and becomes more complex, this is a major reason why they become worse overall, as plots and characters often become incoherent.

The houses reflect this immediately: If you're Gryffindor, you're good. If you're in Slytherin, you're bad. Peter Pettigrew being the one exception, but that is never explained given how his whole personality revolves around being cowardly. If I had to guess, he was only a Gryffindor because she didn't know how to write him into their friend ground otherwise.

Furthermore, so long as you are labeled "good" thanks to some other quantifying label, you can do bad things and still be considered good for them. One of the first scenes has Hagrid turning Dudley into a pig-boy, something that he is rightfully horrified by. Dudley bullying Harry is bad; Hagrid potentially traumatizing Dudley is fine. This is relevant mainly because the admission into Hogwarts is seen as Harry's ticket to a better life, but Dudley isn't allowed to grow at all in return despite how he's clearly living a life of anger and unhappiness in a different way due to poor parenting.

As it goes on: Sirius puts children in danger and sometimes acts like Harry is a replacement for his father, James is a hero who... bullied Snape once?, and Dumbledore is a wise old, noble man who spends the whole series manipulating people, again mostly children. They're all universally good, and never asked to reckon with these actions. Secrets of Dumbledore even goes so far to imply that Dumbledore is the most worthy and pure of heart person around. Partially makes sense, but only if you ignore the sheer amount of people he's always putting in danger while not telling the full story to. Also in Secrets of Dumbledore, he gives Newt all the keys to enter a secret German prison to rescue his brother, but never tells him it's a giant pit full of deadly scorpions that eat people. Might've been nice to be able to prepare for that one in advance!

On the flip side, characters coded as evil are not allowed to grow meaningfully. The whole of Slytherin just gets up and leaves in the final book rather than fight the death eaters, something that aggravated me at the time and that I've apparently never gotten over.

Yet, there is no greater example of this than Snape. Snape is often considered the most complex Harry Potter character, but, as eluded to above, he spends the majority of the series harassing a child, as well as being clearly judgmental and biased against Gryffindor yet never getting punished for it. (Again, Dumbledore? Are you even doing your job?)

The narrative never makes him reflect on these actions. Instead, it is revealed he was in love with Lily, Harry's mother, a fact that is made worse by she married James, who bullied Snape. His love for her is treated as a positive trait, but it's... honestly a bit creepy if you step back and look at how it manifests, his almost complete lack of relationship to her, and the degree to which he's obsessed over it. Nonetheless, this love is his guiding goodness.

So, he kills Dumbledore, but it's okay, it was all according to their plan! And then he's the only Slytherin to oppose Voledmort, dies in the process, and is redeemed through this death. Harry, who spent much of his childhood being abused by this man, names a kid after him.

At no point throughout this does he need to acknowledge his actions or reflect upon them, he's just immediately changed from "bad" to "good." While there should be room for nuance and complexity, that is not supported within the text itself, which instead exalts him afterwards.

Since it would be easy to say "there's nothing wrong with clear good vs evil!" or conversely "but we want complex, nuanced characters!" or such-- then I agree, yes, but the problem here is how it conflates the two. Let's compare with three other different media:

Lord of the Rings: Good and evil are clearly defined, and if characters do stray, such as we see with Gollum and gradually Frodo as the ring impacts him, those are examined in depth as symbolic of the corruptible nature of power, even when given to those who should be most resistant to it. It's a gradual process that Frodo eventually resists the best to his ability, and even when he hesitates at the end, it's his sympathy for another that ends up saving him. If this were Harry Potter, Legolas would probably emotionally torment an orc when rescuing Merry/Pippin, and then it never be mentioned again. This is inconceivable because of how such an act would reflect upon Legolas.

Star Wars: Light Side, Dark Side, but if someone on the light side does start taking malicious actions, they also become gradually corrupted and those around them tend to take notice and try to influence them back. There's 3 whole movies and a long animated series - which is somehow better than the movies - about Anakin's struggle with this. Anakin is then redeemed in a similar way to Snape, by turning sides and dying in the outcome at the end, but the difference is his legacy in-universe is still as Darth Vader, and any forgiveness of him is framed as an ideological choice in order to not let hatred into your heart which could only continue the cycle. No one is out there arguing that "Darth Vader was actually a good person because he loved Padme!"

Final Fantasy VI: Evil Empire to the point it doesn't even really have a name beyond "Empire," as well as one of the villains considered the most vile in video game history. Characters like Terra are fundamentally good, she choose to be so due to what she witnesses, and then we have a slew of ones which are more ambiguous: Celes has to wrestle with the box she was born into versus what she feels is right, something which does not disappear overnight when she switches sides. She still carries grief, and that's even before the world ends and she can potentially attempt to commit suicide. Characters like Setzer and Shadow are also more morally ambiguous, but the narrative treats them as such, with others often reacting to them with dismay or frustration. This group didn't band together because they're "good," but because of a mix of desperation, personal reasons, and the sheer level of the stakes set upon the world. Just about every character has at least one traumatic secret, and that's also the point.

I'd throw Edgar in this mix, but that one is likely more due to changing cultural norms and how common the "flirty to the point of questionable" character archetype was in anime at the time.

Or, let's go with Avatar: The Last Airbender again: What is done to Snape is like if Zuko was killed off at the beginning of season 2, resulting in him being seen as a hero. Sure, we knew he was tormented by something and likely more complex, but he spent the majority of that time just trying to capture a child while also causing quite a bit of damage to random bystanders. Instead, we get to see clearly every discussion and event that leads to Zuko eventually switching sides, and then he spends all of the final season attempting to make up for it.

Also, when Zuko hears of Snape's Lily issues:





What was the purpose of that long write-up? It's because it's highly relevant for the next part, as these problems are amped up to 11 in Fantastic Beasts. It becomes apparent none of this is a fluke.


Fantastic Beasts and the Crimes of Wizard Hitler

If the first movie was merely mediocre, this one is a complete mess.



The crux of the movie revolves around predictable plot twists. Dumbledore is manipulative! Everyone is related to everyone!

I think the best way to describe this clusterfuck is to go character by character. First, the ones I didn't mention last time:

- ... I honestly can't remember her name Tina according to wikipedia: ???: a magic cop like Harry becomes. She exists to show us that magical bureaucracy sucks even in 1920, when there were probably fewer departments needing to sign things off, and be Newt's love interest with 0 chemistry. Has no personality. Exists. Maybe.
- Queenie: aka Temu Roxie Hart: ???'s sister with a confusingly different accent who acts like a generic floozy. I kept on expecting her to have a deeper personality, and... well, it goes places, but not there! She's introduced as a telepath because sure, why not invite even more plotholes.
- Jacob: Cinnamon Roll: A Muggle Polish baker who works in a factory, which he understandably hates, and dreams of opening up his own bakery.
- Credence Barebone: Wizard Sasuke (thanks, toff): Well, 'barebone' is a fitting name, but this man may as well be the real main character. In the first film, he's repressed due to being an orphan growing up in a strict household that hates magic, which results in him becoming an obscurus, a type of malevolent magical entity capable of mass destruction.

This whole situation is weird which is why I didn't touch on it originally. The household is clearly meant to be Christian-coded, but religion is never actually mentioned. The woman who keeps on whipping him hates mages because she believes that there's a secret society of wizards out there hiding from regular people, so we must hunt out magic at all costs before they do something to harm regular humans... and... she's right? There IS a secret society of mages out there! And a lot of them DO want to harm muggles!

Don't think too hard on what this means about actual conspiracy theories in this era involving people secretly controlling things. It will only give you a headache.

Also fun fact: Newt says that an obscurus is incredibly rare, to the point the only one he's seen before now was in Sudan. The logic here is most societies have "evolved past" wanting to repress or fearmonger about magic, but that makes even less sense considering they're still hidden across the globe and cults exist in every society. Also, why are we acting like only the US had witch hunts? The UK had more than we did!

Don't think too hard about the real-world implications of "don't repress who you truly are inside" either... your head will also start hurting once you think of Rowling.
- Leta LeStrange: Her only reference in the first film is from a photograph. Temu Roxie sees it, and then invades Newt's brain uninvited - not stopping after he tells her not to - and learns that she's his ex. She describes her as a "taker, not a giver." Basically added for an unnecessary love triangle.

... and then, of course, Dumbledore and Grindelwald.

With that out of the way:

One of the first scenes in this one highlights exactly why I wrote the above.

Temu Roxie has shown up in England, where Newt is now that he's back home. Temu Roxie and Cinnamon Roll fell in love in the first movie. I have no clue why, it just immediately happens, but it's treated as tragic because he's a muggle and backwards American laws don't allow wizards to marry muggles!

Upset over this, she has now decided to... brainwash him with a charm potion and kidnap him to England, where they can be married. Newt, recognizing that Cinnamon Roll has been charmed, objects to this plan and makes her undo the spell. Cinnamon Roll, suddenly finding himself whisked off to England against his will, immediately asks "how long were you going to keep my under that spell? Until we're married? Until our 3rd child? Forever?"

... and oof, the sheer implications of that. Worth remembering that Voldemort was conceived via rape due to a charm portion, and that Rowling has stated this as a reason for why Voldemort turned out completely evil. While Voldemort's mother was never dating the man, forced marriage that Cinnamon Roll has plainly rejected in the past combined with the potential for kids while under a spell is still unambiguously rape.

Alas, Temu Roxie doesn't end up singing in a cell block for this action. Instead, Cinnamon Roll ends up apologizing to her for his stubborn behavior.

This is never brought up again. See, Temu Roxie is framed as "good" and simply misguided in her actions; thus, she doesn't mean to do harm even when her actions include explicit attempted rape. While the Hagrid example I started with can fall into a certain type of punishment humor in children's book/films (see: just about all of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory), by this point I believe there's enough evidence to say this mentality goes far beyond that.

After that, things happen! In 1920s Paris this time! Paris is just London with more cafes in this world, but at least it spares me from constantly objecting to every little historical flub as I know a lot less about 1920s French history than American. Although, I will say that if I were making magical 1920s Paris, I would have a lot more crossdressers. More cabaret, fewer freak carnival shows.

As in said carnival freak show, we're introduced to our real protagonist: Mr. Barebones aka Wizard Sasuke. He survived the first film, somehow, and is now living in the circus. He doesn't like the circus and is still broody.

We're also introduced to Voldemort's snake, who apparently used to be a real woman before being transformed into a snake, and you'd think this would have more to it, but it doesn't. She's never seen or mentioned again outside of a couple of scenes here.

I call Sasuke the real main character as the plot of this movie is effectively about his heritage more than anyone or anything else. Newt and ??? might as well not exist at all in this and it would make little difference. ??? has no role at all, and Newt is only here because Dumbledore is manipulating him in his place as he made a blood pact with Mage Hitler that prevents him from moving against him directly.

And oh wow do I simply not care about Sasuke's heritage. Why should I? He grew up in an orphanage, was abused because the foster system sucks and is full of religious creeps - something these movies do get right - and the people who conceived him are largely irrelevant.

... or should be. Instead, surprise! He's a LeStrange! ... except wait, not really, he's actually a Dumbledore! In America! Who would've thought?!

I should back up here, but somehow the explanation is even worse than that.

First a detour into a character who is formally introduced in this film: Leta LeStrange. Obviously meant to tie this into characters from the original books, and Leta is a character who had a ton of potential, but it's wasted.

Leta is Newt's childhood friend and implied ex-gf - or at least love interest in some capacity - as they were both seen as the weird kids at school and branded together with their outcast status. Despite how we're explicitly told that Leta is a "taker," in practice she actively defends Newt and herself against bullies. At one point, she plays a prank on one of them which would be praised if a Gryffindor like Fred and George had done it, but... she's a Slytherin and a LeStrange, so surely she's hiding something bad!

According to the wikia, she is selfish (but how?) and the reason Newt got expelled from Hogwarts was because he took the blame - willingly - for something that was technically her fault, but that would then be his own choice. I also have no idea where this is from, so you'd probably have to read some supplemental material to even get the impression she did something like this.

But aha! She is hiding something... that isn't really bad at all as she was a stressed child. You see, the big reveal is that comes from a messed up family where she was unloved because her father only valued men (see: notes at the end). He eventually has a son with a different woman from her mother, but then because he's an asshole a man named Kama wants to kill his song in revenge. In order to protect his son, he sends him, their half-house-elf nanny, and Leta as well for some reason, to America on a boat. You'd think a rich wizarding family would have a better option than public access boat, but I digress.

The seas are already choppy due to a storm, and Leta, a young child, cannot get to sleep because her brother, a baby, is crying constantly. She gets up and tries to comfort him, but it doesn't work. In desperation, she decides to temporarily switch him with another baby on board who IS sleeping soundly. She plans to switch them back once she manages to get some sleep.

But disaster strikes! The boat sinks, and her brother ends up dying in the aftermath as he's on a different lifeboat!

Now, a random act of nature is not her fault, and it seems inane to blame a child, especially one in her family situation, for something like that.

The reason all of this is relevant, beyond just giving her a tragic backstory? The boy she swapped her brother with ended up being Sasuke.

There's a number of questions here, like why was Leta even sent if she just ended up in Hogwarts instead of America later anyway or why are wizarding families in Europe sending their kids to muggle orphanages in the US? But none of that is ever answered for we must focus on Sasuke's brooding over his heritage, which is clearly more important than him trying to improve his present situation!

Anyway, Leta then dies, sacrificing herself to stall Wizard Hitler and save the others. The ultimate act of selflessness. Also, the one of only possible two endings for characters in the Rowling universe: you either die or get straight married and have kids.

The reveal about her switching babies was meant to reflect how he was believed to have been a LeStrange - I honestly can't remember why as I can't express enough how boring I found all of this - but no, he was actually... something else! A random guy?

Oh no, as Wizard Hitler quickly clarifies, he's actually a Dumbledore! Dun dun dun.

Again, I do not know why I should give a shit. Or why anyone should. There's a reason no one ever makes Bible stories out of the lengthy genealogies after Genesis. Jacob beget Mark? Not something anyone needs to know. It's at this point that I start pinning for Twisted Wonderland, since despite stealing the magic-personality-dorm concept, at least we get characters like Vil who doesn't know who his mother and doesn't care to. Simple, effectively conveys that relationship, and he prefers to focus on what he can change in the moment. Plus, again, significantly more crossdressing.

And I now want to know why, not just one, multiple high wizarding families are shipping off babies to New York.

The focus on all of this instead of... literally anything else dampens what could've been. Leta undeniably has better chemistry with Newt than ??? does. Even if she had done something selfish in the past, it could've been framed as caused by her unstable upbringing, and now that she knows more about the world, she regrets it. They could've had her, forced into Slytherin due to the curse of her family name, instead gravitate to Hufflepuff, where Newt is, and change as a person due to witnessing a kindness she wasn't afforded otherwise. A love story between two outcasts with that kind of background would've been like catnip to me.

This isn't the end of this movie, for better or worse, as we now get to what these 3 intended to focus on from the start: the Rise of Wizard Hitler. Here, we get to combine the two worst written characters throughout this: Sasuke AND Temu Roxie. Wizard Hitler spent the first movie manipulating Sasuke, and once Sasuke realized it, went off like the magic nuke he is. Despite that, upon learning he's a Dumbledore, Sasuke, in true illogical side-switching fashion, decides sure, let's rejoin Wizard Hitler because clearly that's the best way to get back at this Dumbledore family he knows nothing about. Certainly, he couldn't be lying or trying to use me this time!

For his part, Grindelwald thinks that Sasuke, having nuke abilities, is the key to defeating Dumbledore, who he cannot injure.

Meanwhile, Temu Roxie, upset over not being able to marry a muggle, is overcome with emotion at the idea of this new Wizard Hitler world where all muggles are... enslaved? genocided? She joins Wizard Hitler because she's a dumbass. This, at least, isn't unrealistic, as she's basically just another causality on r/leopardsatemyface at this point.

However, the issue is it still presents her as good and simply misguided. Fun point: The 4 American Houses are basically just the Hogwarts ones with different names, and she was in American Hufflepuff. I guess at least it finally had someone who wasn't a Slytherin join a genocidal movement, points for that?

Grindelwald gives a speech at the end here, before she switches over and he kills Leta, but as the 3rd movie is more about this, I'll save that for the next section.

Random final other notes:
- France and 1920s/1930s Hogwarts are more diverse than NYC was. I'm guessing this was due to people pointing that out in the first movie, but it makes significantly less sense in 1920s Hogwarts and only raises more questions about NYC...
- Fantastic beasts? What fantastic beasts?
- At one point, there's two random Wizard Hitler Goons who it shows changing appearance/gender to bypass French magical security. I don't even know who these two are, so the decision to show us this specifically is... suspect considering later revelations. People have gone back and pointed out suspicious moments in the Harry Potter books, but I've never seen anyone do so with these films or else I'm sure this would be on there.
- I neglected to mention that Leta was also conceived via mind-control rape, which is rightfully portrayed as horrific, but then that makes the contrast with how it's hand-waved with Temu Roxie all the more wtf. At least Leta isn't considered doomed to be evil forever due to being the product of rape and unloved by her parents, as Rowling once stated that "Voldemort is incapable of love" because he was the product of rape and then unloved by his parents. It might be why we're supposed to think she's worse than she is, though.
- The not valuing women thing: Sexism never exists within this universe, be it within the Wizarding World or Muggle world. As such, I'm assuming this is just one man's personal issue with controlling people who he sees as sexual objects, something that can conceivably happen regardless of the sex of those involved.

Although, if you're writing about fascism... strict gender roles are such a vital part of fascism because they reduce everyone down to soldier of the empire or baby factory for the empire in order to get a stead supply of the people they need, so overlooking that for the sake of fantasy is part of why this gets messy if trying to tackle such a serious topic.



I was going to include the final movie in this one as well, until I realized just how long this has already gotten. Oops, I am good at ranting about Harry Potter.