JK Rowling

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald – Review

Nov 28, 2018 – by David Conway

Dumbledore. Grindelwald. Lestrange. Flamel. Nagini.

The above is a disparate series of Wizarding World names and references. When you look at these names like this, you acknowledge that they are relevant to the Harry Potter franchise. You acknowledge they are important parts of its history. Do you care that I’ve written this random list of names though? No. Not particularly. That’s the feeling one gets from Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, a film so obsessed with attaching these titles to its characters that it forgets to make us care about them at all, believing their connection with other characters will hand-wave away all that tedious need for development.

“Though the film goes to great efforts to connect these threads together, there’s something wholly unengaging about the constant shifting between them, never getting enough time with an individual plot to invest in it”

Set in 1927, the film documents the rise of fascist wizard Gellert Grindelwald (Johnny Depp), and the attempts to stop him by magical zoologist Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) and friends, a quest assigned to them by Grindelwald’s ex-partner, Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law). This is of course, when the film isn’t getting tangled in one of its many subplots that, regardless of being connected to this main storyline, often don’t convince us why we should be particularly bothered about them. These include the identity of extremely powerful magical creature Credence (Ezra Miller), an undercooked love triangle, and an absurdly convoluted trip into family histories. Though the film goes to great efforts to connect these threads together, there’s something wholly unengaging about the constant shifting between them, never getting enough time with an individual plot to invest in it.

It’s made all the more exhausting by the fact there are the seeds of engaging ideas in there. Grindelwald is a character that uses his ‘silver tongue’ to great advantage, and there are moments where watching him charm and seduce his followers starts to intrigue. But CUT. We’ve moved on from that just as it was getting interesting, and now we’re following Credence as he mopes around with Nagini (Claudia Kim, who is scandalously relegated to looking sad when Credence is sad), trying to find out his true identity. Miller as Credence is absolutely fantastic with what he is given, and works his hardest to make the character a vulnerable, real person. However, just as we’re beginning to get attached to this lost, confused young man – CUT. We’re off to Leta Lestrange (Zoe Kravitz) having an extended flashback about her Hogwarts days, as it’s just occurred to Rowling we don’t actually know anything about her and she’s going to be important soon.

What salvages the film from this messy, indecisive screenplay, is the wizarding world itself. Whilst I wasn’t exactly riveted by what was going on, the film was made a pleasant enough experience simply by the world it’s set in being so creative and charming. The parts when the audience I was with and I became most immersed in the film were the little touches, the secret doors and roads in Paris, the wonders of the moving archives at the ministry, and the eponymous magical creatures (I was a big fan of the baby Niffler). It’s a testament to the world Rowling has built that it can still enchant even when paired with lackluster material, and director Yates and his visual effects team deliver some really lovely little touches on the periphery, that make it feel like a full blooded world. It’s a place you want to spend time in, and the one thing this spin-off does take advantage of is the opportunity for world building.

Paired with this is that the majority of the cast are very likeable, and manage to bring pathos to even the most limited of screentime. Alison Sudol as Queenie Goldstein has a potentially emotional and moving subplot made unconvincing by the lack of time spent with it, but never lets that stop her from delivering the goods. By its climax, you’re almost sold on it, entirely thanks to her. Eddie Redmayne continues to impress as a leading man, being one of the few characters given space to breathe and grow, giving a typical ‘lovable outsider’ role a real spark that sets it above others. And Jude Law’s debut as Dumbledore is a subtle, convincing portrayal that leaves you with no doubt as to the man he will become. Much like the setting of the wizarding world, these characters create a pleasant atmosphere that makes the film more enjoyable than the narrative that drives them.

However, narrative is indeed what seems to drive Crimes of Grindelwald; it just has no idea which direction it’s driving in. There’s been arguments that Rowling is a novelist, and that this is set up for later installments where it will all pay off. For pay off to work though, you need to be invested in the action in the first place. We cared what happened to Harry, Ron and Hermoine because early films like Philosopher’s Stone and Chamber of Secrets focused on them, took time to let us get to know them, instead of telling us they’re going to be important down the line so we should care about them. Just because we’re aware Nagini becomes Voldemort’s snake, doesn’t mean she’s excused from having a personality in this film. What redeems it is that I did want to spend more time with certain aspects of the plot with potential. So perhaps if Rowling whittles down on characters for Fantastic Beasts 3: The Secret Father of Hagrid’s Dog, or whatever it’s eventually called, the franchise can regain some of what made Potter special.

What’s the hype? – Harry Potter

Let’s get this cleared up right off the bat: I do not hate fun. I’m not one of those people who hates on popular things to try and increase their edginess. You won’t find me writing a think-piece about why Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again signals the downfall of culture (if anything, it heightens it). But I am here to deliver a solemn message that must be delivered: the Harry Potter movies are overrated.

Whether it’s the earlier movies where Harry Potter gets three billion points for Gryffindor every time just for being Harry Potter, or the later movies where Ron’s always crying, the franchise as a whole is just fine. It’s fine. If the powers that be were to craft a 1001 Movies to Put on Your Netflix Watchlist and Maybe Watch Next Weekend but you Probably Never Will Before You Die list, all the Potters would be on there. In fact, if you run the numbers (and I have) it turns out that the most average, middle-of-the-road movie in the entire history of cinema is Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.

“But no, we’ve got to follow that miserable four-eyes around for 1,178 minutes”

My main gripe with the movies is that its eponymous hero, Harold Potter, is a pretty boring character to build a cultural empire upon. He’s plopped into the stream of The Chosen One, and over the course of the eight (eight!) films, drifts into the Estuary of Greatness. To round off this wet metaphor, throughout the franchise Harry Potter is mostly kept afloat by the deeds of more interesting minor characters – for example, that werewolf-man, whom the rest of the series should’ve been about. Wouldn’t that have been badass! But no, we’ve got to follow that miserable four-eyes around for 1,178 minutes.

Again, I must stress that I don’t dislike these films, I simply have total ambivalence towards them. I am quite frankly stunned at the iron-grip they hold on popular culture. Remember that movie Focus, with Will Smith and Margot Robbie? An absolutely standard movie. As forgettable as a ham sandwich. On the same level, one may say, as the majority of the Harry Potters. Now imagine if Focus held that same cultural weight as our boy HP. Imagine if everyone had Focus-themed scarves and did online tests to see which casino they’d be most suited to conning. Imagine if, ten years after Focus was released, its writer kept retroactively adding traits to characters which were not apparent in the film itself, and there’d be 60 clickbait articles about how Will Smith’s character in Focus is actually a Sagittarius. Wouldn’t that blow your mind? Wouldn’t you be compelled to write for Exeposé Online about how Focus is overrated? Now you understand my viewpoint. And you can’t argue against me because I’ve just awarded myself three billion points for writing this article.

Voluntourism: A Force for Exploitation?

“Iwill never retweet appeals that treat poor children as opportunities to enhance Westerners CVs”. Those were the words of author J.K. Rowling in a stream of tweets in August 2016 after she was asked to endorse a charity offering volunteer opportunities in orphanages. This condemnation of the growing trend of young volunteers from wealthy countries, many of them gap year students, heading to the developing world to fulfil short-term projects has surfaced and resurfaced several times in recent years.

The so-called ‘voluntourism’ industry is worth an estimated $2.6 billion each year according to Save The Children. That’s more than the total GDP of Liberia, half the GDP of Malawi and one fifth of the GDP of Nicaragua.

The intentions of the vast majority of ‘voluntourists’ are likely to be genuinely philanthropic. The 1.6 million people that travel to volunteer in developing countries annually sometimes fork out thousands of pounds for their experience. To spend such a lot of money on a volunteer project rather than simply a summer-sun getaway is certainly admirable, and can perhaps only come from a genuine desire to make the positive impact that international voluntary organisations promote so fiercely.

Many fear that the framing of the wealthy Westerner as the benevolent giver serves to belittle host communities

Furthermore, as is one of the key selling points in recruiting volunteers, such experiences allow participants to drastically broaden their worldview. Cultivating global consciousness across a young generation in the developed world can perhaps only be a good thing. And although adjectives like “life-changing” have become somewhat cliché when we hear students talk about their gap year, it is hard to imagine that participants do not take what they have seen and experienced forward with them in some way when they leave the host country.

However unfortunately, these, the most obvious benefits of voluntourism, seemingly focus disproportionately upon the volunteer rather than the communities in need.

Cynics will say that volunteering can never be a completely altruistic act, and it can sometimes feel hard to argue to the contrary when voluntourism organisations use plentiful CV gains and a sense of personal gratification as their main selling points. Whilst it is possible for such motivations to complement a genuine desire to help those in need, personal gain necessarily complicates the role of the volunteer within the host community, and in the worst cases, can encourage people to participate for the wrong reasons.

Critique of voluntourism also raises ethical concerns regarding the worldview and stereotypes that result from such projects in the developing world. Many fear that the framing of the wealthy Westerner as the benevolent giver serves to belittle host communities. Rather than contributing to meaningful development, an imbalanced narrative of a poor South in desperate need of charity is perpetuated. This, in and of itself, is counterproductive to sustainable development.

The issues with voluntourism are practical too. Most participants are not trained or qualified for the work which they carry out- it is, for example, unlikely that many gap year students are trained in construction when they embark upon projects to build schools or libraries. In many instances, it is actually the case that unskilled volunteers are compromising the employment of qualified locals. Again then, we have to question exactly who is benefitting from voluntourism if not the local community.

‘Orphanage tourism’

Perhaps the most problematic form of voluntourism is ‘orphanage tourism’. This uncomfortably paradoxical phrase refers to the trend of volunteering in orphanages, as well as the practice of orphanages eliciting donations and sponsorships from holidaymakers.

Again, orphanage volunteers often have the best of intentions, and the desire to help some of the poorest children is certainly an admirable one. However, there is a growing sentiment that this practice has increasingly harmful effects upon the children involved.

For one, the short-term nature of many placements takes a heavy emotional toll on the children that are the target of voluntary efforts in the first place. Volunteers form emotional connections with orphans, and then leave as quickly as they arrived. As co-founder of ReThink Orphanages, Leigh Mathews explains “this repeated cycle of connection and abandonment really contributes to a really low self-esteem for these children”.

In addition, and more worryingly still, there is evidence to suggest that the generosity of volunteers and tourists has actually proliferated the exploitation of orphans for financial gain.

Cambodia is one country which has come under the spotlight in this regard. Reportedly, the number of orphanages across the country increased by 60% between 2005-2015, with half of these concentrated in typically touristic destinations. During this same period, Cambodia’s GDP has grown by nearly $11.76 billion, life expectancy at birth has risen by over five and a half years, and the fertility rate has dropped by over 0.6. If development is thriving, why is the number or orphanages growing?

Cambodia: a case study for a country popular with ‘voluntourists’

Increasingly, evidence points towards a simple answer: corruption. The ReThink Orphanages Network estimates that of the 8 million children in residential care across the world, 80% have living family. Some organisations have reported instances where ‘orphans’ are bought or leased from parents, only to be exploited, and in some cases, even abused, by orphanage owners, in order to capitalise on the generosity of donations and line their own pockets. In such cases, it is doubtful how much of the money the ‘orphans’ see.

Thankfully, with growing concern surrounding the ethics of ‘orphanage tourism’, organisations have begun to take action. Last year, World Challenge, the largest school-based volunteer company in the world, brought an end to high school students visiting orphanages. Indeed, in the September of last year, a committee in the Australian parliament went so far as to appeal to the government to ban orphanage tourism altogether as a matter of urgency. Rather than financially bolstering orphanages through volunteer projects, Save The Children and ReThink Orphanages advise positive action supporting organisations that provide community- rather than residential-based care.

So what can we do?

It’s a troublesome situation to say the least, as the sentiments behind voluntourism are, for the most part, productive and genuinely altruistic. Ultimately, the desire to make a difference to those living in poverty should absolutely not be dissuaded. However, there is a growing feeling that we need to seriously rethink voluntourism to facilitate more ethical grass roots change.

Save The Children advises that those looking to volunteer in the developing world ask themselves the right questions before they make a commitment; most importantly that they consider whether they are setting out for the right reasons, and whether they have the appropriate skills to make a productive contribution. It is vital to ask the right questions of the volunteering organisation too, or better still, to bypass such organisations and contact projects directly where possible.

However, another more sustainable solution could be to omit the volunteering element of voluntourism altogether.

The so-called ‘voluntourism’ industry is worth an estimated $2.6 billion each year

To go to a developing country, but to go as a tourist. To stay in a locally run hotel and contribute money to the local economy. To aid development, yes, but without considering it an act of pity or charity. And to continue to donate money to development projects, but to make sure it is going to the right places- for example towards facilitating family-based rather than residential care, or towards providing employment for local workers.

With all respect to those who have travelled as voluntourists, it remains that we need to take steps to eradicate the margin for exploitation and dangerous power imbalances in order to go forwards making a difference in the developing world. To do that, we need to entirely rethink our role in aiding development. Whilst that might not translate to something that we can put on our CVs or on social media, it might just be the key to kick-starting real change.

Pretty Firehouse Lies

I’ve never been to this pub in my life”: A simple sentence with a crushing sentiment. When JK Rowling tweeted last week “if you want real fantasy go to an estate agent” in response to the legendary Firehouse being snapped up for £3-4 million by PLC, the legend of Rowling taking inspiration for the Leaky Cauldron from the Harry Potter franchise took its last sip of the emerald potion Horcrux (for non-fluent speakers, that means it was brutally crushed).

Twitter user, danielRD_15 voiced the nation’s sorrow, reacting with a crying face emoji accompanied with the phrase we were all thinking, it’s “all a lie”. Already dangerously close to never receiving our letter to Hogwarts, this story shatters our last illusion about university. Along with the fact we thought we would be organised, find the love of our lives and get value for £9,250, we now have to add this to our list.

The idea that Gandy Street is the inspiration for Diagon Alley is frankly, laughable

What many people forget about Exeter University, is that JK Rowling didn’t like it. So immediately, the urban legends that Exeter city inspired elements of Harry Pottery are weakened. Maybe it isn’t inspired by Exeter but it surely has to be partly inspired by England, its quaint fantasy and stereotyping of an English boarding school-system is irresistible even to the most pessimistic of us.

The only strong cases for JK taking major inspiration is in the mention of geography of Devon, the drama of Dartmoor, the uniquely named villages like “Budleigh Babbington” named (supposedly) after “Budleigh Salterton”, and Ottery St Catchpole must have been somehow taken from Ottery St Mary. The idea that Gandy Street is the inspiration for Diagon Alley is frankly, laughable. Gandy Street holds the magic of Sunday mornings and seaside holidays, with its quirky selection of chocolates and jewellers, but the most supernatural thing there is the astronomical prices of the products. Essentially, Gandy Street is just a narrow street, isn’t it?

I once visited the Washington Singer building purely hoping to bump into Moaning Myrtyle and was disappointed in what was essentially, a pair of slightly old tapes. Though I did spend an embarrassing amount of time searching for Slytherin iconography.

Personally, I think I always knew JK wasn’t taking inspo from the atmospheric gathering house, because there is no mention of the Leaky Cauldron pizzas. My first firehouse bite was the closest I’ve had to experiencing the magical and supernatural, and that is too prominent a fact to edge around in this debate.

We believed that JK was inspired by these locations because these places mean so much to us

What I think is quite magical about this story, is that it’s got traction. We wanted to believe with our hearts that someone as prolific as Rowling would honour and love the places dear to our hearts and immortalise them in writing. We believed that JK was inspired by these locations because these places mean so much to us. Just like Harry at Hogwarts and Rowling herself at Exeter, we are coming of age in these Leaky Cauldron’s of life, and we want these places that mean so much to us, to mean so much to the world too.

J.K. Rowling denies The Old Firehouse as inspiration for The Leaky Cauldron

JK Rowling has denied that The Leaky Cauldron was based on The Old Firehouse. It has been a long-standing urban myth that she used to frequent Firehouse. The pubs Ye Olde vibes, winding stairs and big oak tables definitely feel like somewhere Harry, Hermione and Ron would frequent. But, in a tweet this morning, J.K Rowling quoted a Devon Live article about the sale of Old Firehouse which stated:

and replied:

In reply to user @TheDanCash she also stated that…

Despite our hearts being broken by the denial of the student myth, the real question is – How did she survive being a student at Exeter without a Firehouse pizza?

The Firehouse sale is believed to be the biggest freehouse transaction in Devon for approximately £4 million.

Review: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

I am not afraid to admit that my first ever midnight premiere, and my latest midnight premiere, have been for Harry Potter films. Ever as excited as I was in July 2011 to see Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2, I sat down to Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them with eagerness and intrigue, at midnight of Friday 18th November. And the film did not fail to disappoint; my heart leaping to my throat as soon as the familiar tune of Hedwig’s Theme crept into the background of the Warner Bros logo shot.

“what sets this latest escapade into the wizarding world apart from the previous films was the leap into the unknown”

What sets this latest escapade into the wizarding apart from the previous films was the leap into the unknown. Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them is based on a book written by JK Rowling for Comic Relief, based on a text book mentioned in Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. From a list of magical creatures on the scale of how dangerous they are, comes an exciting tale of 1920s New York with a new Ministry of Magic (MACUSA), a new set of wizarding laws and a British wizard who feels very out of place.

The film follows Hufflepuff sorted Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) as he travels to New York to purchase a rare type of animal. Through a set of mix-ups and unfortunate encounters, he sets loose three of his beasts that live inside his small suitcase (think Hermione’s beaded purse in Deathly Hallows) on the city. Teaming up with sisters Tina and Queenie Goldstein and Muggle (or No-Maj in America) Jacob Kowalski to find the animals; all whilst avoiding the wrath of Percival Graves (an engaging and chilling Colin Farrell) and MACUSA as well as the ‘Second Salemers’, a radical group of No-Majs bent on getting rid of wizards once and for all.

“redmayne brings a natural british charm to a new land”

Eddie Redmayne shines as Newt. As an unassuming and rather bumbling magizoologist (magical zoo keeper), Redmayne brings a natural British charm to a new land where he feels (and definitely is) out of place. He doesn’t steal the limelight in the lead role but is gracious in sharing his screen time with his co-stars and bounces well off Katherine Waterston particularly. Waterston is headstrong and doesn’t let the idea of romance get in the way of Tina’s willingness to help, although Tina’s motivations are perhaps a little unclear through the film. Alison Sudol is charming and bubbly as Legellimens (mind-reader) Queenie who strikes up an immediate bond with Dan Fogel’s Jacob, the two having immediate natural chemistry and while a relationship isn’t perhaps so obviously on the cards, the implication is certainly there.

Ezra Miller almost steals the show as Second Salemer, Creedence Barebone. A young man who is both aware of the wizards and reluctant to do his mother’s bidding, the implication of his mother’s physical abuse is not shown onscreen. However Rowling’s clever writing, David Yates’ subtle directing and Philippe Rousselot’s cinematography means that no actual scenes of the violence are needed, the implication is there and further increases the pity for the character.

“the CGI is breathtaking and the audience is truly plunged into this new world”

For a first screenplay by Rowling, the script flows beautifully and most of the action seems to make sense in hindsight of the show. The first half of the film spends a little too long explaining the differences between the American and British wizarding worlds. Furthermore, whilst the motivations of several of the characters, Tina and Graves especially, aren’t always clear; they are consistently well rounded and the ending leaves little doubt as to where the new series is heading. The CGI is breathtaking and the audience is truly plunged into this new world, which differs so much from the world that was presented to film audiences for a decade. If the following five films that span 19 years, up to 1945 (which in Harry Potter history marks the defeat of Grindelwald by Dumbledore) are anything like the first film, then we are in for a treat.

Review: Harry Potter and the Cursed Child

July 2002: seven-year-old me’s just finished a new journal entry, tallying how many times I’ve read each Harry Potter book. So far we’re on eight. Fast forward to summer 2005? You’ll find one pale 10-year-old refusing to leave the hotel room. Mum and Dad aren’t buying her ‘stomach ache.’ They know she’s hooked on Half Blood Prince. Two years later? There’s me again, on a sunbed in Greece – glaring with insane jealousy at my new BFF Sarah, who arrived book-in-hand yesterday and has already uttered those heartbreaking words “Dumbledore dies…”

Harry Potter memories are ace. I’m sure we’ve all got them. But wouldn’t it be way cooler if you could physically go back and relive it all? It’s a pity all the Time Turners were destroyed before the Second Wizarding War…

…or were they?

22 years after the Battle of Hogwarts, Albus Severus Potter is about to start his fourth year at school with bestie Scorpius Malfoy (you read that right) when the Potters get a visit. It’s Amos Diggory. He’s heard the Ministry confiscated a Time Turner… and he wants to bring Cedric back. Totally illegal, of course – but just like his father, Albus doesn’t set much store by the rules…

“…expert spellmanship of playwright Jack Thorne and director John Tiffany”

To say Cursed Child presses all the nostalgia buttons is an understatement. Almost a decade after the last Potter story unravelled in our eager hands, JK Rowling’s world is back. And we didn’t even need bone of the father, flesh of the servant or blood of the enemy – just the expert spellmanship of playwright Jack Thorne and director John Tiffany.

“the characters’ ageing feels both satisfyingly new and completely natural”

Because when you start meddling with time, anything can happen. We’re talking good-guys-gone-bad, bad-guys-gone-good, unlikely marriages, surprise teaching careers… and possibly the most heart-wrenching resurrection in the history of fiction.

It’s the one we’ve been waiting for. But it’s also a play with a huge weight on its shoulders – because, of course, Harry Potter fan-fiction has been done. Extensively. With no stone left unturned, fans have conjured up secret relationships, sexualities, alternative endings… all the while nurturing a loyal devotion to Rowling’s original stories.

So how do you strike a balance? How much of that old, familiar vibe can you maintain before fans feel cheated of a new story? And how much new stuff can you add before it’s just too alien? Happily, this trio’s unearthed a balance that for the most part works wickedly. And despite Ginny’s infuriating lack of promotion from sidekick, and a lazy caricature of Ron as jokeshop-owner-slash-eccentric-uncle (he destroyed a Horcrux too, remember?!), the characters’ ageing feels both satisfyingly new and completely natural. Oh, except that unspeakably gruesome bit of wizard sex we now can’t help but picture… *shudder*

Do some lines sound forced, even cheesy? Maybe. And does it ring of fan fiction? A little. Ok, more than a little. But every spell leaves a trace – and this is fan fiction laced with Rowling’s all-knowing magic. Let’s face it: the original novels weren’t gold dust for their sophisticated style. No-frills language just left more room for a plot that literally made you feel like you’d dunked your head in the Pensieve – and likewise, Cursed Child sees playwright Thorne’s simple language made utterly convincing. A few pages is all it takes to make the playscript format blur into something magical – and by the story’s close, you’re left both flabbergasted and utterly convinced that it couldn’t possibly have gone any other way.

JK Rowling turns down SSB invite

Exeter’s legendary, truly magical alumnus JK Rowling has rejected a free ticket to this year’s Safer Sex Ball.

Event organiser Pierre G H Keyzar said: “If you fancy re-visiting Exeter, hit us up Jo-Jo.”

However, author JK replied thanking Pierre for his “kind invitation” and wished him fun. Sadly, Rowling said she is “three decades too old to enjoy this.”

An Exeter institution, the Safer Sex Ball – SSB for short – returned last year following a brief closure. The SSB hit the headlines following a scandal involving a sexual act between two students on the site.

It has often been rumoured that inspiration for the Harry Potter books was found amongst Exeter’s Streatham campus – most notably the Great Hall and Moaning Myrtle’s toilet in Washington Singer. Not forgetting, of course, Moberley’s hand in inspiring the Prison of Azkaban.