Umbrella Spell
No one has mentioned anything about the new spell they cast twice in the movie, where they summon a magical umbrella in the rain. It looks a lot like protego, but I wonder if its a different, unique spell.
shareThe magical umbrella is something Eddie Redmayne came up with.
shareWhere did you hear that from?
shareAn interview with Eddie Redmayne.
shareInteresting. Eddie Redmayne was just on set and was like, "Lol guys we should have a cool umbrella spell" and they went with it? So odd
shareNot exactly.... apparently, Newt was going to pull out an actual umbrella, but Eddie did not think a wizard would do that.
shareIf anything, we should thank him for inspiring one of the most beautiful scenes in the whole movie -- the kiss in the rain.
shareThe shot from above is stunning, if conventional.
As for the CGI umbrella, it stuck out as surprisingly inspired CGI in the film, which goes to show how bland Yates' CGI visuals are. I feel bad for previously giving Yates credit for the umbrella when the idea came from Redmayne.
What I find even funnier, is that it was not J.K. Rowling, who came up with the magic umbrella.
shareAnd it surprisingly works. Other than Hagrid's umbrella and Hogwarts students using them in the third film, have we ever seen fully grown adult witches and wizards use umbrellas in the films or the books? Makes me think that it's not an easy spell to perform or is taught in later years, which is why students use physical umbrellas.
Save a horse, ride a cowboy!
Gotta give the man some credit for coming up with the visuals of what spells and apparating look like, at least.
shareShould we though? His visuals of spells are rather dull. Especially his lackluster duels that too often relies on two spells clashing in the middle. His visual for apparating is unbelievably inconsistant. We've seen three different versions with two of them being in the same movie! The black and white smoke, and when Fred and George apparating behind their mother without the smoke effect. Two completely different versions in Order of the Phoenix. From the sixth movie and on, they end up looking like a bunch of swirls that disappear.
Save a horse, ride a cowboy!
His visuals of spells fit the more realistic tone he was going for with the last few Potter movies -- very simple, but still pleasing to the eye and very brutal. I really like the way duelling looks like a mix of fencing and a shootout, too.
As for the apparating, I never saw the death eater black smoke as apparating, more like a Death Eater power. It was just a cool effect from Goblet of Fire he decided to keep in. Though I'll agree that the Order flying in white smoke was pretty dumb, which is probably why we never saw that again.
His visuals of spells fit the more realistic tone he was going for with the last few Potter movies -- very simple, but still pleasing to the eye and very brutal. I really like the way duelling looks like a mix of fencing and a shootout, too.A realistic tone is one thing, but neutralizing all magic into one single bland looking effect shows a complete lack of creativity. It also makes the witches and wizards incompetent. It makes them look like they're firing one spell multiple times. Also his view of dueling really lacks in creativity. If they aren't engaging in "Block! Block! Block! Attack! Attack! Attack!" it's two spells clashing in the middle. There's no variety. Just look what happened after they filmed the Priori Incantatem scene in Goblet of Fire. Yates brought back that effect multiple times throughout the rest of the Harry Potter films and this movie! Like seriously? Total over reliance of one effect. Even JK Rowling ended up adding it into Deathly Hallows it seems when Harry and a Death's Eater's spell collided in mid-air like green and red fireworks.
As for the apparating, I never saw the death eater black smoke as apparating, more like a Death Eater power. It was just a cool effect from Goblet of Fire he decided to keep in. Though I'll agree that the Order flying in white smoke was pretty dumb, which is probably why we never saw that again.Well, that's how the aurors appeared before they attacked Harry, Ron, and Hermione. Still, they had an entirely different effect with Fred and George apparating and how apparatting and disapparating looks like. Fred and George just appeared in the frame like it was amateurishly edited in.
Save a horse, ride a cowboy! share
Should we though? His visuals of spells are rather dull. Especially his lackluster duels that too often relies on two spells clashing in the middle.
Yes, we should.... everyone always talks about wanting the wizard duels to look more innovative. Only they forget that tends to looks cartoonish on-screen. It is a similar thing to why, Green Lantern does not work in live-action.
That said, I personally hated how the Obscurus looked. However, I am putting the blame on J.K. Rowling, because she obviously wrote it to look like a smoke monster. share
They don't need to make it look cartoonish. What I miss is some variety in colours and shape, as well as more dynamic movements. Basically all spells are blue/grey blasts, which tends to get repetitive, especially in duels where people are standing still while fighting.
I quite like the moments where they integrate elements of the scene into the duels, such as Dumbledore utilizing the water from the fountain to attack Voldemort. Another good example from Fantastic Beasts is when Graves attacks Tina with a car. These moments, while both innovative and functional, never felt cartoonish or took away from the gravity of the situations. I'd like more of that and less static shooting from magic guns. Make it grounded, sure, that's a good idea, but it would be nice if all spells had their own distinctive look in colour and shape, however small the difference might be. I like attention to such detail.
Another good example from Fantastic Beasts is when Graves attacks Tina with a car.
I loved that bit of the Graves vs. Tina duel. That they were dueling in Times Square, was the cherry on top. Since the Fantastic Beasts series takes place in the muggle world, hopefully we will see more moments like that.
Now, who wants to bet that Colin Farrell, came up with the car throw? share
That wouldn't surprise me. Farrell seemed to have a fun time on this film, and it shows in his performance. It's a pity he won't return.
shareFarrell seemed to have a fun time on this film, and it shows in his performance. It's a pity he won't return.
Agreed.... it is nice that he was able to disprove the rumor, that he was only in it for the money. However, WB and J.K. Rowling should consider having Colin Farrell return in the third or fourth film. Percival Graves was just too charismatic to bench. share
I don't know if having a lot of different colours would work -- the duels in these movies are so fast it would probably look messy.
shareA smoke monster is a very vague description, though.
shareYes, we should.... everyone always talks about wanting the wizard duels to look more innovative. Only they forget that tends to looks cartoonish on-screen. It is a similar thing to why, does not work in live-action.Well, I don't haven't seen Green Lantern in any form so I have no frame of reference to go on. So how did you feel about Dumbledore and Voldemort's duel? The only dumb thing I found about it was Voldemort's ballerina pose with the glass attack. Like what in the Hell what that pose?
Save a horse, ride a cowboy! share
So how did you feel about Dumbledore and Voldemort's duel?
It is the only decent thing in a terrible film, which is not a complement. The fire serpent was just a recycled basilisk, and both actors looked rather bored.
The best way to make the duels look good, is for the actors to give a dynamic performance. Instead of focusing on the special effects, the producers would focus on fight choreography. Each actor needs a distinct wand style, and should not steal bits from previous films. Two standouts in Fantastic Beasts, were Alison Sudol and Colin Farrell. While, the duels should have the characters utilize their environment and surroundings. Better to throw a car at an opponent, than to conjure up a fire serpent. share
I wasn't big on it either, but visually what did you think of it? I think the visuals were done well without it looking too cartoony.
Instead of focusing on the special effects, the producers would focus on fight choreography. Each actor needs a distinct wand style,I'm not sure if they still do that, but they did hire a wand choreographer for the fifth film. There was a behind the scenes video with Nat Tena(Tonks)practicing several wand movements with him. Although the choreography is definitely important, I find that special effects need to coincide with the wand movements. Otherwise I don't see a point in making different wand gestures if the effect is the same. Similar to how the video games are like.
Better to throw a car at an opponent, than to conjure up a fire serpent.I do agree with this. I would love to see them use transfiguration in their duels as well which was used in both Voldemort and Dumbledore's duel in the books along with Snape and McGonagall. Example being that instead of ducking, Tina could've transfigured the car into birds then used Oppugno to create an avian attack on Grindelwald. It shows variety and makes the duelist look highly skilled in magic. Yates's dueling style is not like that at all. Everyone looks like they're taking turns attacking or have two spells clashing.
Save a horse, ride a cowboy! share
Example being that instead of ducking, Tina could've transfigured the car into birds then used Oppugno to create an avian attack on Grindelwald.
Um, no.... that is the type of thing that sounds good on paper, but looks stupid on screen. Graves threw the car as a means to distract Tina, so that he could disapparate without her tagging along. Besides, that car belonged to someone.
My point was that by having the wizards utilizing their surroundings, the duels would look dynamic without being too cartoonish. Throw a car or rip up the street, but do not use transfiguration. The flashier magic should be reserved for the fifth film, when Dumbledore and Grindelwald finally duel. share
Um, no.... that is the type of thing that sounds good on paper, but looks stupid on screen.I don't think it would look stupid on screen if they did it well. Unfortunately with David Yates, it wouldn't be done well.
Besides, that car belonged to someone.I don't think either side would care or be thinking of that when a flying car is being directed at them.
My point was that by having the wizards utilizing their surroundings,Something that I am perfectly fine with as it least shows an extra bit of variety.
Save a horse, ride a cowboy! share
This transfiguration you described just wouldn't work with the fast paced duelling estabilished since the fifth film. Plus, I don't think Tina is that skilled an auror to transfigurate a car into birds on the fly -- the most instinctive reaction was to duck or maybe cast a protection spell.
This transfiguration you described just wouldn't work with the fast paced duelling estabilished since the fifth film.
Agreed.... wizard duels are a cross between a Mexican standoff and a Fencing match. The only character, I can picture being incredibly creative, in a duel is Queenie. share
Agreed.... wizard duels are a cross between a Mexican standoff and a Fencing match.Which is seriously dull in my view when it comes to magical duels. It makes the wizards look less skilled than they are. As I said before, I see little difference between the duels that have been established with Yates and the duels we see twelve year olds do back in Chamber of Secrets.
Save a horse, ride a cowboy! share
At least, it is grounded and realistic. Your idea does not translate to a live-action film.
Perhaps you should reread the Harry Potter books, because the duels are even less imaginative. The Battle of Hogwarts is dull as dirt, because it is seen solely through Harry's eyes. J.K. Rowling's strong suit is character development, and not action or plot. Fantastic Beasts was meant to be character driven, which is why the action fell flat.
At least, it is grounded and realistic.A bunch of skilled witches and wizards dueling like twelve year olds? I doubt it.
Your idea does not translate to a live-action film.Only if it isn't done well. With Yates at the helm, it wouldn't look right.
Perhaps you should reread the Harry Potter books, because the duels are even less imaginative. The Battle of Hogwarts is dull as dirt, because it is seen solely through Harry's eyes. J.K. Rowling's strong suit is character development, and not action or plot. Fantastic Beasts was meant to be character driven, which is why the action fell flat.The Battle of Hogwarts was dull as dirt only because there was hardly any descriptions and it completely relied on the reader's imagination. But the duel between Snape and McGonagall in the books was hardly dull. And Mrs. Weasley's duel with Bellatrix caused the floor to crack. Many readers were very disappointed in their duel, and they felt that the only saving grace was Yates keeping in "Not my daughter you bitch!" Dumbledore and Voldemort's duel was significantly more imaginative and had more variety than what was seen in the movies.
Save a horse, ride a cowboy! share
Only if it isn't done well. With Yates at the helm, it wouldn't look right.
It will never look as you imagine, no matter who the director is. Some ideas are better left on the page or for animation. That is just how computer graphics and effects work.
Dumbledore and Voldemort's duel was significantly more imaginative and had more variety than what was seen in the movies.
Pretty sure, that duel just consisted of flashing lights in the book.
The special effects have not aged well, causing that duel to look incredibly cheesy and dated. To make matter worse, both Michael Gambon and Ralph Fiennes looked, incredibly bored during that scene. No amount of special effects can mask subpar fight choreography.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Tbffj_04cI share
It will never look as you imagine, no matter who the director is. Some ideas are better left on the page or for animation. That is just how computer graphics and effects work.No, but some computer graphics are better than others if the director had the right access. Would it still look like noticeable CGI? At this day and age, of course. But depending on the director and the budgest, it can vary greatly. The CGI in the duel in that Wizard of Oz film was horrible. Signficantly worse than any of the Harry Potter films. Even the magical duel seen in the Warwick Davis film, Willow was better done despite being filmed around 1987 or so. Unfortunately there's no high quality videos of the duel out there so I can't link a clip.
Pretty sure, that duel just consisted of flashing lights in the book.Then I'd suggest you reread the book because that is not true. Parts of the movie duel was either taken directly from the book itself or was adapted to movie audiences. The part where Dumbledore surrounded Voldemort with water was directly in the book. However, that's when the duel ended in the novel, unlike the film where it was utilized in the middle of the duel.
Neither was the duel between Snape and McGonagall.
To make matter worse, both Michael Gambon and Ralph Fiennes looked, incredibly bored during that scene.I have absolutely no idea how you found their facial expressions to be bored. What I saw was Voldemort struggling against Dumbledore and it showed on his face. Neither did Dumbledore look bored when Voldemort conjured that snake. In fact he looked completely out of character to the book Dumbledore in showing fear of the snake.
Of course I do agree with the subpar choreography. Especially on Michael Gambon's part. They made Dumbledore struggle far too much and evening the field between him and Voldemort. And as I mentioned before, what in the Hell was with that ballerina pose Voldemort did when he did the glass attack?
Save a horse, ride a cowboy! share
This transfiguration you described just wouldn't work with the fast paced duelling estabilished since the fifth film.I think it would work under the right circumstances. Mostly with very powerful wizards like Dumbledore and Grindelwald/Voldemort.
Plus, I don't think Tina is that skilled an auror to transfigurate a car into birds on the fly -- the most instinctive reaction was to duck or maybe cast a protection spell.No, but it was an example of what could've been done had it been two duelists if they were skilled enough.
Save a horse, ride a cowboy! share
how about - "after deflecting two stunning spells from Tina, Graves swish his wand to make some rubble hit Tina's legs making her loose her balance and then with his other hand makes a car fly towards her, Tina still on the ground tries hard to make the car bounce mid-air off her, while Graves seized the moment and dissaparates away from her... Tina gets up, with a look of determination on her face..."
share