MovieChat Forums > Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016) Discussion > David Yates says next film is - erotic?

David Yates says next film is - erotic?

posted 8 years ago by declankc-49674
45 replies | jump to latest

"The next one is very different to the first one. Tonally, it feels like a dream – a very weirdly beautiful, erotic dream in Europe, in Paris. So yeah, building Paris basically"

Like, maybe he was just being nonchalantly figurative, but it doesn't exactly sound like it. You don't take those types of words lightly when discussing a four quadrant blockbuster franchise.

Due to the franchise getting darker and the setting being in Paris and the fact that we know the romance will intensify, do you think we could actually see some form of intense eroticism? Potter had it, in an "adolescent sexual awakening" respect, and took that to some dark places as that was usually one of the things that cause the threesome strife. The sexual tension and the outside relationships.

Do you think this means there's going to be sex in this film/franchise? Maybe I'm over analyzing, but again, that's not a word creatives at Marvel, Star Wars, or DC would ever use to describe a film that's going to be a part of their 4 quadrant brands. I guess if there's any franchise to have the balls to take their story in that direction, and any creator to do it, it would be Rowling and her Wizarding World. The brand always seems to take darker, more emotional, sophisticated, and creative risks where Star Wars, Marvel, even Middle Earth, for example, do not.

This probably really ties into the issue of Dumbledore. I really think Jo is going to outright present his reality and his relationship with Grindelwald/other men. And I think there's probably going to be a heavily sexual relationship between Leta and Newt and that causes issues with Porpentina, as one sneak peak said "will Newt and Tina wed?" And "the plot thickens with Zoe Kravitz's character".

reply

[–] bmiluszusky 8 years ago

I could see implied sex being added to the films, but I doubt there will actually be sex scenes.

reply

[–] declankc-49674 8 years ago

There was a half naked make out in DHP1 and there was a lot more sexual thematics in the books.

Sex scenes as in humping and moaning? Probably not? Sex scenes as in tender shots of couples in bed, kissing, sighing, etc especially if the film is being described as romantic and erotic? Probably.

Rowling is the type of person to write sex scenes into her universe if they're warranted, and if the creative team is throwing these words out, one only has to wonder.

reply

[–] declankc-49674 8 years ago

Implied sex isn't "erotic" or "romantic". And the Potter series did go beyond implied sexual/sensual
Activity on a few instances, and again, the books had an increasingly large wealth of it.

reply

[–] niceguy11122 8 years ago

The books might have been filled with dirty jokes and innuendos, but the movies were overall very prudish, with Goblet of Fire and one scene from Deathly Hallows being the only exceptions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGJLjp9JpzA

By the way, I suspect this scene wasn't cut just to save time.

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

That scene was cut because Hogwarts students were having sex in the carriages. Heaven forbid, that teenagers in a boarding school were horny.

reply

[–] DaxTony 8 years ago

I don't think the Hogwarts students were having sex in the carriages; I think it was implied that they were making-out and snogging each other. The scene was cut because it had no place in the film itself. Later on in Goblet of Fire, just before the Third Task, it shows Karkaroff and Snape discussing the exact same topic they are talking about here (the Dark Mark), with a little less words.

reply

[–] niceguy11122 8 years ago

Didn't the first Iron Man have a sex scene, though?

As for Beasts, a sex scene is possible, since implied sex or even sex scenes are within the boundaries of PG-13, but it's very unlikey. Sex is a big no-no for big blockbusters. We have to consider a lot of little kids watch these movies too, and for some of their parents, sex and the f-word are the two worst things you could possibly expose a child to.

There will probably be some innuendo, and Dumbledore's sexuality will likely come into play at some point during the series -- specially since the first movie already had a repressed homosexuality subtext --, but a sex scene? I doubt it.

BTW, didn't David Yates or someone from the cast describe the first movie as sexy at one point?

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

BTW, didn't David Yates or someone from the cast describe the first movie as sexy at one point?

Yeah.... and Alison Sudol said, that originally Queenie just meant to be nothing more, than a sexy bombshell with no real personality.

reply

[–] declankc-49674 8 years ago

That's quite less sensationalistic a word than erotic. They used the word sexy to describe a wand. But we know this film is going to partially be a darker romance set in Paris. So...

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

Well, the entire cast referred to Colin Farrell's wand technique as Fifty Shades of Graves. So, why should we be surprised that David Yates is using the term erotic?

reply

[–] PotterFan1029 8 years ago

Yes, I think his use of the word is just Yates being Yates. Remember when they kept calling HBP the "sex, drugs, and rock and roll" of the HP series. And describing DH1 as a "road opera" lol

reply

[–] declankc-49674 8 years ago

...and they more or less turned out to be exactly that.
DHP1 is more or less an apocalyptic road film

reply

[–] PotterFan1029 8 years ago

I never got the "apocalyptic" feel from it...maybe it's cause that was how they described DH2, since that was the real "apocalyptic war film" of the series, at least as far as Harry Potter goes...

reply

[–] declankc-49674 8 years ago

I think, again, you're being overly militant and conservative.

Comparative to other four quadrant brands, a lot of little kids don't watch the Wizarding World films. Fantastic beasts had a viewership of 65% over 25, and almost all marketing is clothing/memorabilia targeted to adults, rather rhan toys targeted to kids.

The books didn't just have "innuendos", they also had sexual thematics pertaining to rape, assault, incest, sadomasochism, bits of nudity, and teenage sexuality, including at least a couple steamy make outs, among other smaller things. Certainly more sexual than most.

Iron man did, but admittedly that was before Disney took over, and marvel films have always been quite lighthearted.

Innuendos aren't erotic, and sex scenes aren't miles away from some of the most severe stuff we've seen in that regard with Potter. The series is definitely more sexual than The Hunger Games, a Middle Earth, or Star Wars, for example, and it's still not that sexual.
I think sex scenes would be acceptable for this world and in Rowling's mind depending on how they suit the characters, the themes, and the story, and if she's written something that's "dark, dreamy, and erotic" I have to believe she's written sex in there somehow. She's certainly no stranger to writing it amongst adults or amongst teens.

reply

[–] niceguy11122 8 years ago

I know Beasts had an audience mostly composed of adults, but that doesn't mean children didn't watch it too. That's just how it is -- parents take children to tentpole movies when there isn't anything animated playing, because there really aren't that many movies "just for kids" anymore. Even stuff clearly meant for children like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles gets handed a PG-13, so older fans don't feel to guilty about watching it I suppose.

Honestly, I don't care whether or not these movies have sex on them. A movie doesn't need to have sex to be sensual. Plenty of movies from the production code era managed that.

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

Innuendos aren't erotic, and sex scenes aren't miles away from some of the most severe stuff we've seen in that regard with Potter.

You are seriously pushing it there. Harry Potter had nothing more than a handful of innuendoes, while the films were pretty chaste.

reply

[–] declankc-49674 8 years ago

Innuendos is not pushing it...I have not mentioned them a great deal

reply

[–] declankc-49674 8 years ago

Compared to Star Wars, they're a bit steamy at mildest

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

Like, maybe he was just being nonchalantly figurative, but it doesn't exactly sound like it. You don't take those types of words lightly when discussing a four quadrant blockbuster franchise.

You need to remember, that J.K. Rowling was not above objectifying the cast. Eddy Redmayne and Colin Farrell filmed shirtless scenes, that were ultimately cut due to being too distracting. Newt's scene was inside the case, to showcase his battlescars. While, Graves' was in his office and he was sweating profusely, due to Grindelwald having a vision. Both of those scenes were nothing more than an excuse, for Rowling to have two hot guys without their shirts on.... just ask the actors.

As silly and superficial as it is. There is something refreshing about knowing, that J.K. Rowling is just like every other repressed housewife.

reply

[–] DaxTony 8 years ago

Erotic also means "suggestive," which is where I think Yates was going with this. Paris is known as the City of Love, and I believe that with its setting, Yates means that the story, being intertwined with the overall arc of this franchise, compliments one another of an old Europe, something akin to the Golden Age of Hollywood here in America back from the 1930s - 1950s; the vintage feel of it, so to speak...something that many people (older people) look back on with a hint of nostalgia with a desire for it to come back, but they know that it can't ever come back.

As for "intense eroticism," I seriously doubt it. Why on earth would Rowling dwindle down her story just for some "action;" that's just pointless. The "sexual awakening" on Potter was needed due to puberty: everyone goes through it, it's a natural cycle that everyone hits in their teen years.

It's a definitely interesting description for sure, but I highly doubt the sequel will be "erotic" in the way your are purporting.

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

I seriously doubt it. Why on earth would Rowling dwindle down her story just for some "action;" that's just pointless.

It is only pointless, because David Yates will probably cut it for being distracting. It is what happened with Eddy Redmayne's and Colin Farrell's shirtless scenes.

reply

[–] DaxTony 8 years ago

Yeah, I didn't even know about those shirtless scenes. Those scenes didn't add anything to the story overall, though.

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

The Graves scene might have added to the story, only because Grindelwald was having a vision. It probably just was not necessary to have the character being shirtless, and the audience would not have realized what was actually happening.

I find it pretty hilarious, that Fantastic Beasts is J.K. Rowling's version of smut fan-fiction. Since in her mind, Newt is incredibly ripped underneath his tweed suit.

reply

[–] GrimmBrother 8 years ago

Where did you guys find out about these supposed shirtless scenes?

I'm sure by "erotic", he is just describing Paris.

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

Where did you guys find out about these supposed shirtless scenes?

The actors spoke about them, during the press tour.

reply

[–] declankc-49674 8 years ago

Paris isn't mentioned in the line though so...he's describing the tone of the film

reply

[–] declankc-49674 8 years ago

I'm not saying whips and chains and thrusting and moaning.

I'm saying a shadowy, short love scene or two with possibly some sexual thematics

reply

[–] zinabaggins 8 years ago

The brand always seems to take darker, more emotional, sophisticated, and creative risks where Star Wars, Marvel, even Middle Earth, for example, do not.

Please don't go there. You know nothing.

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

Why is there is Harry Potter vs. Lord of the Rings even a thing? It is very common to enjoy both series. However, there is no denying that as a book and films series LotR is more sophisticated. I am pretty sure, even J.K. Rowling would admit that. She have never shunned the term children's literature.

reply

[–] zinabaggins 8 years ago

You can enjoy both series (although I'm not sure how that is possible and I always wondered about it) but you cannot compare them. Anything by Tolkien is simply on a much higher level than anything by Rowling.

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

(although I'm not sure how that is possible and I always wondered about it)

It is fairly simple to figure out. Most of the generation that grew up with Harry Potter, discovered the Lord of the Rings because of it. When the HP books were first published, they were marketed as the new LotR. So, many teenagers decided to also start reading Tolkien.

J.K. Rowling never expected that adults would read, and/or enjoy her book. She wrote the series with the intention of it being for children. However, as the characters got older the story became more sophisticated. Her main issue is that she tends to be repetitive, as seen in GoF and OotP. She even admitted if she could go back and change one thing, it would be to reedit the fifth book as it was 150 pages too long.

reply

[–] niceguy11122 8 years ago

Tolkien's contribution for literature surpasses that of Rowling, obviously. But he's not untouchable, so don't put him in a pedestal. It's not like his books are flawless. In fact, the movies actually improved upon them in a few areas.

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

In fact, the movies actually improved upon them in a few areas.

I agree, when it comes to The Lord of the Rings. However, the films butchered The Hobbit. Can someone explain to me, how a 400 page children's book was turned into a trilogy?

reply

[–] niceguy11122 8 years ago

Oh, the Hobbit -- Peter Jackson's worst attributes taken to 11.

reply

[–] vegeta-6390 8 years ago

I agree, when it comes to The Lord of the Rings. However, the films butchered The Hobbit. Can someone explain to me, how a 400 page children's book was turned into a trilogy?

Greed.

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

It was rhetorical question.

reply

[–] DaxTony 8 years ago

You can both enjoy and compare them. Why are you even hanging around these boards anyway? You gave Fantastic Beasts a "2", so what's the point of you replying to different threads with the same response ("Praise Tolkein, he is lord. Tolkein is better than Rowling. Lord of the Rings is better than Harry Potter. Blah, blah, blah").

I enjoy both series, but with Lord of the Rings, the films are just so long that I can't get into them again (though I like Two Towers the best). I liked the Potter books better than Rings because I grew up with Potter. Rings, while good, didn't capture my attention as much as Potter.

reply

[–] vegeta-6390 8 years ago

You can enjoy both series (although I'm not sure how that is possible and I always wondered about it) but you cannot compare them. Anything by Tolkien is simply on a much higher level than anything by Rowling.

Something that has yet to be proven and only exists in the delusional minds of some LOTR fans. I am not taking away Tolkien's genius for a writer that lived in the 1950s.

reply

[–] declankc-49674 8 years ago

Neither do most authors from the 90's writing for young people.

Lord of the Rings was for so long described as Children's Literature but there are caveats to such a description, sub categories and changes in demographic and content, especially in such a brand as The Wizarding World

Also, Middle Earth is ambitious in a world building sense but it doesn't have much of an edge nor is it that psychologically deep and/or "dark" or "tragic" and close to real life as Potter is

reply

[–] declankc-49674 8 years ago

As explained below, I think it's not as sophisticated in many respects and Rowling has readily pointed at that her books were meant for tween audiences at youngest.

"Childrens" is and was a blanket description of any book of book series marketed the slightest bit to youth. Again, LOTR was very much considered a series for children, and still, to some extent, is.

The Wizarding World is, however, primarily marketed to teens and adults at this point in time, and it has been since fairly early on, if not the beginning, of the Harry Potter series.

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

As explained below, I think it's not as sophisticated in many respects and Rowling has readily pointed at that her books were meant for tween audiences at youngest.

Except, that Fantastic Beasts was intended for an adult audience. Everything J.K. Rowling has written after Harry Potter, has been marketed towards an older demographic. If she wants to combine, her love of the Wizarding World with her love of risqué murder mysteries, then she is more than welcome. Fantastic Beasts features an all adult cast, and sexuality is a part of normal adult life.

reply

[–] TheBigYawn 8 years ago

Well, Yates described HBP as "sex, drugs and rock and roll". He is obviously exaggerating once again. He is better at making films than describing them. Has he ever described his films accurately?

reply

[–] themodmazza 8 years ago

Actually, that was a very apropos description of Half-Blood Prince. Since, that was the film where Daniel Radcliffe was drunk, or having a hangover most of the time.

reply

[–] lumosnight 8 years ago

I can imagine erotic elements in scenes that include interactions between Leta and Newt. There's probably a lot of chemistry between them, especially since Newt treasures a photo of her, and Leta is most likely not lukewarm about him either.

reply

[–] LittleNiniel 8 years ago

I can imagine something closer to sexual situation in the Fantastic Beasts series than Harry Potter beyond innuendos and such since it's an adult cast and the fans has grown up since HP too. However there are still young people watching these movies either way so I really can't see there being anything literally erotic going on. Maybe something suggestive or something of a sex scene, but nothing explict.

reply