Written by J.K. Rowling, and directed by David Yates, “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them” returns viewers back to the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, but with more World and less Potter this time around.

Set in New York in 1926, Magizoologist Newt Scamander arrives in the Big Apple enroute to Arizona. But before he can reach his destination, certain creatures escape from his magical suitcase and wreak havoc throughout New York. Enlisting the help of the non-magical, aspiring baker Jacob Kowalski, the former Auror Tina Goldstein and her mindreading sister Queenie, Newt must gather up his pets before the Magical Congress of the USA arrests him for his mistakes.

While these events take place on the surface, there is also something dark moving among the streets of New York, something that threatens to break the peace with non-magical humans and expose the wizarding world.

Directing 3/5

Having directed four of the previous Harry Potter movies, David Yates is certainly experienced with presenting a visual trip through the magical world. He, along with writer and producer J.K. Rowling, does an excellent job with presenting the same world that many grew up with and got to know through the prior books and movies of Harry Potter. But while it’s a world many have been to before, Rowling and Yates manage to give it just enough twists to make it refreshingly new and not more of the same, all the while keeping a familiar air throughout the whole movie.

Writing 3/5

One of the highlights of “Fantastic Beasts” is that it doesn’t beat the audience over the head with the fact that it’s a part of the Harry Potter franchise. Sure, there are name drops and other mentions of characters and events fans will recognize, but it’s not blatantly in your face.

However, it is certainly a movie made for the already initiated, meaning that if you have never read the books or seen the Harry Potter movies, you will have a hard time getting into the world that is already established; vocabulary and names are flung around very casually, assuming the audience understands.

Ultimately, this is a strength of the film rather than a weakness.

Because “Fantastic Beasts” is already built on such a strongly weaved together world, it wastes no time on explaining the rules of the Wizarding World. While there is no world building to be done, there is the task of creating a starting point for a new franchise, which is the sole purpose of “Fantastic Beasts.”

The recently announced five film series of “Fantastic Beasts” is set up with solid exposition and grim premonitions of the grand scale. Unfortunately, the strong focus on building a sturdy ground for future movies to build off of takes away from the impact and strength with which this first movie could have had.

“Fantastic Beasts” is a magically entertaining film on its own, but I wish the characters involved in it had as much depth as the set up. The plot at times can feel stuffed with the large amount of exposition and franchise-building included in the a plot of the movie. But thankfully, Rowling’s writing is able to keep everything from collapsing, but just barely. If it was anyone else writing it, “Fantastic Beasts” certainly would have been a failure.

Acting 3/5

Eddie Redmayne stars as Newt Scamander. His performance is likeable, and the character is solid enough, but he unfortunately lacks the impact of previous Potter protagonists. While he is at his strongest when displaying his passion and knowledge of magical creatures, there is little room for growth for Newt as the movie progresses.

Katherine Waterston gives a fine performance as Tina Goldstein. Her growth in relationship with Newt is noticeable, but overall not as detailed or impactful as it should have been.

Oddly enough, it’s the supporting leads, Dan Fogler as Jacob Kowalski and Alison Sudol as Queenie Goldstein, that make up the heart of emotion in “Fantastic Beasts.” While the pair could have just been written off as comic relief, they are the strongest characters in the movie. Their budding relationship and Kowalski’s motivations are the most charmingly human thing in the film, besides Newt’s love of animals. Colin Ferrell gives an engaging performance as Percival Graves, but is decidedly underused.

Overall

If you are a longtime fan of Harry Potter, you certainly should see “Fantastic Beasts.” If you haven’t ever been introduced to the Wizarding World, I suggest you pick up “Harry Potter and The Philosopher’s Stone” to start. Even if “Fantastic Beasts” may not be as ‘Fantastic’ as its name suggests, the strength of J.K. Rowling as a writer shines through and makes this newest entry in the Harry Potter franchise an entertaining adventure at the very least. Here’s hoping the firm groundwork that has been laid with this film will pay off with future films.