[PHOENIX CRY]
It is your birthright, my boy.
During the final moments of Fantastic Beasts
and the Crimes of Grindelwald, the filmmakers
attempted to pull off a reveal that
would shock audiences and redefine an iconic character's
familial lineage.
However, when they revealed that Credence Barebones is
a long-lost Dumbledore brother, no one really
cared because it didn't have any direct impact on the movie we
just spent two hours watching.
It only relates to the stories that happen later.
And the collective reaction was--
How does it make any sense?
Not only does this go against all well-established lore,
but it feels like a reveal for the sake of a reveal.
But that's kind of the problem with prequels.
There's generally no new story to tell,
so they have to dig into the past.
And yet a successful prequel has to tell a good story
on its own terms, and not just be
full of fan service-y connections
to the previous movies.
It seems like prequels are one of the new ways
to keep your franchise juiced.
In an era where studios don't appear to trust or know
how to market original ideas, they're
forced to keep pumping out installments of existing
franchises, whether there's any reason for the story to exist
beyond making money or not.
And it's not like there haven't been successful prequels.
Rogue One was possibly the best Star Wars movie
that Disney ever produced.
While we know that the death star's plans will be stolen,
we didn't know that none of the main characters
would survive, making for a movie that honored
the past, while also being its own thing.
Going back further, The Godfather, Part 2
managed to weave in Don Corleone's backstory that
felt relevant and compelling on its own.
So if there's a chance to bring a franchise back
to life with younger, exciting actors
taking on roles of beloved characters, why not?
Because in the immortal words of Stephen King,
sometimes dead is better, which brings us
to Platform 9 and 3/4.
After turning seven books into eight movies,
the Harry Potter films ended with a flash
forward to our heroes in middle age,
sending their own kids off to Hogwarts.
Except for a two-part Broadway play, the story was over,
our heroes' journey complete with billions of dollars
made for the Warner Brothers.
But when the final film in the series
is the highest grossing film ever released
by Warner Brothers, can the story really be over?
It's too tempting for the film industry not to try,
which is why we've already seen prequels
as desperate as Monsters University, X-Men First Class,
Bumblebee, and of course, Minions.
[CHITTERING]
Some of these were more successful than others,
but there have been enough financially
successful prequels to make them a viable option for flat lining
franchises.
So it was merely a question of when we'd get more Harry Potter
movies or TV series, even with no more books to pull from.
It was finally announced that instead
of more sequels or a movie set in the continuing
adventures at Hogwarts, we were going to get a prequel based
on the in-universe book, Fantastic Beasts
and Where to Find Them.
So five years after Deathly Hallows, Part 2,
audiences got their first wizarding world movie,
starring Eddie Redmayne twitching
his way into our hearts as magizoologist Newt Scamander.
Fans had more reasons to be optimistic
because the Fantastic Beasts movies were all
going to be written by JK Rowling
herself in her first attempt at screenwriting.
So after all that wait, it was fine,
but there was just something off about it.
Maybe it was the lack of Hogwarts
or the overly confusing plot.
How does it make any sense?
Everyone was concerned about some evil wizard called
Grindelwald, who doesn't even show up
until the third act of the movie.
And meanwhile, Ezra Miller is possessed
by a CGI dust storm-- not exactly the most compelling
of stories.
The beasts were fun, but the story
wasn't ultimately about them or where to find them.
We seemingly watched it because it
was our first new taste of Harry Potter content
after a long drought.
And then a few years later came the follow-up, Fantastic Beasts
and the Crimes of Grindelwald.
The sequel was a series of genealogy reveals
in search of a story.
In some ways, the less beholden a prequel
is to the original films, the better the chance of success.
Although controversial amongst the fans,
Prometheus and Alien Covenant are definitely their own thing,
telling a new story with a different theme
than the original Ripley based movies.
Consider that the alien prequels are less about a single person
going up against a scourge of aliens
and a heartless corporation.
That's been done, and Ridley Scott
had no intention of making the same movie again.
But rather, the focus is on David and Android,
who sets about kicking off an evolutionary war amongst four
different species--
the engineers, the xenomorphs, humans, and androids.
Say what you want about the movies,
but they're at least doing something we've never
seen in an alien movie before.
Compare that to the Fantastic Beasts movie, which
just hit the same beats as any Potter movie--
a big evil that the good Wizards must defeat while Dumbledore
holds back important information that isn't revealed
until the very end, though, in Fantastic Beasts' favor,
they're not set in Hogwarts, and they expand to show us
the greater wizarding world, this time featuring
adult characters.
It's just unfortunate that they never came up
with an interesting story.
But the Fantastic Beasts movies become increasingly
desperate to connect with the original eight Potter films
to keep the audience interested.
Hey, guys, I'm just going to pause for a moment
and talk about a problem that actually really resonates
with me, and that's male pattern baldness.
Did you know that two out of three guys
will experience it by the time they're 35?
For today's video, I partnered with Keeps
because with Keeps, a licensed doctor
will review your information online and recommend
the right hair loss treatment plan for you.
And then your treatment will be shipped directly to your door
every three months.
Find out why Keeps has more five star
ratings than any of its competitors
and why thousands of men trust Keeps for their hair loss
prevention.
So if you're ready to take action and prevent hair loss,
go to keeps.com/nerdstalgic, or click the link
in the description to receive 50% off your first order.
That's keeps.com/nerdstalgic.
Another typical prequel trap is committing ahead of time
to make multiple installments before you even
make one good one.
To do this, the movies have to include
scenes that are just there to have storylines that they'll
get into the sequels, which is why Ezra Miller's Credence
Barebones family history takes up
a good portion of the third act, but he
himself isn't developed as a character
beyond being gloomy and sad.
It's because we're told that he will be important later on.
But if he's not interesting now, why should
we care about him later?
There's also the inherent problem
with having your prequels so tied to the original movies,
knowing how the story ends.
The more Fantastic Beasts are about Dumbledore,
the less dramatic tension there is because we
know he's going to win.
Like a lot of prequels, the Fantastic Beasts movies
seemingly don't have any reason to exist
beyond extending the life of a franchise
by squeezing as much content as they can out of it.
Another dicey aspect of prequels,
especially one as lower heavy as the Wizarding World,
is that it can be very difficult not to contradict the existing
mythology.
The Hobbit trilogy had the benefit
of existing Tolkien lore, but Fantastic Beasts
was venturing into uncharted territory,
as was Rowling, who was showing audiences
that just because someone can write a page turner of a book,
doesn't mean that they can write a compelling screenplay.
And what they ended up doing was infuriating diehard fans
who want to support the films, but are
put in an awkward situation of getting behind a movie that
doesn't respect the lore.
The Beast movies have seemingly changed the entire direction,
making Dumbledore the driving force behind these movies,
and not the beasts.
Shouldn't a movie about fantastic beasts
be about the beasts?
With all the changes to existing lore and piling
on more backstory and sacrifice of actual story or characters
to care about, it's no surprise that The Crimes of Grindelwald
is the lowest grossing and worst reviewed
Wizarding World movie yet.
Prequels may seem like easy cash-ins, but to pull them off,
you not only need to tell an entertaining standalone story,
but it also has to line up with the existing films
that fans know by heart.
When they work, they provide a deeper and new look
at a beloved universe.
And when they don't, they feel like soulless cash-ins
that simply want our money.
In the end, making a prequel just to keep a franchise alive
is a bit of a monkey's paw situation.
Yeah, the franchise you love is back,
but is this how you want to remember it?
Where is Dumbledore?
Well, that's it for Nerdstalgic.
Don't forget to like and subscribe
so you can know when our new videos come out.
And on your screen, there should be two or more episodes,
so click on any one of those.
And we'll see you soon.
[MUSIC PLAYING]