The shocking end of Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald has left many fans scratching
their heads as to what it really means and how it ties in with the Harry Potter movies.
Yippee-ki-yay movie lovers, it's Jan here and in this video, I'm breaking down all the
details in the twist ending to Fantastic Beasts 2 and explaining why you can't trust Grindelwald!
Keep watching to the end to find out what crucial timeline details have been retconned
in the sequel.
And to celebrate the release of a new Fantastic Beasts movie, I'm giving away an amazing set
of official movie merchandise, including a very cool set of Nifflers.
Tap the Gleam link in the video description to enter the giveaway.
Spoilers ahead, of course, so take care if you haven't seen the movie yet.
In Fantastic Beasts 2, Credence goes on a quest to discover his true identity and after
chasing down a red herring that he's Leta Lestrange's brother Corvus, in the final scene
Grindelwald tells the young wizard that his true identity is Aurelius Dumbledore.
To support this revelation Grindelwald takes the baby chick that Credence has been taking
care of and it transforms into a phoenix.
Potter fans will know that phoenixes are associated with the Dumbledore family and Fawkes was
a phoenix who was a companion and protector to Albus Dumbledore at Hogwarts.
This reveal about Credence has shocked Potter fans as until now the character Aurelius Dumbledore
has never appeared or been mentioned in any movies or books, which is strange given Grindelwald
predicts that he and Aurelius will "together go down in history as [they] remake this world."
During the reveal, Grindelwald also tells Credence that his "brother seeks to destroy"
him, implying that Dumbledore plans to kill Credence.
This patently isn't true as during the movie, it was Albus who asked Newt to go to Paris
and try to save Credence.
In fact, J.K.
Rowling herself said in an in an official featurette released for the film that "whatever
you think you know at the end of the movie might not be the case."
So, let's go through all the evidence as to why Grindelwald could very well be lying.
Much is made in the movie about what a master of persuasion and deception Grindelwald really
is.
Right at the beginning, President Picquery remarks that they had to cut out the nefarious
wizard's tongue and change his guard three times because he's so persuasive.
Little did she know that Grindelwald had actually recruited Abernathy to his cause and switched
places with him, and Abernathy ends up rewarded with a forked tongue of his own.
In Paris, Grindelwald recruits the bounty hunter Grimmson who is supposed to be hunting
down Credence.
He also recruits a huge number of wizards to his cause in the speech he gives at the
end, and he even tricks the sweet-natured Queenie over to his side, which I'll talk
more about later.
In fact, it feels like Grindelwald is more than just persuasive; he's actually the man
behind the curtain, a puppet master pulling on everyone's strings and bamboozling everyone
with red herrings and tricks, all for his own nefarious ends.
For example, when Credence goes to find the nanny who'd looked after him, the bounty hunter
Grimmson kills her on Grindelwald's orders.
It seems like Grindelwald wanted rid of her to clear up any loose ends and true answers
she might provide to Credence.
Grindelwald also had the Lestrange family history moved from the French Ministry archives
to the Lestrange mausoleum.
Which raises questions as to why he did that and what information he might have manipulated.
After that scene, Newt points out to Tina that all these things including "Queenie,
the family tree, it's all been bait" to get them to the rally that Grindelwald is holding.
And you can see during Grindelwald's speech to the wizarding community that he's very
skilled in rhetoric and manages to convince many people.
He knows how to make his extreme positions and views sound almost reasonable and sensible
to them.
Director David Yates has said that Grindelwald is quite different to the other big bad we
all know from the Harry Potter series, Voldemort.
Yates says, "If you disagreed with Voldemort, he would kill you in an instant.
But Grindelwald is incredibly beguiling.
He would rather win people over to his side than annihilate them, and he is smart enough
to understand you have to win hearts and minds, not coerce people, to gain their allegiance."
Which is why I think we can't take what he's saying to Credence about his identity at face
value.
He knows that Credence is desperate to discover his real identity and so he preys on that
to set Credence against Dumbledore.
He even conjures up a phoenix to bamboozle him into believing the lie.
So, why does Grindelwald need to use Credence against Dumbledore?
Well, in Fantastic Beasts 2 it's shown that Dumbledore and Grindelwald were lovers when
they were younger and they made a blood pact where they promised they would never fight
each other.
The pendant that Grindelwald wears and which Newt's niffler steals from him contains drops
of blood from the two wizards and the actual existence of the pendant seems to physically
prevent Dumbledore and Grindelwald from attacking each other directly.
At the end of the movie, Newt gives the pendant to Dumbledore who indicates he will look into
whether he can destroy it.
Part of me wonders if Dumbledore seems a little reluctant to break the blood pact and whether
he's holding out hope he can turn his old friend away from the dark path he's chosen.
The other major reason that Grindelwald needs Credence is because of his immense power as
an Obscurial.
Normally, an Obscurus would have killed its host by the age of ten but Credence has survived
into adulthood demonstrating his superior wizarding powers.
And in Fantastic Beasts 2, by the end of the movie we finally see that Credence has gained
control over his power.
Grindelwald gives him a wand and Credence uses it to blast away the side of a huge mountain
in the distance.
This is in stark contrast to the first movie where Credence explicitly said he didn't want
to control his power: "You can control it.
Credence."
"I don't think I want to, Mr. Graves."
Now that Grindelwald has manoeuvred Credence to his side and he's been able to focus the
young wizard's rage, he will presumably use him as a weapon against Dumbledore next.
Credence is perhaps one of a few wizards powerful and foolhardy enough to confront Dumbledore
as remember how earlier in the movie when Grindelwald asked his followers if they would
go to Hogwarts and attack Dumbledore, not one of them said they would.
What's interesting about Credence's identity is that it's changed in every film so far,
meaning it wouldn't surprise me if we discover Credence's true family line in the next Fantastic
Beasts movie.
He might be connected to an alternate character from Potter lore.
After all, we see he's good friends with Nagini who will end up eventually as Voldemort's
snake, so could there be a connection between Credence and Voldemort?
Let me know what you think.
Another victim of Grindelwald's manipulations in Fantastic Beasts 2 is Queenie who ends
up becoming a follower of the dark wizard.
Although I felt her turn to the dark side was a little abrupt, you can see why she personally
feels attracted to the idea of overturning the restrictive laws which forbid her from
having an open relationship with muggle Jacob.
I do wonder whether any foul play was at work though.
After all, there was that teapot which kept trying to serve her more tea.
So, I wonder whether anything was slipped into her drink to make her more susceptible
to Grindelwald's guile.
There's been quite a bit of discussion in the fandom that the timeline for Credence
being Albus Dumbledore's brother is also problematic.
The main issue people have identified is that when the first Fantastic Beasts movie came
out in 2016, Ezra Miller said in an interview that Credence was 18 years old in that film.
Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them was set in 1926 which would have made his birthday
sometime in 1908 or 1907.
And that just doesn't fit very well with the fact that the books established that Albus
Dumbledore's mother Kendra died in 1899, many years before Credence's supposed birthdate.
However, some new evidence just came out via the original screenplay for The Crimes of
Grindlewald which indicates that the shipwreck scene happens in 1901.
In that scene, Leta Lestrange swapped Credence with her brother Corvus just before the ship
sunk meaning Credence was a baby in 1901 and therefore his birth date, say a couple of
years earlier, would fit roughly with the year 1899 that Kendra Dumbledore died.
Now, that still doesn't mean that Credence is definitely a Dumbledore, it's just that
some retconning seems to have happened for Fantastic Beasts 2 to make Credence's age
line up with the Dumbledore reveal.
So, do you think Grindelwald is lying to Credence at the end of Fantastic Beasts 2?
And if you do, who do you think Credence really is?
I've added a poll where you can vote – just tap in the top right of this video and after
you've cast your vote you'll be able to see the results.
Let me know what you think in the comments below and remember to click on the gleam link
in the video description for a chance to win a cool Fantastic Beasts merch pack.
Tap left for another theory and ending explained video or tap right for another video you're
sure to like!
And if you enjoyed this, remember to subscribe and leave a thumbs-up for more videos like
this.
Thanks for watching and see ya next time.
Yippee-ki-yay, movie lovers!