As a cultural critic, I watch a lot of movies
and I'm always on the lookout for positive Hollywood representations of masculinity.
I usually walk out of the theater disappointed
but occasionally the stars will align, and I'll find myself pleasantly surprised.
And that's how I felt after seeing Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.
Newt Scamander, protagonist of this Harry Potter spin-off, is an unconventional male hero.
The kind of character typically relegated to sidekick status.
He performs a refreshingly atypical form of masculinity
especially for the lead in a fantasy adventure story.
His is a quiet, vulnerable, yet confident form of manhood.
Newt's character is largely defined by his extraordinary ability to connect with magical creatures
and by his relative inability to connect with other human beings.
Newt is a Magizoologist. Essentially he's an expert in the care of magical creatures.
His life work, his passion, is studying
nurturing, and protecting these fantastic beasts, then writing textbooks in an effort
to foster understanding and compassion for their plight.
NEWT “They’re the last breeding pair in existence. If I hadn’t managed to rescue them, that could have been the end of Graphorns forever.”
I should mention that this is not a Doctor Dolittle situation.
Newt's bond with and affinity for animals is not supernatural in nature,
even though that wouldn't be out of place in this universe.
Instead he simply pays attention to them and their needs when others don't.
NEWT “He had a cold. He needed some body warmth.”
This is also not an "animal good, human bad" story.
Even though he's painfully shy and socially awkward Newt's empathetic worldview extends to people,
especially to those discriminated against or marginalized,
as evidenced by his disgust at the way American wizards treat non-magical people.
TINA "Mr. Scamander do you know anything about the Wizarding community in America?"
NEWT "I do know a few thing actually. I know that you have rather backwards laws about relations with non-magic people.
NEWT "That you're not meant to befriend them, that you can't marry them which seems mildly absurd to me."
TINA "Who's going to marry him?"
He's strongly opposed to segregation, discriminatory laws, capital punishment,
and other violence committed in the name of justice.
Newts truly special gift is not his magic.
It's his empathy.
NEWT "All right, I'm coming. I'm coming. Mum's here. Mum's here."
This type of quiet sensitive masculinity is so out of the ordinary for a leading man
that I wasn't terribly surprised to see a number of movie reviewers turned off by his character.
The New York Post said that Newt was "not a very engaging lead."
MTV said he lacked "depth," "soul," and a "coherent personality."
The Village Voice went so far as to say he seemed "physically ill" much of the time.
Slate felt that he was "a little boring."
Both Slate and the New Republic lamented that the character "tamped down" Eddie Redmayne's charisma.
The New Republic also expressed shock at his leading man status
saying that he's so "good-hearted, simple and nondescript that it's sort of crazy he's going to be the centerpiece" of a five film franchise.
I was disappointed, but as I said, not surprised to see this kind of reaction.
We, as movie-going audiences, have been conditioned to expect a certain type of
masculine performance from male characters in sci-fi or fantasy films.
We expect leading men who are, or learn to be, autonomous, brazen, and physically strong.
Or at least men who are witty, boisterous, and charismatic.
Preferably all of the above.
It's practically required for male heroes to hide their vulnerability.
We've learned to easily forgive aggression and arrogance in men but to take exception at presentations of humility or sensitivity.
We're accustomed to seeing men who are quick to violence and slow to diplomacy.
Newt is a significant departure from this trend.
His version of manhood doesn't stem from physical strength or combat skills or feats of daring-do,
or even from some preordained mystic destiny like so many other male heroes.
He's sincere, nurturing, emotional, and sensitive.
NEWT "That’s definitely the Murtlap. You must be particularly susceptible."
And critically that sensitivity is framed as a strength rather than a weakness
NEWT "Stay still. Alright, that should stop the sweating."
When men in our culture express this kind of vulnerability, they're often labeled "weak"
because nurturing and sensitivity are things that are stereotypically associated with women and with femininity.
And by framing these attributes as positive and heroic aspects of a male adventure hero,
it goes a long way to challenging regressive gender expectations.
Now in order for us to understand just how revolutionary Newt's performance of masculinity is
it's useful to talk a little bit more about all the things he is not.
Newt is a British Wizard who attended Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
But Newt is not Harry Potter. He's a Hufflepuff.
EDDIE "Actually, no, I am a proud Hufflepuff!"
The House characterized by friendship, hard work, and humility.
Hufflepuffs are said to be more down-to-earth and less competitive than the other three wizarding houses.
Harry Potter, on the other hand, was sorted into Gryffindor, the House known for daring, nerve, chivalry,
and prone to a fair bit of showing off.
As such, Harry fits neatly into the pantheon of traditional Hollywood heroes.
His is the archetypal hero's journey.
And we all know how these fantasy character arcs are supposed to unfold,
an unsuspecting young man has adventure thrust upon him
and it turns out that he's the only one in the entire universe who can save the world.
OBI WAN "Not as clumsy or random as a blaster".
And thus he is transformed from shy nerdy guy into triumphant badass.
It's not uncommon for this evolution to involve fighting with some sort of flaming phallus.
By contrast Newt Scamander is not the "chosen one."
He doesn't have some fated cosmic burden that he alone must shoulder.
Some have compared Newt with Doctor Who because, well
British, bowtie, and bigger on the inside
but that's really where the similarities end.
Newt does harbor a deep inner pain, but his personal struggle doesn't manifest as arrogance.
[Newt's] not interested in showing off his power in grand gestures.
DOCTOR WHO "So, all of time and space, everything that ever happened or ever will, where do you want to start?"
Newt is a humble caregiver who's content with his personal goal, which let's remember is writing textbooks.
Albeit magical textbooks, but still that's surprisingly unassuming for a fantasy adventure hero.
This means that unlike Potter, Newt doesn't possess super-powered magic
nor is he plagued with self-doubt about his abilities or his place in the magical world.
TINA "Well, sit down Mr. Scamander. "
He's a grown up already confident in his wizarding skills...
TINA "We aren't going to poison you."
...even if he remains uncomfortable around others.
And I suspect that this point might be another reason why some critics weren't so fond of this new Wizarding protagonist.
BANKER "Can I help you?"
I think there's an argument to be made that Newt exhibits the characteristics of someone on the autism spectrum.
He's awkward in social settings. He doesn't like being touched.
He feels intense empathy for others but has trouble connecting to people and making friends.
And careful viewers will also notice his aversion to direct eye contact.
The film's narrative never confirms this hypothesis one way or the other.
Perhaps this is simply how Eddie Redmayne decided to play the character
but whatever the case it's a testament to both the writing and the acting
that Newt's social anxieties are not framed in the stereotypical ways we've come to expect from Hollywood.
Characters like this tend to fall into a few specific archetypes.
There's the Tormented Genius:
a brilliant but insufferable character who's intelligent to the point of instability or mental illness
which is often framed as "the price" he must pay for his extraordinary talent.
There's the Mad Scientist:
a whimsical or bumbling character whose weird eccentricities are perhaps endearing to a degree...
DOC BROWN "I'm gonna read your thoughts!"
...but are also played for comedy.
And then there's the Sherlock Holmes archetype:
a character possessing such a superhuman IQ that it leads to callousness and the inability
or perhaps unwillingness to feel sympathy for other people.
SHERLOCK "Shut up.!" INSPECTOR "I didn't say anything?"
SHERLOCK "You were thinking. It's annoying."
But Newt isn't too lost in his own mind or his own eccentricities to care about or empathize with other people.
In fact, quite the opposite. His sensitivity is where he excels.
Critically, Fantastic Beasts doesn't frame Newt's social anxiety as an obstacle he must ultimately overcome in order to be a true hero.
The narrative doesn't require him to "toughen up" or learn to be more outgoing.
Newt doesn't fundamentally have to change his way of being.
And the people who become his friends are those who interact and engage with him on his terms.
Newt does learn and grow over the course of his adventure, but it's a subtle more interpersonal growth.
JACOB "Everybody knows Newt only kept me around because--"
He learns to make friends, and he learns to trust them.
JACOB "Newt, why did you keep me around?"
NEWT "Because I like you."
NEWT "Because you're my friend."
JACOB "Oh."
And establishing these deep human connections is the core of his character development.
NEWT "It's been...um" TINA "Hasn't it?"
The ending of Fantastic Beasts is rather anticlimactic compared to most other action fantasy movies and
even compared to most other films in the Harry Potter universe.
As expected, there's a final showdown with a powerful and destructive magical force
but even here Newt's actions are guided by his empathy.
NEWT "I'm here to help you, Credence."
NEWT "I'm not here to hurt you."
Rather than besting his foe in an epic magical duel, Newt approaches the conflict with an eye for de-escalation.
Of course, in the end the malevolent force is vanquished, but it's not done by Newt's hand.
Even more surprising, this triumph of over evil isn't shown to be a cause for celebration.
It is instead framed as a melancholy event.
Melancholy because our heroes failed to save the monster.
I feel like I might need to say that again.
In this movie, defeating the monster is framed as a tragedy because they couldn't save him.
A fittingly unconventional conclusion to an unconventional Hollywood Fantasy production.
It remains to be seen if Warner Brothers has the guts to keep Newt as the protagonist throughout all five films in the franchise.
For her part, J.K. Rowling has said that Newt will remain the star, at least for the next movie in the series.
But within Hollywood, there is no doubt enormous pressure to shift the focus to a character who performs a more traditional
and expected type of manhood. The studio has even hinted at demoting Newt's role
And that would be a shame because we need more movies that center a gentle
empathetic version of heroic masculinity.
If you'd like to see more videos related to media and manhood
hop on over to my Patreon page and help fund the Pop Culture Detective Agency.
Subtitles by the Amara.org community