It's not about "Cassandra and Her Cat Gustavus"
Harry Potter fans might not have thought that J. K. Rowling turning one of the boy wizard's textbooks into a franchise. "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" was an encyclopedia of magical creatures, who were feared and misunderstood by wizards. They could be found inside Newt Scamander's worn suitcase, and they might like 1920s America. In the age of Jazz and Prohibition, it could be the new frontier for wizards and magical creatures alike. There may be too many of them in England (and the rest of Europe), such that there could little space left (to live in obscurity). After all, knowledge about their powers would make them vulnerable to the Muggles.
Rowling won't pen another novel, even entertain the thought of another series. But cinema is another medium. It could be more exciting, as the Harry Potter series have many subplots, which would be good for a trilogy at the least. Ask the author herself.
The British author was the screenwriter and producer, which would mean that she had greater control on the outcome of the production. It's a good thing, as "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" is quite different from "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" and its sequels. It won't be Potter, even the overwhelming sight of Hogwarts. Moviegoers were quick to think that they would revisit this magical realm, as the opening scene would suggest. It turned out that Gellert Grindelwald, Albus Dumbledore's friend-cum-foe, was on the loose.
Authors and their works to guide the more literate viewers
Rowling had many literary references in her Harry Potter series, and it wasn't different in "Fantastic Beasts." The Second Salemers would remind them of the Transcendentalists, Nathaniel Hawthorne in particular. (The dreary house of theirs may be a nod to "The House of the Seven Gables.") Queenie Goldstein, who would resemble the blond bombshells of early Hollywood, might be a muse of Fitzgerald's Jazz Age. And the introverted Scamander could be the grown-up John "Demi" Brooks. (Demi is one of the main characters of Louisa May Alcott's "Little Men".) As for the appeal to Young-adult viewers, there was no blurred line in this film.
David Yates, who directed the last four Harry Potter films, found himself in familiar terrain. He made sure that "Fantastic Beasts" would remain charming and oddly amusing despite the gray colors that would cast a spell on the inhabitants of New York. Philippe Rousselot, who won an Academy Award (for Best Cinematography) for his work in "A River Runs Through It", might get another Oscar nomination. (It won't be the dark hues.) Dan Fogler almost upstaged his fellow cast members. Some fans would see Ron Weasley in Jacob Kowalski, a hard-lucked "No-maj". (No-maj is an American term for Muggle.) Bug Fogler's wide eyes, deadpanned features, and portly figure won the audience's hearts.
Hardcore fans might be wanting for more, even be disappointed after a running time of slightly more than two hours. This is the beginning of a franchise, though. They must expect Eddie Redmayne, who plays Newt Scamander, to work his way into the hearts and minds of viewers in the upcoming sequels. Magic was unleashed in New York, and the rest of the East Coast and the Far West would follow next. What will be the sequel be all about? Newt Scamander will return to the US, as his research (on fantastic beasts) will lead him to the Wild West. He might be startled to encounter Native Americans who know a great deal of magical spells. Scamander, who will become a renowned Magizoologist, will meet Leta Lestrange. She is his first love, and she may likely be related to Bellatrix Lestrange. And fans will see more of Johnny Depp. (The "Pirates of the Caribbean" star plays Gellert Grindelwald.) There's one more thing.
There's a scene where Kowalski is reading "Cassandra and Her Cat Gustavus." It's another wizard book, which Rowling might turn into a film. What do you think?
