We got a new trailer for Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them a couple days ago, along with an announcement of a global fan event on Oct. 13, which will feature a live Q&A with various cast members and filmmakers and new footage from the upcoming “Wizarding World of J.K. Rowling” prequel just over a month before its Nov. 16 overseas debut (it opens on the 18th in the U.S. and the U.K.). You can watch the trailer, and you decide whether to attend the fan event (which will be followed in some locations by an IMAX showing of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone... neat) or watch the Facebook live-streaming version of said event.
This is the launch of the final lap of marketing for what has become Warner Bros.’ most important release of 2016. The film needs to be good, and it needs to be a big hit. I would argue that the former is more important than the latter. Obviously, Warner Bros./Time Warner Inc. would prefer to have a film that is critically acclaimed, gets the fan and general audience support, and makes a bunch of money here and abroad. How much would qualify as “a bunch of money” is open to debate.
Also On FORBES:
More than Suicide Squad’s $732 million+ total? More than Batman v Superman’s $872 million cume? Closer to the Hobbit trilogy’s $978m average? I don’t have the budget on hand, but I will argue that the better received the JK Rowling-penned/David Yates-directed film turns out to be the less it has to make to qualify as a hit. Because, like all too many would-be franchise-starters these days, the goal is two-fold. The film has to make money, and it has to be good enough to keep people interested in this new extension of an old franchise.This isn’t the Star Wars prequels or the Hobbit trilogy. We aren’t talking about a brief trilogy that can rely on a consistent fandom showing up on schedule for “one last ride.” If Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is not good, that’s a much bigger problem for the long run than if it merely makes less money than hoped. This doesn’t have the advantage of established characters showing up onscreen for the first time or returning to big-screen glory. All it has is a loose connection to a very popular cinematic franchise, and this is its one shot at justifying its existence.
The pitch of Fantastic Beasts is that the world of Harry Potter, set 70 years before the Harry Potter adventures, is compelling enough to justify as many stories as Warner Bros., J.K. Rowling, and friends can push out on a semi-regular basis. If the film stinks, that’s pretty much the ballgame. The fans and casually curious will show up in November, to what extent I cannot say, but the burden of proof will be on the film itself to convince those who came out of loyalty and curiosity to stick it out beyond the introductory chapter.
Moreover, Warner Bros. has suffered a year’s worth of bad press regarding the DC Films offerings, both regarding critical disaffection and reports of horrific behind-the-scenes meddling. Warner Bros. needs to make a case that it can still offer a mega-budget franchise blockbuster that is A) narratively coherent and genuinely good as well as B) a filmmaker-driven project unencumbered by executive micromanaging and the like. Whatever happened with Batman v Superman and Suicide Squad (notwithstanding will become of the rest of the superhero slate), that needs to be “the DC Films problem” and not “the Warner Bros. problem.”
But getting back to pure quality considerations, we all know what happens to the sequel to an artistically disappointing film that still hit it big thanks to advance interest and marketing hype. As such, it is infinitely more important that Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them be a good/crowd-pleasing entertainment for the long-term health of the “Wizarding World” franchise. Better to be Batman Begins than Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Of course, better to be Jurassic World or The Force Awakens, but you get the idea, and the idea is that we’re all trying to avoid the dreaded Tomb Raider Trap.
A rock-solid Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them has room to grow even if it “under-performs” here and/or abroad, as those on the fence check it out down the line and then get excited about the 2018 sequel. But a poorly received film, one without the crutch of familiar characters or a favorite story arc, will be a much more severe problem for the health of this newfangled “Harry Potter” series. That’s what’s at stake with Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. It has to go big, or risk being sent home.
