Eddie Redmayne as Newt Scamander,
Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, directed by David Yates and written by Steve Kloves & J.K. Rowling (2022).
33 notes
·
View notes
I know it is the SAME scene from the movie but shown at different angles BUT DAMN MY FEELS! Gellert get a grips damnit you are a super villain damn 🥲 I almost feel bad for him even tho he IS an abusive husband, damn even his last line to Albus was a textbook manipulative sociopath line XD still I ship them 🥹
216 notes
·
View notes
Lips parted, eyes closed, head down. Gellert's longing evident. He shows more vulnerability than Albus whenever jumps from being cruel to friendly. Part of him didn't assume how much he loves that man and struggles to demonstrate and to hide it. As if young Gellert was still there, fighting against his villain self for Albus. Look, he couldn't break the physical touch, his love language
400 notes
·
View notes
I wish thinking about... oh, we were closer that brothers... we can free each other... what you’re doing is madness... it’s what you said we’d do... committed to me, to us... because i was in love with you... with or without your help, id burn down their world, albus... love, arrogance, naive, pick your poison... we were young, we were gonna transform the world... who will love you now, dumbledore?... you are all alone... can help me pass my finals
96 notes
·
View notes
I can’t believe I went into the newest Fantastic Beasts movie expecting the only mention of Grindelwald’s and Dumbledore’s relationship being that one scene in the restaurant and having my whole world flipped upside down. Holy shit was I surprised. Not only was that the FIRST scene but their relationship was literally mentioned in every other scene.
Literally me during the credits:
42 notes
·
View notes
newt cut out tina's pic from the newspaper in COG coz at that time they weren't that close penpals to exchange photos (or maybe even their relationship became more complicated) so tina sent (or gave) him her pic in SOD and he was carrying it with him all the time
he even took it out the case before dumbledore gave it to bunty
and i really like to think about it!
and also about the fact that in that scene in SOD newt and tina are still a bit awkward with each other but less awkward than usual! newt now looks tina in the eyes and compliments her more easily, and tina looks at him with her heart eyes
gosh i love them so much, i still love them after all of the years of waiting for the third film!
38 notes
·
View notes
FANTASTIC BEASTS HEADCANON (SECRETS OF DUMBLEDORE SPOILER ALERT)
So there is no way the Qilin bowed before dumbledore because he's pure of heart (I love him but dude fell for a literal nazi and is a top teir manipulator) so I recon the all seeing fawn just looked around and went 'hmmm who would piss the fucking nazi that killed my mom and twin off most??? Ah, the ex-husband!'
46 notes
·
View notes
Mads Mikkelsen as Gellert Grindelwald,
Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, directed by David Yates and written by Steve Kloves & J.K. Rowling (2022).
12 notes
·
View notes
I thought of you when the Qilin bowed to Dumbledore. I went "Ha, Blair's going to hate this."
Oh my goodness anon. You do me great honor. And yes, yes, I hate it. The saddest part is that I thought this movie was actually pretty good. Better than the second film, not quite as good as the first. It had some genuinely beautiful moments, some others not so great. (Lally needs to be mainstay. She's such a delight, they better not bench her like they did to Tina, or kill her off like they did Leta.)
Truly, it was shaping up to be a great movie. But then they did that. And completely fumbled the climax.
I kid you not, when the Qilin bowed to Dumbledore I started laughing so hard that I accidentally woke up my kitty. I had to pause the movie, as I laughed for a full minute, give or take. Something tells me that I'm not supposed to laugh at that moment. That it's supposed to be poignant and powerful. But seriously, seriously. Seriously. This movie expects me to buy that Albus War Crimes Abuse Apologist Child Groomer Dumbledore (Those are his middle names, right?) is pure of heart...? Give me a break, Rowling.
First of all, nobody is. Everyone has flaws, everyone's got demons. Not being pure doesn't mean you aren't a good person. This is just like the idea that only the pure of heart can cast a Patronus. Even if I accept the existence of "pure hearts," that is still balderdash of the highest caliber - fucking Umbridge could cast a Patronus. Even children aren't pure of heart, though I could be a bit more understanding if that was the take the series went with. You can call this a personal belief on my part, and fine, it is...but the movie says so too. Literally in the very scene when they establish the Qilin's powers, Lally clarifies that obviously, no one is actually pure-hearted. This is contradictory to what they go with later. Fine, for the sake of argument, let's say I accept that in this world, some people just have totally pure hearts.
But do not try to tell me that Albus Dumbledore is one of them. Albus Dumbledore, who plotted a fascist takeover with Grindelwald, who was complicit in the imprisonment of his sister and is at least indirectly responsible for her death (all of which the movie itself discusses) who refused to face Grindelwald out of shame, who never warned anyone about young Tom Riddle's behavior, who kidnapped infant Harry and then imprisoned him with abusive relatives, who left Sirius to rot in prison, who lied to Harry for years and groomed him into becoming a martyr at seventeen, who employed and constantly defended an unrepentant child abuser, and guilted Harry when he complained, who showed blatant favoritism for Order families, who hired a fraud to teach at Hogwarts for no other reason than to expose him, who kept the truth about the prophecy from Harry for years, who forced Sirius to live in the house he was abused in...
...Need I go on?
This man is not pure of heart. I recognize that I am pretty biased as a Dumbledore-Anti and one could make a case for him being more of a mixed bag. Fine, I acknowledge that one could make that case, that Dumbledore is a character who is more in the gray. I don't agree, but I get why people might see him as such. But someone who falls into shades of gray is not "pure of heart." That's the entire point. Not that it even matters because, as we seen, the Qilin itself is not infallible, nor do I understand why anyone thinks it would be? It's still a living creature. (Or a dead one, in Grindelwald's case.) It can be influenced just like anyone else. It's a baby for goodness' sake. Animals can be trained. Animals can be replaced with duplicates - would anyone apart from Newt be able to spot a dressed up fawn from a real Qilin? How many wizards on average even known what a Qilin is? Animals can also make mistakes just like humans - and Newt's Qilin clearly did.
But you know what's even worse than that? There's someone else at that ceremony who the Qilin should have bowed to. Someone better. In hindsight, it feels very obvious. The Qilin should have bowed to Jacob. No, but seriously, think about it. How many times did this movie make a point to mention how big Jacob's heart is, what a good person he is? I could have accepted this. Even moments before the Qilin takes her bow, Dumbledore himself is complimenting Jacob. Why doesn't the Qilin sense the purity in Jacob's heart? If she had bowed to him...can you imagine it? A Qilin bowing to a muggle, in front of all those people? Would leave all of Grindelwald's rhetoric totally discredited. Especially since he had just tortured said muggle with an illegal curse no less, but I guess everyone just ignored that? It would do far more damage to his cause.
I feel very strongly about this.
14 notes
·
View notes