Daniel Radcliffe is one of many former child actors who went on to take wilder roles after finishing their stints in recognizable IPs. Since the Harry Potter movies (which we've ranked) concluded, he’s played a gassy animated corpse in Swiss Army Man, a man who wakes up with magical horns on his head in Horns, a heightened version of Weird Al Yankovic in Weird and many whimsical characters from the anthology series Miracle Workers. As Radcliffe continues to challenge himself as a performer, one of his former Harry Potter directors, David Yates, weighs in on how he feels about the inspired career choices he's made since leaving the Wizarding World behind.

David Yates saw Daniel Radcliffe as The Boy Who Lived while directing him in the last four Harry Potter movies, but he’s also followed his adult career since the franchise ended in 2011. Yates told Looper that he's noticed the wild trend in the roles Radcliffe has taken, and it sounds like he couldn't be prouder of the 34-year-old star:

You love to see that the actor is getting this kind of support from his former director, and I totally agree with the filmmaker. I hope the star continues to try fresh material It can definitely be difficult for a former child actor to break out of a certain mold. But luckily, each one of his roles since the magic-centric film franchise have been memorable, unique and bizarrely entertaining. We’ve seen him go from Potter to horror in The Woman in Black and even take on action flicks and comedies like Now You See Me 2 and The Lost City. Radcliffe is also expanding his talents on stage starring in plays. He's appeared in the musical How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying and is currently starring in the hit money-making musical Merrily We Roll Along on Broadway playing second protagonist Charley Kringas. 

When you’ve played the same role for a decade, it’s natural that an actor would want to try to flex their muscles. That’s why Daniel Radcliffe wanted to take on many different roles following his stint within the Wizarding World. He's certainly carved out a lane for himself. When talking about playing Weird Al Yankovic in a separate Looper interview, the British actor explained that he would feel bored if he didn’t get to explore the realm of a movie doing fun, crazy stuff compared to characters just sitting around and talking. Can’t say I blame him on that front.

If the actor could think about the one role that served as a “statement” for his life apart from Harry Potter, it would be Equus, a play that required he appear nude for a segment. The show opened shortly before The Order of the Phoenix premiered and was a major shift for the star. It was considered controversial at the time for the then-17-year-old actor to star in this role since he would be in his birthday suit. But the performer said the role was very important to him, as it would show the world he’s was ready for a life outside of the confines of Hogwarts.

It's great that David Yates appears proud of his Harry Potter star for venturing into roles much different than the boy wizard character that launched his career. Since Daniel Radcliffe became a father, he's been looking to do fewer movies. Though I'm confident that whenever he does line up a gig, he'll continue to keep us on our toes when it comes to his range. 

You can watch the actor in Merrily We Roll Along playing at the Hudson Theatre in New York, and keep an eye on the schedule of 2024 new movie releases in case he lands a project there. Those who want to watch the Harry Potter movies in order can also stream them using a Max subscription.

With its films rarely hitting theaters, and the ones that do rarely debuting with much fanfare, is Netflix hurting its films with its more ephemeral release model? That’s a big topic on this week’s show. We discuss how both films and series on Netflix seem to come and go through the cultural zeitgeist, whether or not that is sustainable, and whether we think it should change. 

Also this week, director David Yates joins us to discuss his new film “Pain Husters,” his time working in the Wizarding World, and the upcoming documentary “David Holmes: The Boy Who Lived” which tells the story of Daniel Radcliffe and his Harry Potter stunt double David Holmes who endured a life-changing accident on set. 

Timestamps (approx. only)

• 00:00:00 - Intro 
• 00:11:58 - David Yates Talks ‘Harry Potter’ & ‘Pain Hustlers’
• 00:34:31 - Netflix’s Bad Release Model & ‘Pain Hustlers’ Review
• 00:41:42 - ‘Five Nights At Freddy’s’ Surprises Us With A Huge Box Office Win
• 00:56:37 - Sophia Coppola’s ‘Priscilla’ Review
• 01:12:49 - ‘Now and Then - The Last Beatles Song’
• 01:27:30 - Outro

Want More ReelBlend?

Sign up for our premium membership, which includes a bi-weekly newsletter from Sean, and ad-free episodes. Also, be sure to subscribe to ReelBlend on YouTube for full episodes of the show in video form. Finally, we have all kinds of fun merchandise for dedicated Blenders to flaunt their fandom with pride.

News broke recently about an upcoming documentary film focused on David Holmes, a stunt performer who was injured on the set of the 2010 film Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part One, leaving him paralyzed from the chest down. Holmes spent years as the stunt double for Daniel Radcliffe on the Harry Potter films. Now Radcliffe is participating in the documentary The Boy Who Lived, which will tell the inspirational tale of Holmes’ recovery and successful life, post tragedy. A new trailer for the documentary was released recently, which we will include below. But as chance had it, Deathly Hallows director David Yates was a guest on our ReelBlend podcast the day that the documentary was announced, and we were able to get his thoughts on Holmes, Radcliffe, and the documentary. 

Film director David Yates hopped into the Harry Potter series for the final four films, starting with 2007’s Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. He stayed in the Wizarding World for three Fantastic Beasts films, but is detouring into tough drama for the pill-pushing Netflix original Pain Hustlers. On the day he joined us, news of The Boy Who Lived hit the wire, so the ReelBlend hosts asked Yates to comment on David Holmes and his accident. The director lovingly remembered the stunt performer, telling our podcast: 

David Holmes’ accident occurred while filming with the second unit. Yates remembers hearing about the accident, which involved a wire pull, over the walkie talkies on set. Holmes was rushed to a nearby hospital, but his paralysis couldn’t be avoided. 

As Yates continued to remember David Holmes, he said: 

It’s terrific that Daniel Radcliffe is honoring the legacy of his friend and former stunt double, David Holmes. The Harry Potter series remains a formative film franchise for generations of audiences who have grown older with the actors, and no doubt want to hear more details about Holmes, his accident, and his road to recovery. Here’s the trailer that just arrived:

The Harry Potter story is set to resume when a television series takes a second crack at JK Rowlings’ novels. Of course, the movies are available to stream on Max at any given moment. And Davids Yates’ Pain Hustlers, with Emily Blunt and Chris Evans, is available on Netflix as we speak.

The Harry Potter franchise has been entertaining it's generations of fans for decades now. While it all began with J.K. Rowling’s books, the property crew thanks to movie franchises, stage plays, and theme parks. A prequel film series was also started over the last few years, titled Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Potter director David Yates recently revealed his reaction to Fantastic Beasts being announced as a five-film franchise. And it’s one that you might not expect.

David Yates directed the final four Harry Potter movies, and was once again behind the camera for the Fantastic Beasts franchise. Three of those films were released, but it’s unclear if the final two Fantastic Beasts movies will ever be produced given the disappointing box office performance of its sequels. Yates recently appeared on the Inside Total Film podcast, where he revealed the shocking way that the five-film plans for Fantastic Beasts ended up coming about. As he put it,

Talk about a surprise. News of the five-film plan for Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them broke the internet. And it turns out that not even those involved in the property knew about this prior to J.K. Rowling’s announcement. Although it’s unclear if we’ll ever see the final two Fantastic Beasts chapters ever be produced and released in theaters. Right now that property looks like it’s currently on pause at Warner Bros., especially given the ongoing SAG-AFTRA strikes.

While Rowling promised five movies for the Harry Potter prequel series, that is far from guaranteed. It’s truly wild that not even David Yates and Eddie Redmayne didn’t even know that there were plans for more Fantastic Beasts films, let alone an additional four blockbusters. But since movies like The Secrets of Dumbledore failed to resonate with audiences or make money, it seems more than possible that the spinoff franchise will never get a true conclusion. 

2016’s Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them performed super well, with Harry Potter fans seemingly thrilled to see the Wizarding World back on the big screen. Unfortunately, the two sequels failed to bring that same joy, and had disappointing box office runs. Add in controversies like Johnny Depp’s firing as Grindelwald, and there’s seemingly a lot going against the magical movies right now.

The Harry Potter and Fantastic Beasts franchises are currently streaming with a Max subscription. Be sure to check out the 2023 movie release dates to plan your next movie experience. 

Throughout the landscape of streaming television, the subject of the opioid crisis has risen in profile rather quickly. Series like Hulu’s Dopesick and Netflix’s Painkiller have started the process of digging into this modern problem, opening the door for narrative feature films to do the same. 

The latter streaming provider/studio has seized that opportunity through director David Yates’ Pain Hustlers, a dramatized adaptation of journalist Evan Hughes’ non-fiction book The Hard Sell: Crime and Punishment at an Opioid Startup. While casting Emily Blunt and Chris Evans as the film’s leads was a smart move, the resulting film doesn’t use their talents as recommended. 

In Pain Hustlers, a chance meeting between Liza (Emily Blunt) and Pete (Chris Evans) puts the former stripper on a career path that uses her intelligence to get ahead. Falling into the world of pharmaceutical reps, Liza helps build the failing company that hired her into a juggernaut almost overnight. Throughout this movie’s relatively short and brisk story, that success forces Liza to question the morality of the world that’s helped build her a better life.

Admittedly, David Yates’ latest directorial effort, from a script by writer Wells Tower, could have fallen flatter than the end result presented. If there’s anything Pain Hustlers can claim as an asset, it’s the fact that the film does glide rather quickly through its course. That brevity may be part of the problem though, as it fails to dig into any piece of its subject matter with any sort of significant depth.

Pain Hustlers is a riff on The Wolf of Wall Street, but plays on the other side of the moral table.

The audience for Pain Hustlers will more than likely be drawn to the film due to the similarities between itself and Martin Scorsese’s The Wolf of Wall Street. Emily Blunt’s Liza is the wide-eyed lead that finds a financial racket that has high yields, but equally high risks. Following the path from startup to major player, the journey of the pharmaceutical company presented is just as shady and meteoric as that of Jordan Belfort and his Stratton Oakmont investment firm.

One massive difference that separates the two projects is that Pain Hustlers focuses on Emily Blunt’s character as a relative innocent. While she’s along for the ride until her moral compass is truly tested, we never really see her become corrupted by the big pharma lifestyle. Liza may enjoy her new apartment or being able to buy her mother (Catherine O’Hara) a new Mercedes, but she’s never truly shown as one of the “bad guys.” Instead, she's merely providing for her family, which includes her epileptic daughter (Chloe Coleman). 

That means by the time the chickens come home to roost – and they inevitably do within the world of Pain Hustlers – we’re meant to identify with our protagonist rather than condemn her. It’s a novel spin on this sort of story, lending a little bit of freshness to the proceedings. But it fails to land in any significant manner, thanks to the lack of proper characterization for any of this story’s characters. 

Its heart may be in the right place, but there’s a lack of the electricity that usually flows through tales of moral seduction such as these. So by time Liza is trying to make things right, we never truly feel like she's done something wrong. 

Chris Evans is enjoying his villain era, but the rest of the movie fails to match his energy.

The post-MCU years have been good to Chris Evans, and Pain Hustlers is no exception. Our former Captain America lead has shrugged off the mantle of America’s Boy Scout, digging into anti-heroic and morally dubious roles with glee, and it’s fun to watch. Playing the sketchy Pete Brenner, Evans continues his run of villain era performances that entertain with energy and enthusiasm.

With Emily Blunt’s Liza as the lead in Pain Hustlers, that presents the problem of her performance failing to match that level of energy. This isn’t the fault of the Quiet Place star though, as a clear failure to develop Liza as a proper vessel to tell this story would trip up even the most veteran of performers. 

Just as Pain Hustlers doesn’t cash in on the chemistry and star power of Chris Evans and Emily Blunt, the supporting cast also languishes in this narrative that feels a bit too streamlined. Any movie that shows Catherine O'Hara and Andy Garcia dancing together and fails to at least make a moment out of it should be prosecuted for such a waste.

Dropping us into Liza and her chaotic life after a short introduction that sets up her eventual actions, the movie gets right to throwing Blunt and Evans together on screen, starting our protagonist on her path. While the two actors working together makes for some of the better stretches presented, failing to develop either individual past stereotypes contributes to the overall toothlessness of what we witness.

Pain Hustlers provides neither an emotional punch nor an acidic indictment of big pharma, adding up to a cinematic placebo.

Pain Hustlers knows its heroes and villains all too well, and isn’t interested in trying to blur the lines all too much between the two. Sure, there are moments where Emily Blunt and Chris Evans’ characters are seen in self-reflection, made to look remorseful in their actions. Ideally both of these characters would provide the emotional punch and acidic indictment of the pharmaceutical world that this story is clearly trying to land.

Blunt’s whole third-act arc is even built on those familiar bones, as she tries to absolve herself of the nastiness that starts to crop up. Meanwhile, Evans gets to play the wild man throughout Pain Hustlers, chasing women and running from any sort of morality. Those two paths are supposed to intersect with meaning by time a picture like this is set to wrap up, but all we ever get are a couple of slight scenes that only briefly touch upon such intents.

We’ve seen plenty of darkly comedic movies with a heavy dramatic undercurrent designed to dissect the corrupt systems that have run unchecked for some time. Usually, the lesson isn’t as clearly stated, yet utterly lacking in effectiveness as it is in Pain Hustlers. That combination makes for an unremarkable cinematic placebo that’ll be flushed out of your system in a quick and painless manner. It may move fast, but it leaves no lasting trace of being there in the first place.

The Harry Potter franchise has been entertaining audiences for decades now. And while it all began witH J.K. Rowling's books, for some fans it’s all about the eight-movie film franchise. The last few movies were helmed by David Yates, including the two-part finale. The Harry Potter director recently explained why Deathly Hallows - Part 1 was a “great challenge.” And that movie ended up being one of my favorites in the whole franchise.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 1 was released back in 2010, and offered a very different installment in the Wizarding World. Our trio of heroes weren’t at Hogwarts, and instead embarked on a cross country adventure to try to locate and destroy Voldermort’s horcruxes. The movie had a unique visual language including a stunning animated sequence and Harry and Hermione’s emotional dance. Filmmaker David Yates recently spoke to Collider about the challenges of capturing and editing that film, offering: 

Well, my mind is blown. While I was a big fan of the pacing of Deathly Hallows - Part 1, it seems it actually gave David Yates and company reason to pause. Specifically worries about the direction of the movie and its third act. Let’s break it all down.

The ending of the seventh Harry Potter movie was an emotional sucker punch,with Dobby sacrificing himself to save Harry and his friends from Malfoy Manor. This was preceded by a magical battle, but it sounds like there were concerns that the third act wasn’t exciting enough. After all, the movie was ultimately setting up Part 2’s Battle of Hogwarts, which lasted most of its runtime.

I always say that loving Deathly Hallows - Part 1 so much is my hot take for the franchise, as some fans took umbrage with its change in format. But after seeing the novels’ contents being condensed to make them movie length, the stillness of the seventh movie is super satisfying. And I found each of the visual risks effective. Later in that same interview, Yates explained how difficult it was to complete the project, saying:

In my opinion, that work really paid off. Both Deathly Hallow movies were wildly successful with the events of Part 1 perfectly setting up the epic Battle of Hogwarts that would come in the eighth movie. And there are some fans who re-watch the entire series annually.

Potterfans will soon be returning to Hogwarts thanks to the developing Harry Potter TV series. Each season is expected to cover one year of Harry’s time at school, just as the novels did. Not much is known about how far its development is, especially amid the ongoing strikes.

The Harry Potter franchise is available with a Max subscription. In the meantime, check out the 2023 movie release dates to plan your next movie experience. 

The Harry Potter franchise has been entertaining audiences for decades now, resulting in genrations of fans. While it all stated with J.K. Rowling’s novels, the movie franchise is possibly more iconic– even inspiring theme parks. The Wizarding World was expanded with the Fantastic Beasts movies, but it’s unclear if the final two movies in that series will ever be produced. Harry Potter director David Yates revealed the state of Fantastic Beasts 4, and addressed if he would ever return to the famous characters again.

David Yates made his Wizarding World debut directing Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, and stayed on until the series ended. He also directed all three Fantastic Beasts movies, so he’s deeply connected to the franchise. He recently spoke to Deadline about the state of those spinoffs, as he’s gotten a break from magic in favor of other preojcts. In his words,

There you have it. It sounds like not even David Yates knows if another entry of the Harry Potter spinoff will end up being produced. Considering there was originally a five-movie plan for Fantastic Beasts, smart money says some fans are going to be holding out hope to get a proper conclusion.

Yates’ comments to Deadline come as he’s promoting his new movie Pain Hustlers, which had its premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival. But Potterheads are still wondering about what’s going to happen with the Fantastic Beasts franchise. Unfortunately it doesn’t seem like the studio has any plans to complete the franchise as of this moment.

While the first Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find them did well, the sequels failed to do the same. Moviegiers didn't connect to The Crimes of Grindelwald’s story, and The Secrets of Dumbeldore was a box office disappointment. There’s been no news from the studio since the latter movie’s release, and not even the filmmaker behind the franchise knows what’s coming next.

Even if the Fantastic Beasts franchise is dead in the water, there are still plans ocming together for future Wizarding World projects. A live-action Harry Potter TV series is being developed for Max, with each season expected to capture on year of Harry’s time at Hogwarts. This should allow for much more of the books’ contents to be included, which should please hardcore Potter fans. Fans are also hoping a movie adaptation of The Cursed Child happens, preferably with the original cast reprising their roles.

David Yates’ work on the Wizarding World is streaming now with a Max subscription. Be sure to check out the 2023 movie release dates to plan your next movie experience. 

Eddie Redmayne was the center of the Fantastic Beasts movie trilogy for three blockbuster films. When shooting a magical franchise, the actors are certainly put through the ringer. Whether it’s working through the awkwardness of holding a magic wand for the first time, or reacting to CGI elements added later in the production process, it’s not always easy being in such a big, fantastical film series. However, Redmayne was able to imagine new ways to make the process as easy for him as possible, and once was able to get out of spending an entire film soaked in water.

The Danish Girl actor recently sat down with Vanity Fair to talk about some of the most important moments from his prolific acting career. When discussing his time playing Newt Scamander in the Harry Potter prequel series, Redmayne talked about how he once improvised a way to make one of the films easier on himself as an actor. Apparently, he magically prevented himself from being wet throughout the entirety of the film. The actor detailed: 

There are several spells in the Harry Potter universe that allow wizards to do all sorts of spells to get them out of difficult magical situations. An umbrella spell definitely isn’t out of the realm of possibility in the Wizarding World, and a very clever solution to being drenched throughout the movie. While Redmayne was clearly willing to be wet if that was required of him, as he is a professional, the solution was definitely a better option for everyone involved. Director David Yates was receptive to this, as Redmayne went on to say:

It sounds like Fantastic Beasts was a very collaborative set, which probably made the production process more enjoyable for everyone. When the director is flexible, it allows for a slew of creative ideas to be encouraged, including a magical umbrella keeping the star dry. Yates has directed several films within the Potter world, including the final four Harry Potter films. He must be very comfortable working within this universe which may make him more comfortable with actors taking creative liberties. 

It’s unclear whether there will be more Fantastic Beasts movies in the future. Redmayne has stated he is unsure what the future may hold for his involvement in the franchise. In addition, Yates is seemingly taking on more original film projects, so it may be a while before Fantastic Beasts 4 hits theaters even if development does move forward. However, hopefully it isn’t too long before Redmayne and Yates work together again, as they clearly make a great team, and are wonderful collaborators.

Fans of Eddie Redmayne can check out his latest film The Good Nurse which is currently streaming exclusively for Netflix subscribers. In addition, those wanting to revisit the Fantastic Beasts movies can stream the trilogy with an HBO Max subscription. For more information on other films hitting theaters and streaming this year, make sure to check out our 2022 movie release schedule. 

The decision to make a series of prequels to the beloved Harry Potter series was one of the biggest no brainers in the history of pop culture. Unfortunately, the story that started with Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them became a bit muddied when wizard politics and legacy characters entered the picture. After two films of the proposed five-movie cycle, author J.K. Rowling’s expansion of her Wizarding World seemed confused as to what it really wanted to do. That mayhem is somewhat dialed down in the third installment, David Yates' Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, which manages to be the franchise’s best prequel yet. 

Still balancing the narratives of magizoologist Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) and Hogwarts professor Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law), the latest Fantastic Beasts chapter delves further into the heights and depths of magical power. As Scamander and Dumbledore continue to head up the side of good, the evil forces under Gellert Grindelwald (Mads Mikkelsen) continue to work towards destabilizing the world of wizards and Muggles. With Grindelwald having a Dumbledore of his own in his thrall – the man who used to be known as Credence Barebones (Ezra Miller) – the threat of impending magical conflict grows.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore goes a long way towards righting the ship when it comes to the mixed bag of Wizarding World history. Addressing several of the flaws that presented themselves in the first movie, as well as its sequel, The Crimes of Grindelwald, the new film's script written by J.K. Rowling and newly returned co-writer Steve Kloves heads back in the direction of whimsy and danger that the Harry Potter films orchestrated. It couldn’t have happened a moment too soon. 

While it doesn’t totally correct the errors of The Crimes of Grindelwald, The Secrets of Dumbledore brings the feelings of magic, adventure, and fun back to the Fantastic Beasts series.

To honor just how much of an upgrade Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore is, we need to remember The Crimes of Grindelwald. A convenient title for what happens to be the lowest point of the series so far, that 2018 sequel seemed to forget a key piece of its own title. The titular Fantastic Beasts took a backseat to the intrigue of wizarding social politics – and while the combination of these elements coexisted better in the first film, they absolutely bottomed out in the second.

In his seventh Wizarding World film since 2007’s Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, David Yates juggles both beasts and wizards rather well almost immediately. Opening with a sequence featuring Dumbledore and Grindelwald having a chat you’d expect between Professor X and Magneto in the X-Men series, it isn’t long before we jump to Newt Scamander protecting a sacred, mysterious magical creature. Both sides of the board are set up quickly and effectively in Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, and the film that unfolds moves swiftly while weaving through both halves effortlessly.

Most importantly, the adventurous fun you’d hope for from a movie with Fantastic Beasts in the title is restored. Magic battles are dialed down a bit when compared to The Crimes of Grindelwald’s attempt at an all out ending, but on the plus side, the stakes are much clearer this time around. Fun and warmth return as well, especially through Jude Law’s portrayal of Dumbledore. This time out, Law is even more comfortable in the role, and thus the secrets we learn in our latest chapter are even more effective revelations. 

Once again, co-writer/Harry Potter vet Steve Kloves proves he is the secret sauce to the Wizarding World’s cinematic universe.

Out of the entire Wizarding World canon, between the Harry Potter and Fantastic Beasts stories, writer Steve Kloves’ pen has only been absent from three entries. Looking back at the results for Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, as well as the first two Beasts films, it’s become readily apparent yet again that Kloves is the secret sauce to adapting and crafting J.K. Rowling’s world for the big screen.

In Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, the grave nature of all that’s come before isn’t ignored in favor of whimsy. At the same time, beasts like Teddy the Niffler and Pickett the Bowtruckle are properly built into the twists and turns of this latest story. So while Newt and his brother Theseus (Callum Turner) are engaged in a life or death escape from a tight spot involving a Manticore, those beasts in question are assisting in their own way.

As any good writer does when brought into a franchise midstream, Steve Kloves doesn’t try to overwrite or contradict anything J.K. Rowling might have set up in previous movies. Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore enhances the past, twists and all, and adds new wrinkles to the fabric of this in-process universe. Perhaps the greatest decision in that respect was for Kloves to bring back Albus Dumbledore’s estranged brother Abelforth (Richard Coyle), as his role in the titular mystery goes a long way towards grounding some of the more fantastical twists of the past.

Character has become more important under the creative regime that rules this movie. Returning figures like Theseus Scamander get to be more charming and snarky, while also maintaining their sense of authority. Plus, additions like Professor Eulalie Hicks (Jessica Williams) and Yusuf Kama (William Nadylam) sparkle as personalities that fit the Fantastic Beasts world while also pushing the plot along. More is actually merrier in this movie, especially in the ranks of Dumbledore’s army. 

After a rocky start, The Secrets of Dumbledore feels like it’s a sign that the Fantastic Beasts films are only going to get better from here.

An argument could be made that if Harry Potter fans really wanted to properly experience the Fantastic Beasts franchise, all they’d need to do is skip the previous two movies. Having a deeper knowledge of those entries is an advantage for obvious reasons, but it also doesn’t feel required given how well Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore catches you up. So if you’re looking to introduce anyone to the series and they’re afraid that missing the “required reading” will keep them in the dark, you can put their mind at ease. 

Should the Fantastic Beasts saga continue for its remaining two films as planned, things should only get better from this point out. That is, if Steve Kloves’ writing talents can be secured for those future installments. Weaving together the wizarding war we know is coming into a story of forgiveness, love, and protection of the beasts with which we coexist, Kloves massively corrects the course of the Wizarding World with Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore.

Franchise expansion is an easy decision to make, but an even harder experience to turn into a fitting continuation. Fantastic Beasts may be the latest franchise to learn that lesson the hard way, but it’s also starting to look like a prime example of what happens when creators learn from their mistakes. All that’s left now is for Harry Potter fans to experience the results for themselves, in order to decide whether they deem these films worthy of continuation or in need of a swift, decisive finale.

After several years and multiple delays, Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore is finally coming to theaters in the spring of 2022, and will offer fans of J.K. Rowling’s sprawling Harry Potter franchise a glimpse at one of the darkest periods in the history of the Wizarding World. The third installment in the Fantastic Beasts series (though certainly not the last) will surely answer some of those burning questions we have all been asking since we last saw Newt Scamander and Albus Dumbledore in the extremely busy The Crimes of Grindelwald back in 2018.

But as we anxiously await the next chapter in the saga, now seems like a perfect time to take a look at what we know about Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore so far, including its release date, cast, and other vital information that everyone should know going in…

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets Of Dumbledore Release Date Is Set For April 15, 2022

Fans of the franchise have been waiting with bated breath for information on the theatrical release of Fantastic Beasts 3, but we’re happy to say there isn’t much time before the next chapter arrives. In September 2021 Warner Bros. finally revealed the title as Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore along with a release date of April 15, 2022. However, this wasn’t the first time a date had been thrown around over the years.

In April 2019, Warner Bros. issued an official release date of November 12, 2021. Fantastic Beasts 3 was initially expected to release on November 20, 2020, then the studio gave Dune that release date (which was also delayed several times). Production on Fantastic Beasts 3 was initially delayed from starting to film July 2019, to starting instead in late fall 2019. Filming was delayed yet again to start in the spring of 2020 to match the new November 2021 release date. Then the COVID-19 pandemic happened and you pretty much know the story from there.

The Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets Of Dumbledore Cast Is Led By Eddie Redmayne, Jude Law And Mads Mikkelsen

When Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore is released upon the world, it will see most of the cast members from the first two movies in the series return to play their iconic characters with some new faces as well. Taking on the role of self-proclaimed magizoologist Newt Scamander is Eddie Redmayne. Also returning are Jude Law as Albus Dumbledore, Ezra Miller as Credence Barbone/Aurelius Dumbledore, Dan Fogler as Jacob Kowalski, Katherine Waterston as Tin Goldstein, Alison Sudol as Queenie Goldstein, and Callum Turner as Theseus Scamander.

One of the biggest stories surrounding the Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore has been the hiring of Mads Mikkelsen to portray Gellert Grindelwald from Johnny Depp, who stepped away from the franchise shortly after production began.

Other members of the cast include Richard Coyle, Maria Fernanda Cândido, Oliver Masucci, William Nadylam, Jessica Williams, Poppy Corby-Tuech and several others.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets Of Dumbledore Follows Albus Dumbledore As He Attempts To Stop Gellert Grindelwald’s Plan To Take Control Of The Wizarding World

Following the shocking events of Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, the Wizarding World was left in a precarious situation, and by the way Warner Bros.’ official synopsis of the third movie sounds, it doesn’t look like things are going to get better before they get worse. In fact, it looks like things are going to get much worse for everyone involved.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore is set to follow Professor Albus Dumbledore as he attempts to stop Gellert Grindelwald from taking control of the Wizarding World and shaping it to meet his desires. And since it was revealed in the final moments of The Crimes of Grindelwald that the two have a blood-pact that prevents them from dueling, Dumbledore enlists Newt Scamander and a small yet fearless team to stop the dark wizard’s plan before it comes to fruition.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets Of Dumbledore Is Directed By David Yates

David Yates will be continuing with the franchise, potentially to the end. He started in J.K. Rowling's magical world by directing  Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix and continued with Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, and both Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows movies. He returned to direct the first two Potter prequel movies in the Fantastic Beasts series, and he has officially signed on to helm the third installment. In 2018, longtime producer David Heyman told CinemaBlend he'd like to see David Yates continue to direct all five films. But it sounded like it was partly up to Yates himself, and also dependent on how things played out. 

The Secrets Of Dumbledore Is Not The Final Movie Of The Fantastic Beasts Saga

J.K. Rowling surprised fans when she revealed that she was actually planning to write five movies for the Fantastic Beasts series. Producer David Heyman later explained that she began by expecting three films but then, as she dug deeper and started writing the first script, she realized there was a lot more story to tell and didn't think she could fit it all into three movies.

The five-film Fantastic Beasts series is expected to span from 1926 to 1945, with the final movie including the big duel between Grindelwald and Dumbledore. The second movie was set in 1927 but, as shown above, Rowling hinted at the third movie being set at least in part in the 1930s. There has been no confirmation about the third movie's timeline. Will it lead up to the start of World War II, or would that real-world war be left to play out opposite the magical one in the fourth and fifth movies? Time will tell. (Get it? Time? #classic)

But even though there are two more movies on the way, very little is known about them at this time besides the fact that it looks like the fourth installment won’t be coming for quite some time.

The Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets Of Dumbledore Trailer Shows The Wizarding World On The Brink Of War

In December 2021, Warner Bros. finally released the long-awaited trailer for Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore and it did not disappoint. In addition to featuring some amazing references to the Harry Potter movies, the exciting display of wizarding wonder shows off what’s to be a deadly march to all-out war between the two factions led by Albus Dumbledore and Gellert Grindelwald. But even though Grindelwald’s forces of evil look as deadly as ever before, Newt Scamander and his team (consisting of a magizoologist, a wizard from an old family, a schoolteacher, and a Muggle) look up to the task. 

What Will Fantastic Beasts 3 Be Rated?

The MPAA won't reveal Fantastic Beasts 3's official rating until closer to the release date. But it's almost certainly going to be PG-13. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them was rated PG-13 for "some fantasy action violence." Crimes of Grindelwald was rated PG-13 for "some sequences of fantasy action." Expect something similar for Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore.

Expect to hear more about Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore as we get closer to the film’s April 15, 2022 release. But while you wait, check out our ranking of the Harry Potter movies and don’t forget to take a glance at our 2022 movie release schedule.

Chris Columbus is the legendary director behind Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. Have you ever wondered why he didn’t direct all of the films? He’s recently shared why, along with why David Yates was the perfect director to finish the series, and which film is his favorite. 

Harry Potter fans agree the first two films, which were directed by Chris Columbus, are a lot of fun. They’re full of magic and wonder as Harry learns that he’s a wizard and starts exploring the Wizarding World. Once the third film begins, the rest of the series is much darker, both literally and figuratively, as Harry gears up for the battle against He Who Shall Not Be Named. I sat down with Chris Columbus for an interview with CinemaBlend, and he shared why he only directed the first two films and why he thinks David Yates was the perfect director to finish the series. Here’s what he told me:

For any who are unfamiliar with all that goes into directing a film, it’s a lot of hours. They oversee all aspects of the production, so they’re being consulted on things like set design and lighting before the actors even get to set, then there’s the shooting, and after that, as Chris Columbus mentioned, there is another set of hours dedicated to visual effects. It’s mentally and physically exhausting, and what a fantastic job Chris Columbus did setting up the world for others to take over. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban was directed by Alfonso Cuarón. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was directed by Mike Newell. All films from Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix through the finale were directed by David Yates. 

Chris Columbus gave David Yates a glowing review for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 which I can’t disagree with. I also cry every time I watch, and something that can elicit that emotion on subsequent viewings is hard to come by. David Yates was absolutely the perfect choice to finish the series for all that he brought to the production. 

The 20th anniversary of the theatrical release of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone is November 16, 2021. The full series is available to stream on HBO Max.

When the Fantastic Beasts movie franchise was first revealed we learned the plan was to make five movies. The first two films, Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them and Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald were released two years apart and it seemed the plan was to make all five movies over the course of a decade. However, the third film in the series was pushed back following a lukewarm reception to part two, and the global pandemic only made the delay worse. Part three is now set to open next year, but it looks like Fantastic Beasts 4 may also see a significant delay before it's released.

Director David Yates has been one of the core architects of the Wizarding World on the big screen, having helmed the final four Harry Potter franchise films and all three of the Fantastic Beasts movies. He's only directed one other movie, 2016's The Legend of Tarzan since starting on the franchise, and he took that gig between the two major film series. However, it looks like Yates is looking to take another little break from the world of wands and brooms as Deadline is reporting that he is in talks with Sony to direct an original film project. While Yates taking the other job would likely cause a delay, it seems that Yates is taking the job because Warner Bros. had informed Yates there was going to be a break between Fantastic Beasts 3 and part four anyway.

Exactly why the studio has decided to take a break between the next two films is unclear. It may simply be a desire to make the next movies better. Fantastic Beasts 3 saw a delay after the second film wasn't a massive hit with audiences, with the hope being that if the new movie took its time, it would simply turn out better. Audiences won't know until next summer if that plan actually worked, but if WB's early look at the movie gives the studio the impression taking more time worked, then it may simply plan to take more time with every movie in the rest of the franchise.

Exactly how long this break is planned to be is unclear, but the movie that David Yates is working on, though a lot isn't known about it, is being described as a "smaller film" which was one of the things that appealed to Yates about the project. As such it likely won't take a great deal of time to complete.

It's a movie set in the world of pharmaceutical sales during the opioid epidemic and is being described as something similar to The Wolf of Wall Street. That certainly doesn't sound like the sort of film that will require large amounts of post-production digital effects, so Yates will likely be able to make the movie quickly compared to what the Wizarding World films require.

It's possible the reason for the delay is simply to wait until Fantastic Beasts 3 is released and make sure that audiences embrace it. If they do, the next movie can move forward. If not, there may be a longer conversation about what to do with the final two planned films.

The Harry Potter franchise has enthralled the general public for decades, starting with J.K. Rowling's original novels. Since then the Wizarding World has been consistently expanded thanks to games, theme parks, Broadway plays, and the Fantastic Beasts movies. Production is currently underway on Fantastic Beasts 3, with director David Yates once again behind the camera. But does he still plan on helming all five installments of the spinoff property?

David Yates has a long history with the Harry Potter franchise, directing the last four movies starting with Order of the Phoenix. He's been collaborating with J.K. Rowling herself on the Fantastic Beasts franchise, which will span five total films. Production on the threequel has hit a number of road blocks, so fans are left wondering if Yates still plans to stick around for two more movies. Tina actress Katherine Waterson recently spoke to this, saying:

Well, there you have it. It looks like despite the on set drama associated with Fantastic Beasts 3, David Yates is still seemingly set to direct all five installments of the prequel series. This approach will no doubt give the franchise a cohesive visual language, while also allowing the story to be told in a methodical way.

Katherine Waterson's comments to Collider are sure to be thrilling for Harry Potter fans who are patiently awaiting the release of Fantastic Beasts 3. Utterly nothing about the threequel has been revealed, although it's expected to further raise the stakes after The Crimes of Grindelwald. What's more, it seems David Yates and J.K. Rowling are still planning to collaborate on another two installments of the magical franchise.

As previously mentioned, there were a number of roadblocks that have already affected the Fantastic Beasts franchise. First the set was shut down just as filming began, resulting in the project being pushed back. Next J.K. Rowling herself got involved in an ongoing controversy about comments she made regarding transgender women. Eddie Redmayne himself came out against those comments, while the two continue to work together on Fantastic Beasts 3.

But perhaps the biggest controversy surrounding Fantastic Beasts 3 was Johnny Depp's recent departure from the role of Grindelwald. Following the actor's loss in court for his libel case against The Sun, Warner Bros. asked Depp to step down as the franchise's primary antagonist. He's since been replaced by the great Mads Mikkelsen, and fans are eager to see how he'll step into the character's shoes.

Regardless of these hiccups, production is underway for Fantastic Beasts 3 nonetheless. The ending of The Crimes of Grindelwald teased major things for the ongoing story, especially regarding Dumbledore. What's more, Grindelwald seemingly has more power than ever-- even if he's being played by another actor entirely.

David Yates' Fantastic Beasts 3 is currently expected to arrive in theaters on July 15th, 2022. In the meantime, check out our 2021 release list to plan your next movie experience.

In pop culture, we are living in the age of the fan. Never before have audiences had so many options for entertainment available at any given time. Superhero cinematic universes and heavily serialized television programs are notable extensions of this, and it stretches to the world of Harry Potter as well.

In fact, David Yates' Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is a perfect example. The movie is solid and loaded with fun characters and sequences, but it's also a ride that is designed specifically to be enjoyed by those who have long invested their hearts into the Wizarding World. However, it's also a double-edged sword. While you also have to admire the movie's commitment and confidence in itself, it's definitely going to leave some crowds feeling like they are on the outside looking in.

The second chapter in the Fantastic Beasts series, and based on the second screenplay from author J.K. Rowling, The Crimes of Grindelwald picks up a year after its predecessor and begins as its titular villain (Johnny Depp) makes a daring jailbreak in hopes of continuing his mission: finding the powerful young wizard Credence Barebone (Ezra Miller) and convincing him to join his side. Of course, Grindelwald being free sets off all kinds of alarms, and it's not long before news gets back to England and magizoologist/burgeoning celebrity Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne).

Having had some experience with Grindelwald in the last movie, Newt knows exactly what it is that the dark wizard is trying to do, but also can't legally do anything about it because of a punishment that forbids him from international travel. Plus, unlike his bureaucrat brother Thesueus (Callum Turner), he's also not entirely comfortable choosing sides in the imminent war. This all changes, however, when friends Queenie (Alison Sudol) and Jacob (Dan Fogler) arrive from New York with news that Queenie's sister Tina (Katherine Waterston) is in Paris looking for both Grindelwald and Credence -- and the legendary Dumbledore (Jude Law) asks for Newt's help in the matter.

That description probably isn't going to make a lot of sense to those who don't have at least some background with this property -- and that's on purpose, in that it's representative of the mode in which Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald operates from the start. Being the tenth chapter in a movie franchise that has earned over $8 billion to date, it has a strong expectation of the audiences' presumed knowledge, and doesn't slow down once it gets rolling. The perfect example of this? It never actually features or explains what the "crimes of Grindelwald" are.

For the die-hards, this will be seen as a blessing, as few things will take you out of a movie faster than a string of exposition filled with information that you already know. If you're not a person who is aware of the Lestrange family, know what a Boggart is, or can immediately recognize the halls of Hogwarts, though, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is trouble. It's a film that throws you into the deep end of the pool, telling you to sink or swim, and while it's possible to tread and keep your head above water, it doesn't exactly make for a wholly satisfying experience.

It speaks to the comfortability of J.K. Rowling as a creator, and is an advancement for her as a novelist-cum-screenwriter following Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them. The sequel is much more tonally consistent than the previous movie (opting to be more Prisoner of Azkaban than Sorcerer's Stone), and it seems to have a much clearer idea of the larger story that it wants to tell. However, Rowling also does seem to still be adjusting to the very different way information is offered on screen versus in text, with certain bits coming across as throttling in their delivery.

With so much going on, it's the characters that ground Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, as it plays host to charming and engaging performances from its talented ensemble. Eddie Redmayne's Newt Scamander remains a strange, atypical franchise lead (what with his regular inability/hesitance to make eye contact with the people he's talking to), but his charisma comes from his amiability, and his general attitude makes his bold stances all the more powerful. What's more, this is a story that tests him, and forces some very important decisions that move the character forward in key ways.

Similar sentiments can be shared about the majority of the returning Fantastic Beasts cast (though there are some spoilery controversial choices made that can't be discussed at this time), but unfortunately those particularly excited for the roles played by Jude Law and Johnny Depp may walk away underwhelmed. In the case of the former, Dumbledore has only a very minor part in Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, straight-up benched by the Ministry of Magic in the middle of the movie, and Law only has a handful of scenes to establish his take on the great wizard.

Grindelwald is the bigger disappointment, though, with most issues stemming from the lack of any kind of meaningful engagement with the character. At the very start we learn through expositional dialogue that he is a smart and dangerous manipulator, but despite seeing a plethora of recruits, we never actually see him fully execute this skill. Instead, we simply know what he's doing, and we're told it's bad... and that's about it. Rather than coming across as scary or dangerous, he is merely painted as Representative Antagonist who we only know is sinister because the heroes don't like him. For all of the controversy surrounding Johnny Depp's casting, it's strange just how underutilized he is.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is a film where what you get out of it is heavily dependent on what you bring into it. It's competently made, with David Yates bringing that familiar Harry Potter world aesthetic back for the sixth time, but your appreciation for it is going to entirely depend on the context in which you personally put it. It's a movie built special for aficionados of the Wizarding World, and while there's nothing wrong with that in this age of fandom, it's an element that demands consideration before purchasing a ticket.

If you had Fantastic Beasts 2 in your 'What 2018 movie will be a surprising source of controversy?' pool, you're doing quite well for yourself. The second film in the Harry Potter spinoff series has received a fair bit of backlash even though it doesn't even come out for another month. Some of that backlash springs from the film's approach to Dumbledore's sexuality. Earlier this year, director David Yates said that the film would not explicitly address the fact that Dumbledore is gay, leading to a belief among some that this aspect of the character's identity and an opportunity for that kind of positive representation was being brushed over. David Yates has now clarified that point, affirming that the film will address Dumbledore's sexuality, as he explained:

David Yates makes it clear here that he never said that Dumbledore wasn't gay, and his story in Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald isn't an instance of making him straight or ignoring/hiding that aspect of the character. It just sounds like there won't be some flashing magical banner that says he is gay, but it will be very obvious to anyone who sees the film that Dumbledore is gay. There will be some scenes that he shares with Grindelwald, and when you see them, the reality of the character's sexuality will be undeniable.

The other thing that stands out to me about what David Yates told Empire Magazine is that "This part" of J.K. Rowling's story does not focus on Dumbledore's sexuality. As he says, this is a huge narrative, and The Crimes of Grindelwald is only the second film in a five-film series. Just because this film may not really focus on Dumbledore's sexuality does not mean that none of the other three upcoming films will. Heck, Dumbledore wasn't even in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Maybe the Dumbledore-Grindelwald relationship plays out over multiple films. Dumbledore could just be crushing from afar right now; we don't know till we see it.

The obvious problems of backlash against a film before anyone's seen it aside, we don't yet know what happens in Fantastic Beasts 2. Maybe Dumbledore isn't out yet or maybe he is still coming to terms with his sexuality. The Wizarding World isn't the most enlightened place during the Harry Potter story, with students shouting racial slurs like 'Mudblood' in school halls and Death Eaters palling around with Ministry of Magic officials. So who knows what this world was like in 1927 when the film takes place.

In truth, if you are familiar with the Harry Potter universe and its magical objects, Dumbledore's sexuality is even apparent from the trailers for Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald. We see Dumbledore staring in the Mirror of Erised, which, by his own words in the Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone novel, "shows us nothing more or less than the deepest, most desperate desire of our hearts." For Dumbledore in this film, that is Johnny Depp's Gellert Grindelwald.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald arrives at Platform 9 3/4 and in theaters on November 16. For all of this fall's biggest movies, check out our release schedule.

WARNING: Some Spoilers for Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them are in play. Please bookmark this story until you've watched the film, unless you're ready for spoilers.

Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them was always going to be the doorway to more adventures in the wizarding world of J.K. Rowling. But instead of just three films, the Fantastic Beasts series is in the game for five installments of Newt Scamander and his friends fighting against the forces of darkness. So, now's probably a fantastic time to compile what we know about the next installment of this new series, which is titled Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald. What do we know so far about this first Fantastic Beasts sequel? Read on and find out.

What Have We Seen From Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindelwald?

With the movie's release now just a few weeks away as of this writing, we've finally gotten the final trailer for the film to feast our Wizarding eyes on. And, as you can see above, it promises tons of action, appearances from old favorites and new characters alike, and a lot of intrigue. If you were already excited for Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, then this look at the movie is sure to keep you hyped!

When Will Fantastic Beasts 2 Be In Theaters?

With previous reports that films in the Fantastic Beasts world would be coming every two years, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald pretty much makes good on that promise with its November 16, 2018 release date. It will be competing against Instant Family and Widows on its day of release, with the likes of Dr. Seuss's The Grinch and Overlord opening before it, and Ralph Breaks The Internet: Wreck-It Ralph 2 being released the weekend after. Still, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald shouldn't have a problem making for a hell of an opening weekend.

What Will Fantastic Beasts 2 Be Rated?

Both the Harry Potter and Fantastic Beasts series have historically been in the PG / PG-13 wheelhouse. As predicted, the PG-13 rating has stuck to the franchise, as it doesn't seem that the darkness of the threats to the wizarding world will be lightening anytime soon. The official rationale by the MPAA for the rating is due to, "some sequences of fantasy action." With magical murder, warfare, and dangerous snakes flying around in the Wizarding World, we're not the least bit surprised.

Who Will Direct Fantastic Beasts 2?

After originally balking at returning to the world of Harry Potter, David Yates brought himself back into the fold with Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them. Previously, Yates had declared that first film as, seemingly, reinvigorating his desire towards seeing the series through its five film plan. Sure enough, David Yates returned to the director's chair for Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, making this his sixth film in the Wizarding World. Though this is far from going all the way, series producer David Heyman seems to think that if anyone could go the distance in the world of Harry Potter, it'd be Yates.

Where Will Fantastic Beasts 2 Be Set?

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is going to be a pretty European affair, as the story is already set up for a trip to Paris, as previously indicated by director David Yates. Between a magical circus that sees Credence Barebone running away from home, and the French Ministry of Magic, there's going to be quite some action in the city of lights. Yates also previously indicated that the film will mark the series' return to the UK, and we've definitely seen footage of Newt Scamander and Albus Dumbledore apparating at Hogwarts, despite previous reports that the landmark location was a toss-up for inclusion.) Though, don't be surprised if the film at the very least teases a trip to Germany towards the end, as that's the home nation of newly in play Gellert Grindelwald, and it looks like World War II will definitely be included in the series' near future.

When Will Fantastic Beasts 2 Be Set?

There were rumors that the next film in the Fantastic Beasts series would take place almost immediately after the events of Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them. However, after those rumors made their way back to J.K. Rowling herself, she weighed in on those remarks, dispelling them and stating that it wouldn't "begin days after the first movie ended." With a timeline set between 1926 and 1945, there's a 19 year gap for the second film to play around with, though we'd like to think that 1930 would probably be a logical starting point for Fantastic Beasts 2.

What Is The Plot Of Fantastic Beasts 2?

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald sees the titular dark wizard escaping from MACUSA's captive watch, and making his way to Europe to try and wage war against the Mudblood and Muggle races. With Albus Dumbledore apparently being unable to fight this war himself, the Hogwarts professor enlists his former pupil, Newt Scamander, to help prevent said conflict. Their adventures will bring other Fantastic Beasts characters back into the fold, and will see them return to Hogwarts, as well as make their way through the magical portions of France.

Of course, it only makes sense that the story for Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald will see Newt continuing his career in magizoology, while also being roped into the continued search and fight against Gellert Grindelwald. Seeing as Albus Dumbledore was extremely close to Grindelwald, his reluctance to fight his former friend may be tied to his romantic feelings, though the two are on the path to conflict in the timeline set for the five film cycle. Also, it's to be assumed that Leta Lestrange, Newt's ex-girlfriend and now his brother Theseus's fiance, is more than likely in Grindelwald's camp, seeing as her family eventually has deep roots in the darker side of the wizarding community.

Which Characters Will Return for Fantastic Beasts 2?

The definite list of characters previously specified as coming back in Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald were laid out by David Heyman as Tina, Queenie, Jacob, Credence, Grindelwald, and, of course, Newt himself. How these characters will be brought together, considering they'll be separated by an entire ocean, has yet to be seen. But, we have seen the various characters returning in various trailers and pieces of footage. Also, MACUSA president Serafina Piquery will also be returning, as Tina has been reinstated in the organization, and someone has to be in charge. Though, there are more questions around how Credence will reappear, considering the big reveal of his survival was removed from the finale of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. His appearance is confirmed though, as we see him in the Circus Arcanus (a sort of shady wizarding circus in France) with who looks to be the human form of Volemort's pet snake / horcrux, Nagini.

Will Newt Still Be At The Center In Fantastic Beasts 2?

Despite his front and center presence in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, David Heyman has gone on record as stating that Newt won't necessarily be the front and center character for the future Fantastic Beasts films. With the hunt for Grindelwald being of some importance to the wizarding world at this point, it would only make sense to shift focus onto more pressing matters and the characters who can really move the story along. However, Newt was our first focal point into this world, and neither he, nor his fantastic beasts will be leaving anytime soon. Although, this does make us question the strategy of naming every film "Fantastic Beasts and..."

How Well Does Jacob Remember The Events Of Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them?

At the end of Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them, baker and Muggle/No-Maj companion Jacob Kowalski had his memory wiped by the cleansing rain that Newt encouraged his Thunderbird, Frank, to bring down upon New York City. However, we see that at the very end of the film, not only has Jacob built his bakery, he's creating pastries that look like the fantastic beasts he was exposed to throughout the film. And, not only that, but he sees Queenie Goldstein, and looks to definitely have remembered her. At the recent VIP event for Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, actor Dan Fogler assured the crowd that we'll find out exactly how Jacob gets his memory back, and it'll be fairly early on in the film.

Which New Characters Are Joining The Cast?

The three big names that were originally thrown out as appearing in the Wizarding World of Fantastic Beast: The Crimes of Grindelwald were Albus Dumbledore, Leta Lestrange, and Theseus Scamander. With Dumbledore being an obvious inclusion into the Fantastic Beasts world the moment Grindelwald's name was printed in first film's opening sequence, Leta and Theseus are more tied into Newt Scamander's personal history, which only helps further integrate his story into that of the hunt for the villainous wizard he encountered in Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them. So far, we know that Leta Lestrange will be played by Zoe Kravitz, and is Newt's ex-girlfriend, who is now engaged to Theseus Scamander, played by Callum Turner. With her obvious relation to Harry Potter's Belatrix Lestrange, it'll be interesting to see how her presence links through to that of her relative by marriage.

Theseus was mentioned in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them as Newt's older brother, and a bit of a war hero in the First World War. Between those luminary contributions, and his current relationship with his brother's ex, a little bit of sibling rivalry seems to be on the horizon, and we've seen some of it come to the forefront in the latest trailer for the sequel. Rounding out the newer cast members of Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald are two important characters to the Harry Potter canon: alchemist Nicolas Flamel, played by Brontis Jodorowsky, and Nagini, played by Claudia Kim.

When Did Fantastic Beasts 2 Begin Production?

Since Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald was scheduled for a November 16, 2018 release date, production was slated to start at some point in 2017. Per David Heyman's statement that "July / August" 2017 would be the projected start date, July 3, 2017 marked the official start of production on the second Fantastic Beasts film. The production was a smooth one, with everything wrapping up in December of that same year, and the release date remaining unchanged and locked for action.

What New Creatures Could We See?

There are quite a few creatures we haven't seen come to life that have been listed in Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them. With the return to England and a trip to Paris in the series' future, there's all sorts of environments and lands that other beasties are camping out in, just waiting to be found by Newt Scamander and whomever may accompany him. While we're not sure of any of the creatures we'll definitely see, there's more than likely a chance that we'll be seeing some dragons, as the Harry Potter series has made a big deal about their presence in this world, and Europe is probably the best continent to spot one on. The "Winged Horse," or the "Pegasus" as it's best known as in Muggle mythology, was a popular symbol among the UK's paratroopers. So, maybe we'll get to see those beauties at some point, setting them up to be used in any sequences set during the later part of the series' 19 year timeline. At the very least, we do know that there will be some baby Nifflers to coo over, once Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald debuts.

Will There Be Any References To Other Characters From Harry Potter?

Of course, the biggest question we have is, will any other Harry Potter figures be crossing over into the Fantastic Beasts series, other than Albus Dumbledore? Already, Gellert Grindelwald is going to be present during the rest of the series, so that base is covered. Also, with Nicolas Flamel and Nagini being confirmed as debuting in this second film, more links to the pre-existing mythology will start to wind between the past and the present. But, with Hogwarts being one of the settings for Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, we might see younger versions of some professors, such as Minerva McGonagall, who is born during the time frame of this series of prequels. Though, to be honest, we wouldn't put too much faith in seeing a lot of old faces from the Harry Potter realm, as Fantastic Beasts is meant to be both a prequel to those adventures, while also being its own thing.

PHOTOS: Copyright: (c) 2016 WARNER BROS ENTERTAINMENT INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Photo Credit: Courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures

Early on, in the opening stages of the Harry Potter franchise, the voice attached to the visual storytelling was shuffled. Chris Columbus helmed the first two adaptation of J.K. Rowling's novels. But after he left, varying filmmakers of different tastes and talents stepped in to take a crack at translating Rowling's text for the screen, giving us stories from Alfonso Cuaron and Mike Newell. Ever since 2007's Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, however, the same gatekeeper has been at the helm -- David Yates -- and his stewardship of Rowling's Wizarding World has extended into the first two Fantastic Beasts movies. So, when CinemaBlend ventured to England last year to visit the set of Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, we asked longtime producer David Heyman if he plans to have Yates direct all five planned Beasts movies, and he told us:

On one side, this makes sense. Having the same director work in tandem with Jo Rowling as she pens scripts, and producer David Heyman as he weighs in on casting, can maintain a streamlined vision for the world of Fantastic Beasts, especially as the core characters begin to share screen time with young Dumbledore (Jude Law), the evil Gellert Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) and several other unique individuals. Keeping David Yates on board for the duration of the series gives a needed stability.

And yet, part of the reason why Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban was my favorite of THAT series was because it took Rowling's words and filtered them through a new lens -- that of Alfonso Cuaron -- and it might be exciting to see what a different storyteller might see in the world of Newt Scamander that would lead to a refreshed and rejuvenated story.

We're jumping the gun a tad. We haven't yet seen how different Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald will be from And Where To Find Them. For now, we only have this trailer:

What do you think? Should the Fantastic Beasts series keep David Yates, and maintain visual and creative stability? Or would you be curious about seeing a Fantastic Beasts movie with a different voice and perspective? Take a vote in the poll, then gear up for Yates' Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, in theaters on November 16.

This poll is no longer available.

Johnny Depp's personal life has made a lot of headlines in recent years, as his divorce from ex-wife Amber Heard got pretty heated, with the actress making some accusations about Johnny Depp's conduct while they were married. Just when that died down, Johnny Depp started dealing with several lawsuits between himself and his former management company, which has put some of his radical expenditures in the limelight. Following the other accusations against A-list stars and producers in recent weeks, some fans are murmuring about whether or not Johnny Depp should be the star of the upcoming Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald. Director David Yates has some thoughts about the concerns, noting,

The allegations Yates is referring to are the ones brought up by Amber Heard when she was working to divorce herself from Johnny Depp a couple of years ago. One of the stories that came out at the time indicated that both Heard and Depp had gotten high and drunk, whereupon the couple had argued and Depp reportedly broke some glass items in the house, cutting his finger deeply in the process. A photo later emerged regarding the incident in question. Per what Yates is saying, the actor has never been a hard person to work around on set and the allegations have been limited to what Amber Heard said and not a slew of people in the work environment, which makes it a non-issue for his movie in the director's mind.

Per EW, David Yates also notes that the Johnny Depp accusations have been limited to one person and shouldn't really be coming back out thanks to the Harvey Weinstein scandal and subsequent accusations. He says,

If there is an issue with Johnny Depp being cast in Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, perhaps we should be talking about the twist at the end of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, which has robbed us of the ability to see Colin Farrell back on the big screen playing Graves. Johnny Depp is a capable actor and he certainly brings something special to a role, but Colin Farrell's performance in the first movie perfectly fit the franchise and was one of the finest pieces of acting in the movie as a whole. Farrell should be missed with Johnny Depp playing the official version of Grindelwald.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald recently revealed its title and a full cast photo. The movie will finally be hitting theaters on November 16, 2018. If magic isn't your thing, there's a ton of other stuff coming in 2018. Check out our full schedule to be in the know.

There are some slight SPOILERS ahead for Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them. They're nothing major, but you might want to proceed cautiously if you have not seen the Harry Potter spin-off yet.

It's always impossible for a director to squeeze in everything that they want into the final edit of a film. This is something that David Yates confronted while editing down the footage he shot for Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them. Luckily for us, though, the English filmmaker opened up about the scenes that he had to cut, giving us a breakdown of what nearly made it into _Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them. _

But don't go thinking that the stuff that was left on the cutting room floor was sub-par. That's because David Yates insisted during my roundtable discussion with him at Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them's New York press-day earlier this month that the film just didn't flow quite as smoothly with them in. David Yates explained:

So what did David Yates decide to cut from Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them? Yates and producer David Heyman opened up about two specific sequences during my chat with the pair, and one scene in particular would have severely changed the shape of the film, because it introduced us to Jacob Kowalski (Dan Fogler)'s fiancée, Mildred.

This scene saw Jacob returning to his tiny apartment after his bank loan had been rejected. Waiting there is his fiancée Mildred, who asks him if he managed to get his loan. After Jacob informs her that he didn't, she hands him a ring and walks away. David Yates insisted that it was "the most beautiful scene, tender and very funny," before explaining that they got rid of it because the audience "didn't need a reason to fall in love with Jacob" thanks to Kowalski's performance.

Meanwhile, David Yates also took advantage of Alison Sudol's musical talents during production on Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them, asking the singer-songwriter, who portrayed Queenie in the film, to "write an alma mater song" that Queenie and Tina (Katherine Waterston) perform to Jacob and Newt Scamander (Eddie Redymayne). David Yates added that during the course of the song you see "the boys slowly fall in love with them."

David Heyman also noted that this moment came at a rather inopportune time, too, because it took place when Newt, Queenie, Tina and Jacob all go down into the briefcase. "At that point in the story, there's a lot of stuff going on outside," he explained, so it felt a little peculiar that all four of them had sat down to sing a song.

You can judge for yourself whether Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them would have been better off with these songs in them, as the film is now in cinemas.

Fantastic Beast and Where to Find Them has only just arrived in theaters this weekend and we are already talking about the sequel. Fantastic Beasts sets up some pretty major things to come for this new franchise, with the sequel potentially getting a little darker. While the first film was set in New York City, it was reported that Fantastic Beasts 2 will take place primarily in Paris. However, that might not entirely be the case anymore.

While it's true that the bulk of Fantastic Beast and Where to Find Them 2 will take place in the heart of Paris, it won't be the only setting for the magical sequel. As it turns out, the film will visit a place that Harry Potter fans should be pretty familiar with by now: the U.K. Harry Potter fansite The Leaky Cauldron spoke with director David Yates and producer David Heyman (aka the Davids), and the duo revealed some new tidbits about the sequel's setting.

Yates confirmed that the sequel will be set in the City of Love, and that,

Yates wasn't quite sure yet on where J.K. Rowling was setting the rest of the films (implying that this franchise will be a globetrotting affair) but figured that it would be "difficult to ignore America."

Fans are intimately familiar with the U.K. as it serves as the entire setting for the main Harry Potter series. It's next to impossible to figure out which of the iconic locations from the British Wizarding World that Fantastic Beasts 2 will go, but I think our minds all collectively screamed/wished "Hogwarts!"

The fact that this new series of films is focusing on so many new aspects of the Wizarding World means that fans will get to indulge in previously unseen aspects of this universe. The U.K. is where the heart is, but it's exciting to learn about what magical culture is like in other countries- and it's helped to reinvigorate and expand on the Harry Potter series. We could see any number of countries before the fifth movie in the series concludes. Seeing as how this series seems to be building up to a pretty pivotal moment in Harry Potter that happens to take place in 1945, we can probably guess that WWII will play a part in deciding certain settings. Personally, I'd love to see what wizards in Japan are like.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them 2 is expected to release sometime in 2018. If you can't wait that long, then there is a film called Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them that happens to be in theaters right now.

With the release of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, we are being introduced to a whole host of new characters that get into magical antics several decades before Harry Potter, Hermione Granger, and Ron Weasley were even twinkles in their dads' eyes. But while the above trio are unlikely to ever cross over into the franchise, it turns out that the future Fantastic Beasts movies could still be partly set at Hogwarts.

Director David Yates made this admission to me on Monday when I sat down to talk with the filmmaker about his work on Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. After I quizzed David Yates about the revelation that a younger version of Albus Dumbledore will in fact be in the follow-up, I asked him about whether Hogwarts will be used as a setting for the film. This led him to admit that they're currently going back and forth over whether to actually include it. Yates explained:

At the moment it doesn't sound too positive that we'll actually get to see Hogwarts School Of Witchcraft And Wizardry in Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them 2. However, the fact that they're already having discussions about whether to include the institution just two films into the franchise bodes well for it being incorporated at some point.

J.K. Rowling has already announced that there will indeed be four further installments to the Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them universe, which leaves plenty of time for Hogwarts to appear again. Plus there's an in, too; the first trailers for _Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them _have already revealed that Eddie Redmayne's Newt Scamander was kicked out of Hogwarts for endangering human life, but that Albus Dumbledore argued strongly against the magizoologist's expulsion.

But since it has also been confirmed that Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them 2 will be mostly set in Paris, there's a good chance that our return to Hogwarts will only be fleeting- if it occurs at all. At this point we'll just have to wait and see. Thankfully we now only have a few more days to wait until the first installment in the Fantastic Beasts franchise is with us. And just to help you get that little bit more excited for the film, here's the trailer for you to fawn over.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them will be in cinemas from November 18, while keep glued to Cinemablend for further revelations from my discussions with the film's cast and crew in the build up to its release.

It's been five years since we last saw the Wizard World depicted on the silver screen, but director David Yates will soon bring us back to that (literally) magical place with Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Although pretty much everything about Fantastic Beasts is new and different, Yates himself is no stranger to directing movies within this universe, as he cut his teeth on several Harry Potter films. What was it that brought him back? Yates has an answer to that question, and it primarily has to do with the strength of Fantastic Beasts' story. He explained:

During the Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them set visit in December, David Yates opened up regarding the decision to return to the Wizard World with Fantastic Beasts. He had his own particular set of reservations about coming back, considering the fact that he had already spend six years working on the Harry Potter franchise. However, he ultimately felt compelled to return because he found himself impressed by the script, as well as the new direction that the wizard universe would take with the upcoming spin-off movie.

It's difficult to overstate how vital David Yates' return to the Wizard World is for Fantastic Beasts. Although a number of highly regarded filmmakers took the reigns on the Harry Potter franchise over the course of the eight films, none of them had quite as big of an impact as him. Over the course of six years, and the latter four movies, Yates took the franchise from Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, and carried the story all the way through Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows -- Part 2. Although Fantastic Beasts is an entirely new story altogether, Yates' visual style will go a long way towards maintaining a sense of visual continuity that fans have come to expect.

Check out the brand new trailer for Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them below to see Yates' handiwork for yourself.

CinemaBlend will keep you updated with any and all relevant details related to the upcoming release of Fantastic Beasts as more information becomes available to us. The Harry Potter spin-off film will land in theaters on November 18.

The Edgar Rice Burroughs-created hero Tarzan has been a big screen character for decades, brought to life as far back as 1918. We've seen the jungle man adapted in many different ways in that time, from his live-action origin story to a Disney cartoon. What we haven't yet seen, however, is the hero presented in a 3D blockbuster, but now we have director David Yates' The Legend of Tarzan fitting that bill.

You can read our full review of Legend of Tarzan right here, but as we do with every newly released 3D film, what you'll find below is a full breakdown of the experience to determine exactly the best way to see the movie on the big screen. To 3D or not to 3D is the question, so read on for the answer...

What kind of material lends itself to 3D? Animation is certainly a friend, as entire worlds can be built to maximize the effect. In the live-action realm, however, it's all about the big action blockbusters -- which is why they're almost exclusively the ones made in 3D nowadays. The Legend of Tarzan certainly qualifies here, if not especially because the character classically does so much swinging. On paper, David Yates movie makes plenty of sense for the technology.

Being in development since the early aughts, The Legend of Tarzan actually started on the road to theaters way before 3D movies were a big thing again -- but the extra dimension certainly became an important factor along the way. When Warner Bros. committed to making the movie years ago and announced that it would be coming out in July 2016, it was confirmed that there was a plan in place to present it in stereoscope. This is plenty of planning and effort in our minds -- and while the film doesn't get a perfect score because it's converted instead of shot natively in 3D, the improved quality of conversions over the years still allows us to give it a high score.

While you might hope that a new 3D Tarzan film would use at least one scene to have the titular hero swinging on a vine into your local theater, the sad fact is that David Yates movie never actually does it. There are a couple of animal-based utilizations of the technology's Before The Window factor -- one including a butterfly and the other an ostrich -- but beyond that everything in the movie stays completely contained within the screen.

As The Legend of Tarzan cuts back and forth between the actions of the movie's heroes and villains, there are included a number of big, sweeping establishing shots that give the film the chance to crack its knuckles and craft some 3D dazzle. Beyond that, there is sadly very little to say about the movie's use the "Beyond The Window" factor. Even in scenes featuring wide open areas, in which good 3D can get you lost, there still isn't a tremendous sense of depth. For most of the film it's completely ineffective.

We've officially arrived at The Legend of Tarzan's biggest issue in the 3D arena. Every movie shown in stereoscope has to deal with the fact that audiences are watching the action through a pair of tinted glasses, but that's usually combated with a bit of compensation and adjustment. This new film, sadly, feels like you're watching it through a thick layer of mud. A big part of the problem is that the cinematography utilizes an extremely desaturated color palette, leaving nothing to really pop, but it also doesn't help that a great deal of the action is set within canopy jungle.

Want to see exactly how effective the 3D in a film is in any given moment? Just lift up your glasses. Without using lenses to adjust the stereoscopic image, what's revealed are the artificial layers that create the extra-dimensional experience -- and as a rule of thumb, the harder the screen is to watch, the stronger the 3D. I did this numerous times while watching The Legend of Tarzan, and was frequently disappointed. While the aforementioned sweeping establishing shots looked decent, I wasn't impressed that you could clearly make out almost every face in crowd scenes.

"At least it didn't make me sick" isn't exactly what someone might call triumphant praise, but it is one of the better things that I can say about The Legend of Tarzan's 3D experience. Some movies leave audiences with headaches or motion-sickness as a result of not creating solid focal points, but I walked away from the blockbuster feeling just as healthy as I did going in. Of course, it's hard to make someone sick with 3D effects when the intensity of the effect is low.

Final Verdict: We've seen 3D movies come a long way since the rough days of 2010, when every blockbuster was trying to emulate Avatar's success, but The Legend of Tarzan feels like a step backwards. I wasn't the fan of the extra dimension utilized by David Yates for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2, and his latest feature has many of the same issues -- particularly in the brightness category. If you're going to go watch the Lord of the Jungle back on the big screen, you're best off going for some 2D action.

It's been five years since the Harry Potter movie series concluded, and while Harry's latest story in adulthood is currently being told on stage, Warner Bros is aiming to expand the Wizarding World on the big screen by delving into the past. Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them is jumping back to the 1920s to follow Newt Scamander's adventure in the United States. We already knew that Fantastic Beasts is the first entry in a trilogy, but now we've learned from director David Yates that the second movie has already been written.

While promoting his latest movie, The Legend of Tarzan, Yates told GSNews that Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling has already penned Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them 2. He said:

Given Warner Bros plans for Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them, it's not terribly surprising that J.K. Rowling already has the second installment of the series written. In October 2014, the studio announced that Fantastic Beasts 2 will be released on November 16, 2018, and the third movie will follow on November 20, 2020. That means the sequel will need to begin shooting sometime in the middle of 2017 if they want to keep its release date. Okay, so maybe Rowling could have gotten away with finishing the script a little later this year, but now that it's completed, this will give them plenty of time for preproduction and other stages of planning. Judging by Yates' comments, it sounds like Rowling is keeping story details close to her chest, revealing only what she needs to until the movie is officially underway.

Of course, news about Fantastic Beasts 2 is almost nonexistent because the first movie is still four months away from release. Taking place 70 years before the events of the Harry Potter movies, Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them will follow Newt Scamander, played by Eddie Redmayne, who comes to the United States with his magic briefcase containing numerous magical creatures. However, when an accident sets these creatures free across New York City, Newt will have to work with his new allies to track them down, all while avoiding capture by the American wizarding authorities and the sinister New Salem Philanthropic Society. The movie's cast includes Katherine Waterston, Alison Sudol, Dan Fogler, Colin Farrell, Samantha Morton, Ezra Miller and more.

Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them will be released in theaters November 18, and once that's had time to haul in money at the box office, then we should start to hear more details about the sequel.

With a rich history that’s now over 100-years-old, and, according to IMDB, over 200 movies with Tarzan in the title, it’s little surprise that Warner Bros. has decided to throw $180 million behind another reboot of the character with The Legend Of Tarzan.

Obviously, the studio has rather high hopes for The Legend Of Tarzan as they’re releasing it in the height of the summer blockbuster season. They’re hedging their bets that it will be able to swing from vine to vine for several weeks and not only amass a healthy box office return, but will also kick start a brand-new franchise that will prove to be very, very lucrative.

All of that was thrown into a bit of chaos just a couple of months ago when rumors emerged that Warner Bros. wasn’t completely happy with what The Legend Of Tarzan’s production had left them with. This issue wasn’t helped by the revelation that director David Yates had moved onto Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them just after The Legend Of Tarzan’s post-production had begun.

But all of these problems dissipated with the release of the stunning first trailer for The Legend Of Tarzan, which suggested that the blockbuster will be a moody, thrilling, and action-packed waltz through the jungle and a modern examination of the titular character and his doting wife Jane.

But what else do you need to know about The Legend Of Tarzan? Well, luckily, you can have a look through our handy guide below to learn about the blockbuster, which could be the surprise hit of the summer.

What Is The Legend of Tarzan Release Date?

Movie fans need to get really excited, because the end of June and July in 2016 possesses a genuine feast of cinematic delights for those of us that like visiting the multiplexes. Not only is there Finding Dory, Central Intelligence, Independence Day Resurgence, Ghostbusters, Star Trek Beyond and Jason Bourne within the space of a few short weeks, but over the same weekend we’ll have to make the impossible decision of whether to take in The Legend Of Tarzan or Steven Spielberg’s take on Roald Dahl’s The BFG. While moviegoers will adore having this option, the respective studios (Warner Bros. for The Legend Of Tarzan and Disney for The BFG) will be well aware that they have a battle on their hands to dominate the oh so important opening weekend. Unfortunately for The Legend Of Tarzan, their task to topple The BFG is a big ask. As the most popular mainstream director in the history of cinema, Steven Spielberg has built up a sturdy reputation that means every new release from him is met with an immediate intrigue from audiences. In fact, the last Spielberg film to approach anything near to a flop was 1997’s Amistad, which grossed just $44.2 million from a $36 million budget. But, with Steven Spielberg making a special effects driven, big-budgeted action adventure for all the family, that is based on an established novel from one of the most beloved writers of recent memory, it’s hard to see how The BFG will fail. The Legend Of Tarzan’s only chance of eclipsing it will be if it’s met with an impressive critical response. But, if that doesn’t happen, it could gust out of cinemas just as quickly as it entered them.

What Is The Legend of Tarzan Rating?

From the looks of the footage released so far, The Legend of Tarzan will be a pretty intense film. And yet, the filmmakers have managed to make the movie one that a large audience will be able to see without too much trouble. The film has currently gained a PG-13 rating, and since the movie comes out in just a couple of months, it’s unlikely that any editing will be done that would change that to an R rating. So, as long as your young teens are accompanied by an adult, they should be fine audience members for this action/adventure film.

What Is The Legend of Tarzan Story?

Rather than starting at the origins of Tarzan in the jungle and working forward in a linear fashion, writers Adam Cozad & Craig Brewer and director David Yates have decided to begin The Legend Of Tarzan with Alexander Skarsgård’s titular character as John Clayton III, Lord Greystoke. In fact, according to the synopsis for The Legend Of Tarzan, it has been years since Lord Greystoke lived in the jungles of Africa. Instead, he has since become gentrified and he now has a nice, casual life alongside his wife Jane Porter (Margot Robbie) in England. But it wouldn’t be a Tarzan film if we didn’t see our muscle-bound hero amongst the green and gorillas. And after being invited back to the Congo to serve as a trade emissary for the British Parliament, Lord Greystoke is thrust back into the life he left behind and begins to turn back into Tarzan. He's a pawn in a deadly convergence of greed and revenge that has been orchestrated by Christoph Waltz’s Captain Leon Rom, a sneaky Belgian. The first trailer for The Legend Of Tarzan suggests that most of the action is going to take place in the jungle, with its plot also seemingly revolving around the myth of the man that has built up since Lord Greystoke moved to England. Which was probably pretty obvious from the film’s title.

The Writers

Warner Bros. has been plotting a Tarzan reboot since back in 2003. John August tried to bring to life a modern-day big-budgeted adaptation, while Guillermo del Toro, John Collee, Stephen Sommers, and Stuart Beattie each worked on different variations that were inspired by Pirates Of The Caribbean and would incorporate parkour and high-energy action. Finally though, Warner Bros. decided to hire two writers, Craig Brewer and Adam Cozad, to write separate drafts for The Legend Of Tarzan, which have now seemingly been merged together. This is also a ploy that Warner Bros. used for Wonder Woman. Out of this writing team, Craig Brewer has found the most success, having previously written and directed Hustle & Flow, Black Snake Moan, and Footloose. Meanwhile, Adam Cozad is hardly a novice to the screenwriting game, with his previous screen-credit coming in the shape of 2014’s Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit. Obviously it’s impossible to know if this approach will produce cinematic gold, or an uneven and truncated final product. That’s why the appointment of the perfect director was key. Luckily Warner Bros. got someone who has been there, done that, and got the t-shirt straight from the Hogwarts megastore.

The Director

More than any other, Warner Bros. is famously a studio that likes to maintain their working relationships with writers and directors. So, when they were after a mainstream director to oversee their Tarzan reboot and, hopefully, the first installment of many in the franchise, it was hardly surprising that they turned to David Yates. Yates reportedly beat The Hunger Games’ Gary Ross and Nanny McPhee and the Big Bang’s Susanna White to claim the job, and you can imagine that his main selling point was his work directing the final four Harry Potter films, The Order Of The Phoenix, The Half-Blood Prince, The Deathly Hallows – Part 1 and Part 2. David Yates’ role in stabilizing the Harry Potter franchise and building it to a rousing conclusion, while at the same time bringing a solid tone and getting increasingly impressive performances from Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint, often goes unmentioned. But Warner Bros.' decision to have him oversee both The Legend Of Tarzan and the Harry Potter prequel Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them is proof that they noticed. The first trailer for The Legend Of Tarzan teases that David Yates has only grown more confident with his action set-pieces and set-ups. While Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them doesn’t look half-bad, either.

Tarzan

Alexander Skarsgård has been tasked with playing the titular character in David Yates’ new incarnation of Tarzan, with the 39-year-old True Blood and Generation Kill actor beating out the likes of Tom Hardy, Henry Cavill, and Charlie Hunnam to take the part. Rather alarmingly, there was previously a rumor that Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps was going to dive head first into a cinematic career with the role, but that, thankfully, proved to be unfounded. There was actually precedent for such a casting, though, as Olympic swimmer Johnny Weissmuller played Tarzan in over 12 films between 1932 and 1948. Despite the past, thankfully Warner Bros. recognized that an actual actor was needed for the part, and the Swede soon set out on a rigorous four month training regiment to get his body in tip-top shape. Talking about his version of Tarzan, Alexander Skarsgård explained to USA Today:

Obviously, since most of his career has been spent working in television, there are still some concerns over his leading man credentials. But, there’s no denying that he certainly looks the part.

Jane Porter

What makes Margot Robbie’s meteoric rise to becoming a bona-fide Hollywood leading lady remarkable is just how at home the 25-year-old Australian looks as an A-lister. Possessing a beauty that in previous centuries would have led countries to go to war, with The Wolf Of Wall Street and Focus Margot Robbie went toe-to-toe with Leonardo DiCaprio and Will Smith, respectively, and effortlessly rose to the occasion. That’s only the beginning though, and 2016 is set to be the year that she reinforces her credentials. Of course there’s her performance as Harley Quinn in Warner Bros.’ other rather huge summer blockbuster Suicide Squad, but, with Tarzan’s wife Jane Porter in The Legend of Tarzan, Margot Robbie is playing a character that’s equally as iconic in pop culture history. Yet, there are absolutely no concerns that she won’t do the character justice. Director David Yates previously promised that Margot Robbie's Jane Porter is far from a "passive partner to Tarzan" before adding:

In fact, a merging of her old-school glamour and beauty, with a modern toughness and complexity that was previously missing from Jane, is perfectly suited to both the character and The Legend Of Tarzan.

George Washington Williams

While Margot Robbie and Alexander Skarsgård will be doing most of the heavy lifting with The Legend Of Tarzan, the film possesses an impressive supporting cast for assistance. Not only is there the Academy Award nominated actors Djimon Hounsou and John Hurt, but there’s Academy Award winner Jim Broadbent, too. However, it’s the supporting presence of Samuel L. Jackson that will undoubtedly impress viewers the most. In The Legend Of Tarzan Samuel L. Jackson plays George Washington Williams, the pioneering American Civil War veteran, politician, minister, lawyer and journalist who repeatedly broke ground in African-American history. George Washington Williams visited Congo shortly before his death, where he helped to spur an outcry over the treatment of people in the country. It will be exciting to see what Samuel L. Jackson can do with such an influential figure, especially since this is the first time that George Washington Williams has ever actually appeared on screen.

Captain Leon Rom

The Legend Of Tarzan’s roster of Academy Award nominated actors doesn’t just stop at four though. That’s because they’ve also got two-time winner Christoph Waltz in the villainous role, playing another character based on a real-person, Leon Rom. Rom sounds like a downright despicable individual, as not only has it been speculated that he was the main inspiration for Kurtz in Joseph Conrad’s Heart Of Darkness, which was later turned into Apocalypse Now, but he allegedly used to keep severed heads of Africans in his flower bed, and even murdered individuals for the smallest of offenses. Having portrayed the SS-leader Hans Landa in Inglorious Basterds and Blofeld in Spectre, Christoph Waltz is quite adept at portraying wicked individuals. But this might just be his most detestable yet.

History

Of course, The Legend Of Tarzan has a long and storied to try and not just match, but emulate. Originally created by Edgar Rice Burroughs years before cinema even evolved into talkies, the first Tarzan story, Tarzan Of The Apes, was released in print in 1912. In the ensuing decades, the feral child that was raised in the African jungle would go on to appear in innumerable novels and stories. Meanwhile, Hollywood recognized the mainstream appeal of the character when films were still silent, but, starting in the 1930s, a popular Tarzan movie franchise and serial was launched that lasted all the way through the 1960s. However, since then the appearances of Tarzan on the big-screen has only been sporadic. 1981’s Tarzan, the Ape Man and 1984’s Greystoke: The Legend Of Tarzan, Lord Of The Apes both fared well. But, the most recent version was Disney’s 1999 animated adventure Tarzan, which is mostly remembered for featuring an agonizing Phil Collins theme song. This could help Warner Bros. in their cinematic cause, though. Because the established legacy and identity of Tarzan mixed with the complete lack of a recent incarnation of the beloved character means that there should be an intrigue and clamoring to see a worthwhile Tarzan film. And, the first trailer for The Legend Of Tarzan suggests that, for the first time in decades, we’ve got just that.

Yes, folks. The Tarzan movie is still happening. It may end up being a disaster, assuming you believe the latest reports, but it’s happening nonetheless. Aside from the recent production drama, we’ve heard very little about the film, so when Cinema Blend was in Mexico visiting the set of Spectre, we decided to get an update from Christoph Waltz, who told us how this Tarzan film will be different from its predecessors.

There have been many cinematic iterations of the famed wild man, such as Scott Sidney’s Tarzan of the Apes (1918), Edward A. Kull’s The New Adventures of Tarzan (1935), Tarzan and the Lost City (1998), and Disney’s animated movie (1999). According to Waltz, who’s reportedly playing a villainous military figure named Captain Rom who crosses paths with the ape lord, this iteration will only be different with regards to the historic context.

During our interview, which was mostly about his role as Oberhauser in the new James Bond film, he said,

Elsewhere, reports suggest the film will see the wild man returning to the jungle years after his departure to live in modernity with Jane. Tarzan is directed by Harry Potter helmer David Yates and stars Alexander Skarsgard (True Blood), Margot Robbie (Suicide Squad), Samuel L. Jackson (Marvel Cinematic Universe), and Djimon Hounsou (Guardians of the Galaxy). The film is currently scheduled for release on July 1, 2016, though according to recent intel from The Hollywood Reporter, Yates still has a lot to do before then. Yates has already moved on to Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them — we’ve already seen Katherine Waterston’s new bob to go along with her character. The worry is that Tarzan, with a budget of $180 million, isn’t getting enough attention.

Watch Waltz’s full statements on Tarzan in our interview clip below.

Christoph Waltz next will be seen in Spectre, which sees Daniel Craig’s 007 on a mysterious but personal mission. Also featured are Lea Seydoux as Madeleine Swann, Monica Bellucci as Lucia Sciarra, Dave Bautista as Mr. Hinx, Naomie Harris as Moneypenny, Ben Whishaw as Q, and Ralph Fiennes as M. The film will hit theaters this November 6.

With Warner Bros. still reeling from the fact that Pan lost them a monumental amount of money, they have now had to move onto their next crisis with the revelation that their Tarzan reboot has hit some issues, too. And these aren’t just minor issues. Because the $180 million blockbuster is in a bit of a pickle, it remains unfinished, and its director has already moved on to his next project.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, David Yates still has a "considerable" amount of work to do before Tarzan’sr elease date of July 1. And while that might seem like a lifetime away at the moment, it will come around in a speedy and forthright manner, especially when there is so much money at stake. Rather than feeling the burn over the unfinished Tarzan’s impending release date, Yates has taken a rather unique approach to dealing with the pressure: he’s started shooting his next film, which just so happens to be J.K. Rowling’s Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them.

The fact that Yates has left behind the $180 million Tarzan, which is set to glisten with stunning visual effects - if they’re finished on time - has left some Warner Bros. executives a little bit nervous. They’re worried that the film isn’t going to get the attention that it desperately needs.

Various fingers are now being pointed at whoever’s decision it was to take David Yates off of Tarzan when he still had several months of post-production still to oversee. Because of the decision, Tarzan could find itself being rushed to completion since Yates, a veteran of four Harry Potter films who has been shooting Beasts since August, hasn’t be there to give it his undivided attention.

And from accounts in the trade, Tarzan, which stars Alexander Skarsgard as the titular character and Margot Robbie as Jane, hasn’t been met well by Warner Bros. executives, who were left very disappointed with its early screenings. They were able to remain open-minded because the film is far from finished, but the fact that David Yates is now trying to juggle two huge productions at the same time has got them extremely nervous. Especially since Pan flopped so badly.

Because Tarzan is another Warner Bros. project, it’s safe to assume that the studio probably isn’t overly mad at Yates for getting to work on the Harry Potter prequel, which remains a huge priority for the studio and is likely to eclipse Tarzan in budget and in box office return. In fact, a source for the studio explained to THR that this move from Tarzan to Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them was planned all along. Honest. The insider admitted that it is a rather unorthodox move, but the studio is still "extremely comfortable with the productions timelines," which have been set in stone for several months.

If need be, though, there has already been rumors that Tarzan might be pushed back a few months to give the film time to finish. This was a tactic that Warner Bros. used with both Jupiter Ascending and Pan. But the fact that both of these were huge flops for the studio means that it’s a plan that could be fraught with terrible financial repercussions for them.

You don’t get much more fanatical than the fans of the Harry Potter universe. After absorbing the seven original novels, three secondary books, eight movies, 11 video games, and attractions at theme parks in England and abroad, Pottermania has yet to die down. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that a new trilogy set in the vast Harry Potter world is being prepped right now. The first in that new series, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, is currently in production and just added a new location to its shooting schedule, a stand-in for 1920s New York City.

After weeks of filming at the Warner Brothers studio outside of London, The Hollywood Reporter broke the news that the production will move to Liverpool, where the only non-studio scenes will be filmed. Director David Yates says he's looking forward to adding the city to the shoot.

The city best known for bringing The Beatles into the world will serve as the story's New York City setting. The movie is based on J.K. Rowling’s book of the same name, first referred to in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. In that novel, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is a textbook used by students at the magical Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. The book is written by acclaimed magizoologist Newt Scamander, and is a study of all the magical creatures he’s discovered in the world. Rowling also wrote the screenplay for the film.

Eddie Redmayne has taken the lead role of Newt Scamander for the movie. He’s joined by Steve Jobs actress Katherine Waterston as Tina; Colin Farrell from True Detective as Graves, Alison Sudol from the Amazon Prime series Transparent as Tina’s sister Queenie; our new big screen version of The Flash, Ezra Miller, as Credence; two time Oscar-nominee Samantha Morton as Mary Lou; and Tony-winner Dan Fogler as Jacob. The production has also given as yet unspecified roles to Sons of Anarchy’s Ron Perlman (though he's said to be playing a goblin, which is perfect), Ray Donovan’s Jon Voight, and Carmen Ejogo of Selma.

The film takes place in 1920s New York, and, well, that’s all we really know about the plot for certain. There are bound to be some fantastic beasts in the movie, though. You can’t really have a movie in the Harry Potter universe that has Fantastic Beasts in the title and not have some awesome creatures filling the place with weirdness. 

The book that the film is based on mentions something like a whopping 85 beasts. That’s a lot of special effects to round out a movie. I can imagine that the streets of Liverpool as old-time New York should be easy to fill with centaurs, several types of dragons, acromantulas, fairies, ghouls, manticores, and more. People will run through the city screaming as Newt Scamander and his friends try to reason with/magic away all manner of creepy crawlies in order to keep the world safe. It all sounds like good fun, even for non-Potter people. If Liverpool can help bring a little Harry Potter style magic back into theaters, so be it.

Totally aware of the love for prior Scarface films—Howard Hawks’ 1932 version with Paul Muni and Brian De Palma’s 1982 version with Al Pacino—Universal Pictures is carefully crafting their latest re-invention of this mobster tale. Deadline reports the studio’s mindful approach includes bringing in a director who can make a movie with commercial and critical appeal, like David Yates. The English director, who is a hot commodity after helming the last four Harry Potter films, is reportedly in final negotiations to direct this new Scarface. But don’t call it a remake.

Universal is considering this more a reboot. Back when word of the project first surfaced, they were looking to recreate the story of an immigrant come to America who makes his way to wealth and power through crime without actually calling it Scarface. But within a few months, that idea was abandoned and Training Day scribe David Ayer was brought on to pen the screenplay for a Scarface remake. But Universal seemed underwhelmed by his approach, and brought in The Good German writer Paul Attanasio to rework the screenplay.

While many were wondering when and where this new Scarface would be set, pop princess Rihanna reportedly began dropping hints she’d like to play the titular gangster’s moll. Universal is still trying to keep plot details under wraps. However, a report that surfaced last December suggests the "reboot" means shifting the time and place from 1930s Chicago and 1980s Miami to modern-day America. And instead of Italian or Cuban, their new Scarface would be Mexican, and his plotline would have him involved with a Mexican drug cartel. Really, considering the horrific headlines real cartels from that nation have been snatching the past several years, this is a move we should have predicted.

Universal is not commenting on these plot points yet. Instead, they are said to be fine-tuning the script and getting Yates on board. Once he has signed on, the world will be watching to see who is considered for the title role. What actor is ballsy enough to follow in the footsteps of Pacino in his most iconic role? We’ll see. In the meantime, check out the leaps made from the first Scarface to the second by comparing its trailers below:

David Yates most notable credits to date are the last four Harry Potter films. But what has the director been up to since Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows? There was talk about him maybe directing The Stand a few years back, but then he backed out. And then there was a Doctor Who feature project that didn't happen. And coming up, he's been attached to direct a British war drama St. Nazaire, which IMDB has listed as "in production," so we might be seeing that soon enough. But it looks like Yates may be turning back to television, as he's reportedly set to direct a pilot for FX.

Deadline says Yates has been brought on board to direct the FX pilot Tyrant, which comes from Howard Gordon and Gideon Raff (Homeland) and Craig Wright (Six Feet Under). The project tells the story of "an unassuming American family drawn into the workings of a turbulent Middle Eastern nation." Not much more is given on the premise of this pilot, which was created by Raff and is being developed by Gordon and Wright. But it's an interesting combination of writers when we consider Gordon and Raff's experience with the successful politically charged Homeland and Wright's experience working on a dark family drama (SFU). That experience combined could yield something pretty intense if done right. Deadline also mentions that the pilot will be shot in Morocco.

As mentioned, this would be a return to TV for Yates, who directed British miniseries State of Play, The Way We Live Now and The Sins before turning to the big screen for Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix and the three HP films that followed. If a return to TV is what he's up for, FX certainly isn't a bad place to start. The network continues to make a name for itself with its original dramas, including Sons of Anarchy, American Horror Story, and most recently, The Americans.

Over the last few years we've seen a few big blockbuster projects get shut down due to studio budget concerns. Gore Verbinski's The Lone Ranger was able to find its way out of trouble when it shrunk its costs from $250 million to $215 million, but other films, like Alex Proyas' Paradise Lost, Jaume Collet-Serra's Akira, and David Dobkin's Arthur & Lancelot, weren't so lucky. So it will be interesting to see which side of history David Yates' Tarzan falls on.

According to Deadline, the vine-swinging adventure film is the latest project to get the brakes thrown on by Warner Bros., with the studio concerned about the film's budget, casting, and ability to shoot this year. In addition to having the Harry Potter filmmaker on-board, it was previously reported that has been attached to play the eponymous jungle man, while there have been strong rumors that Jessica Chastain would be playing his Jane. There were initially plans to start filming this year, but now the production office is being closed down due to a "high budget they just couldn’t reduce to the level that made the studio comfortable." The site also notes that WB has been trying to get Jamie Foxx to come aboard as another lead in the movie, but that a deal has not yet been made.

But for those who really want to see Skarsgard swinging around the jungle, there is some good news: insiders are saying that there is a possibility that the project could be resurrected in 2014, and Yates remains interested in bringing the Edgar Rice Burroughs character back to the big screen. We'll just have to wait and see if he will ever get the chance.

The requirements for playing Tarzan aren't especially lengthy, but they are stringent. You must have excellently defined muscles. You must look half decent in a long, stringy wig. And you must be able to bellow the iconic Tarzan scream, preferably while swinging from vines and also wearing a loincloth.

Is Los Angeles completely overrun with hunky beefcakes who fit that description? Sure. But not many of them are famous enough to sell a movie, which is how the search for the new Tarzan seems to have finally narrowed down to a certain toned True Blood star. Variety reports that Nordic god Alexander Skarsgard is now the frontrunner to star in Tarzan, which is being developed at Warner Bros. with Harry Potter director David Yates behind it. Variety says that Skarsgard is Yates's personal choice, but he doesn't yet have an offer and the studio hasn't finalized any decisions-- which means the studio could potentially turn down Skarsgard in favor of someone more famous, or more jungle-looking, or something else completely inexplicable.

In addition, Samuel L. Jackson is being considered for another major role, as a Civil War veteran "eager to redeem himself for his part in the massacre of the Native Americans." He joins Tarzan-- who has left the jungle he was raised in and is now living in England-- to travel to investigate the Congo and save it from a warlord in control of a large diamond mine. Given that the assignment comes from Queen Victoria, this Tarzan will be taking place at the height of British colonialism, which has the potential to dredge up a whole lot of ugly history and racial conflicts-- it makes sense to bring in Jackson as a potential counterbalance to depictions of Africans living in the jungles of Congo.

But Tarzan is being assembled as a giant tentpole, so you can guarantee they'll sidestep as much controversy as possible in order to appeal to the widest audience imaginable. I'm still skeptical that the Tarzan story can be sold to a modern audience, but at the very least, Samuel L. Jackson is worth watching in most anything.

There's been talk for a while now of the return of Tarzan, the Edgar Rice Burroughs character who has been depicted around 89 times on screen already. Twilight's Kellan Lutz is at work on his own 3D motion-capture version, and Warner Bros. has been developing their take for a while now, at one point attaching Hustle & Flow and Footloose director Craig Brewer, who spoke frequently in interviews about his passion for the project.

But word broke not long ago that Warner Bros. wanted to hand the project off to one of their most loyal blockbuster-makers instead, and now the news seems to be official. Vulture reports that David Yates, who made the final four Harry Potter films for the studio, has committed to Tarzan as his next project, and is already meeting with several actors who might play the title character. Actors you might eventually see swinging through the trees include future Superman Henry Cavill, Pacific Rim star Charlie Hunnam, True Blood's Alexander Skarsgard, or even Bane himself, Tom Hardy-- though Vulture notes that it's unclear how interested he'd be in the part.

Given that the last major on-screen take on Tarzan was Disney's 1999 animated version, it's hard to even know how they're going to update Tarzan for modern audiences. Even if they set the movie far in the past, in some exotic African jungle or whatever, the idea of a man raised by apes and living in the jungle is a little hard to swallow these days. Casting a strong actor like Hardy could definitely go a long way to selling it, and Warner Bros. seems right to trust Yates, who jumped in and gave the end of the Harry Potter series a clear identity without mucking around too much with J.K. Rowling's original stories. But given the recent flop of John Carter, we've seen how Burroughs's iconic character don't necessarily translate into modern blockbusters. Can Tarzan gather up the goods to overcome that?

Early last year there were talks of a new Al Capone movie in the works called Cicero. Though nothing had been signed, Warner Bros. was having discussions with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows director David Yates to helm the project, which would tell the story of Capone in his younger years. Now there's word that not only has Yates officially signed on, they have found a star - and a major one at that.

The Daily Mail recently spoke with Tom Hardy who revealed that he is now attached to star in Cicero and has already begun his research for the part. The actor says that the plans are to start shooting the movie next year, but only after he has completed work on some of the other projects on his plate, including George Miller's Mad Max: Fury Road (which begins production this April in Nambia). In his preparation for the part, Hardy has been digging through the Warner Bros. archives and watching gangster movies like The Petrified Forest, The Public Enemy, and Little Caesar, which starred big names like Humphrey Bogart, James Cagney and Edward G. Robinson, as well as other films about the prohibition era. Said the actor, "The idea isn’t to remake those films but to get a flavour of them as we explore Capone’s career as a racketeer."

Even more impressive is that Cicero may not just be a one-off film, but rather the first in a series. While nothing is set, Hardy says that they are thinking about creating a trilogy about Capone. Yates is currently attached to direct Cicero and has been doing a bit of rewriting on the original script by Walon Green. Hardy has a huge list of 2012 releases lined up, including Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises, John Hillcoat's Wettest County, and McG's This Means War.

Okay, this whole Doctor Who movie nonsense is starting to make my head hurt. First the news came that Harry Potter director David Yates was in the process of developing a bigscreen Doctor Who movie which would break off from the cult hit TV series and "start from scratch." That made Who fans begin gathering torches and pitchforks. Then the official BBC Twitter feed downplayed the rumor. To quote BBC executive director Edward Russell, "Maybe one day. But not right now!" The original story said Yates was working with the L.A.-based BBC Worldwide Productions. So maybe one hand didn't know what the other was doing? Maybe it was just a case of a director talking out of school and things getting blown out of proportion?

Well, here's the problem. The BBC may not think David Yates is making a Doctor Who movie, but damned if David Yates doesn't think David Yates is making a Doctor Who movie. The director has continued to talk about the project in interviews, so he at least seems pretty convinced that he did not conjure this story out of whole cloth.

So what does current Doctor Who showrunner Steven Moffat have to say about this? Moffat took to Twitter last night to address the subject in a pair of posts:

Moffat reiterated his statements -- that there were no plans for a Doctor Who movie, and if there were it wouldn't be Hollywood and David Yates making it -- in an interview with The Register today:

Great, that's settled then. But wait...which red carpet is Moffat talking about? Comic Book Resources suggests it might have been this MTV report. But...that interview was posted yesterday, whereas the story first appeared in Variety on November 14th. So even if Yates was speaking "off the cuff" to MTV, that doesn't explain the original story that precipitated this mess, nor the interviews Yates has given since then where he continues to talk about the movie. So either one of them is wrong, one of them is lying, or various parts of the BBC are making plans without telling the other parts. Or, and this is just me throwing something out there, they're both right, but they're describing different Doctors from different points on the timeline and/or alternate realities. Maybe this new Doctor Who movie is like The Silence and you forget all about it when you aren't looking directly at it?

Stay tuned for more news on the possibly nonexistent Doctor Who movie as we learn it.

Having helmed the last four Harry Potter movies, director David Yates knows a thing or two about handling beloved properties with insanely devoted fan bases. He's going to need every bit of that experience since he's developing a new Doctor Who feature film to direct. That's an announcement that angered many Who fans, since Yates said the movie would start "from scratch" and split off from the existing TV continuity.

Despite the plans to start fresh, Yates is apparently a fan of the show. He had plenty of praise for the recent incarnations of the show in an interview with the LA Times' Hero Complex blog:

Apparently not so great that he doesn't think he couldn't improve on the concept, mind you, but whatever. Of course, the entire Doctor Who movie news gets more confusing the more you read up on it. Yates says he's developing the film with Jane Tranter, the head of the Los Angeles-based BBC Worldwide. But, as Giant Freakin' Robot reported around the time of the initial announcement, the folks across the pond at the BBC were quick to downplay the news. Who knows if Yates will actually get around to making a Doctor Who movie, but it's nice to know he's at least seen the recent series. Or at least memorized the names of some of those involved...

Of course, Yates nearly wound up tackling an even bigger property: the bigscreen adaptation of Stephen King's epic novel The Stand. He and Potter screenwriter Steve Kloves were all set to collaborate on the Stand movie...and then they backed out, making way for, of all people, Ben Affleck. What changed Yates' mind? According to Hero Complex:

I don't quite know what to say about that, but if Yates wasn't passionate about The Stand, it's better for everybody that he moved on. Of course, I'm sure there are many Who fans who wish he'd have the same epiphany regarding a certain Time Lord...

Director David Yates has been in the news a lot these past few days with all the buzz about the potential big-screen Doctor Who movie. Assuming a Who movie comes together at all, that's years down the road, so what might be closer on Yates' horizon? Deadline says Warner Bros. is trying to talk him into directing Imitation Game, which tells the tragic story of WWII hero and math genius Alan Turing.

Warner Bros. paid new writer Graham Moore a hefty seven figures for the Imitation Game spec script last month. According to an earlier story on Deadline, there was a bit of a bidding was for the script because Leonardo DiCaprio was pursuing the lead role. That same story reported that Ron Howard was interested in directing, but so far neither of them are officially attached. Given this news about Warners wanting Yates for the director's chair, presumably Howard is out of the running.

Moore's script is based at least in part on Andrew Hodges' Turing biography, Alan Turing: The Enigma. Producers Nora Grossman and Ido Ostrowsky had picked up the rights to the book and spent over a year working with Moore to perfect the script. It's no wonder, because there's plenty of fascinating material to explore in Turing's story. He was a pivotal figure in math, computer science, and artificial intelligence, having created the so-called "Turing test," which tests machine intelligence. During World War II he was a cryptanalyst in Britain and was crucial in cracking the infamous German Enigma code. His tragic death is the stuff Oscar bait is made of: after being prosecuted for his homosexuality in 1952, he accepted chemical castration rather than be sent to prison, then killed himself a few years later by eating a cyanide-laced apple.

Despite promises to make a few small movies now that he's done with the Harry Potter franchise, Deathly Hallows director David Yates is going to hand another iconic British character his own movie franchise. According to Variety Yates is teaming up with the BBC to develop a Doctor Who movie, based on the long-running sci-fi TV series that currently stars Matt Smith as the space and time-traveling doctor.

But don't count on seeing Smith, or the recently popular Doctor David Tennant, on the big screen. Yates told Variety that the show "Needs quite a radical transformation to take it into the bigger arena," and that they won't be adapting the current series but starting "from scratch." Yates told them that he and the BBC are currently in the process of looking for writers, and "we're going to spend two to three years to get it right"-- meaning that Yates might have plenty of time to direct those smaller films after all before a Doctor Who movie takes shape.

As one of the longest running TV shows in history-- Doctor Who first went on the air in 1963, and Smith is the 11th actor to play the Time Lord-- the series is obviously a good fit for a movie, with tons of back story and situations already explored that could be adapted for the big screen. As Yates himself said it, "The notion of the time-travelling Time Lord is such a strong one, because you can express story and drama in any dimension or time." Or if you want to hear from the bona fide Doctor Who fan we have here on staff, here's what our own Josh Tyler had to say about the news over at our Sci-Fi site GFR:

So I guess that's the big question-- who will be playing the Doctor? Will he be able to pull it off? And is David Yates-- who directed the last four Harry Potter movies-- the right guy to tackle another iconic character? Sound off in the comments, Doctor Who fanatics-- the project is still in early stages, so now is the time to have your voice heard.

David Yates left his stamp on Warner Bros.’ lucrative adaptation of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter literary series, helming four of the eight films in the franchise including the critically praised (and sure to be profitable) final installment, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2. One might assume, after back-to-back adaptations, that Yates was finished with multi-part, massive-budget, page-to-screen endeavors, though if Warner has its way, he’s just getting warmed up.

The studio reportedly wants Yates to turn Stephen King’s post-apocalyptic horror tome The Stand into a three-film franchise, Vulture reports. And Yates appears keen to tackle the story, reportedly flying out to meet with Warner executives and streaming through a copy of King’s story about survivors of a planet-cleansing virus who unite in a fight against the ultimate evil. No word on whether Warner wants Yates to map out King’s original 1978 novel or if they’d update his Complete and Uncut Edition that was released in 1990, though either sets the stage for a multi-character, high-production-value shoot that could be extremely profitable or could get stuck in production hell like Universal’s planned Dark Tower adaptation.

There’s no question Yates has the discipline and creative drive to handle a project the size and scope of King’s Stand. But would he want to cover ground that’s already been picked over by a novel, a television mini-series, and a Marvel Comics graphic novel? If the director wanted to try something completely different, Vulture says he could shift to two other projects. The first would be Cicero, an Al Capone story that once was planned for a TV pilot in the 1970s but now is a feature film idea with Tom Hardy attached. Talk on that project also adds that Hardy, who is locked into Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight Rises, could shoot Cicero with Yates before diving into the Mad Max prequel Fury Road.

The second potential project is either Fables, an adaptation of a Vertigo Comics graphic novel that involves classic fairy tale characters in a murder mystery, or an adaptation of This Is Where I Leave You by Jonathan Tropper. Neither sounds nearly as exciting as a Stand series or a Capone thriller with Hardy in the lead, but Yates has as much power as he’s bound to have at any given point, so the choice will be all his.

What a day for gangster pictures. Sean Penn and Ryan Gosling might join a Bugsy Siegel and Mickey Cohen biopic, John Travolta is officially on board for Gotti: Three Generations, and now there’s talk Harry Potter director David Yates could pick an Al Capone project as his next feature.

According to Deadline, no formal talks have happened between Yates and Warner Brothers, but the notion is nonetheless very intriguing. The project is called Cicero, and it’s essentially a chronicle of the gangster’s younger years.

Whenever you’re dealing with mafia projects, the timeline is always the most important wrinkle. The older the subject matter, the more likely the made man is to be well known and relatively open. In contrast, the newer films are almost always clouded in webs of secrecy. Back in the day, when the mafia was mostly quiet and fighting amongst itself, the police typically didn’t see the mob as such a serious problem. Once random people started getting caught in the crosshairs, the whole operation was forced underground. John Gotti aside, most of the newer gangsters just don't have the same eye for showmanship. Maybe that's why so many directors turn back to the classics.

David Yates is mostly known to American audiences as the Harry Potter guy, but he has a long history of intriguing television work. His four part miniseries State Of Play went over very well, as did his BAFTA winning drama The Way We Live Now. I can’t wait to see him try something new. If it ends up being about Al Capone, all the better.

In the last nine years the Harry Potter franchise has managed to bring aboard nearly every single British actor alive, from John Cleese to Bill Nighy, Maggie Smith to Emma Thompson. But with production now completed on the final film, you'd think that it would be impossible for any more to joint the cast, right? You are incorrect.

Vanity Fair recently interviewed Scottish actress Kelly Macdonald, who revealed that she will play a role in the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 next summer. The actress, best known for her roles in Trainspotting, No Country For Old Men and the HBO series Boardwalk Empire, will play Helena Ravenclaw, the Ravenclaw ghost, in the David Yates directed film. Also known as "The Grey Lady," the character holds a key piece of information for Harry as he searches for Voldemort's horcruxes. The film will be the first time Macdonald has worked with Yates on a feature, but they did previously work together on the State of Play miniseries and The Girl in the Café, a made for TV movie that came out in 2005.

Kind of strange that this may be the last Harry Potter casting announcement that we will ever hear. It's still strange to think that next July will see the completion of one of the longest running movie series in history. Be proud, Kelly Macdonald - wear it like a badge of honor.

David Yates has been a subject of great interest recently as not only is he wrapping up work on the 8th and final Harry Potter film, but his name has also been tossed into the hat as a potential replacement for Guillermo del Toro on The Hobbit. Yesterday, another project fell into his lap via the internet, but we're still awaiting confirmation on whether or not the British director has actually been offered top spot.

The film is another DC project called Fables chronicling the existence of all of our favorite fairy tale stars now living in modern day NY. The groups is led by King Cole and his deputy, Snow White, living in secret among the "mundanes" (humans) in a place called Fabletown. The necessity for Fabletown comes from a dark force known as The Adversary or the Emperor taking over all the lands of the Fables and driving it's inhabitants into exile. For now, NY seems to be the only land the Adversary hasn't sought control of.

An ABC mini-series based on the story was announced in late 2008 but has been dormant since then. The announcement of a film either confirms that the mini-series is six feet under, or that it will be a jumping off point for the film. Wow, there's really no solid information about any of these projects, is there?

Pajiba is adamant about taking this as rumor for now, but it's certainly a possibility that Yates would be shopping for his next project right now. Fables sounds like it could be incredibly intriguing if done properly, but could easily get lost in the current fray of fantasy/princess films on the way, namely three Oz films and Disney's Tangled. Yates has done good things with heavily abridged scripts in the Potter franchise, a skill which will surely carry over when directing a comic adaptation. We'll be keeping a look out for confirmation on this or The Hobbit, whichever comes first. One if by land, two if by sea.

When David Yates was rumored yesterday to be in line to direct The Hobbit, I speculated this was more of just a discussion than actual talks, since he'll be busy wrapping up the Harry Potter franchise for a few more months and may not want to immediately jump into another massive fantasy project. Turns out Yates might not be as close to the project as it seems because the studio is still trying hard to get someone else to do the job: Peter Jackson.

Deadline Hollywood reports today that MGM and New Line are trying desperately to get Peter Jackson to do what seems like the logical thing and take over on this two-part finale to the franchise he built. Even as they beg Peter, though, they're coming up with some truly ridiculous potential replacements. Deadline mentions Yates, who is a somewhat logical choice, but also David Dobkin-- the guy who brought you Wedding Crashers and Fred Claus-- and that reliable harbinger of the apocalypse Brett Ratner. Really they would only need to throw McG and Roger Corman on the shortlist to prove they were going for a Producers-style "worst movie ever made" to swindle some old ladies out of their money.

Apparently one of the big problems is that there's not that much money to pay a director, and presumably Jackson would demand a pretty high salary for swooping in and single-handedly saving the film. And sure, Brett Ratner might be cheaper, but at what cost MGM? Learn from Bryan Singer. This is not a road you want to go down.

Given all the running away from Snatchers and Death Eaters and Voldemort and giant snakes, there isn't a lot of time for romance in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. But hey, sex sells, right? That's probably why an Italian magazine allegedly fabricated a story about Daniel Radcliffe having a "very sensual" scene in the movie, and possibly even a naked one.

Unsurprisingly, Radcliffe's representatives has quashed this one quickly. Just because we saw Radcliffe naked onstage in Equus doesn't mean Harry Potter audiences are quite ready for that. Digital Spy reports that Radcliffe's rep called the story, which included a supposed quote from director David Yates, a "complete fabrication."

The scene they're referring to is obvious for fans of the book-- when Ron attempts to kill the Horcrux in the forest, a ghost comes out of it that takes the shape of Harry and Hermione kissing, preying on Ron's worst fears about his best friend and the girl he loves. The scene will probably be part of the movie, and be bizarre to see-- who can handle seeing Harry and Hermione together??-- but, blessedly, it won't involve nudity.

Given how long they made us wait to see the film, and how many clips and images they've released over the course of the year-and-a-half long marketing campaign, it's fair to assume you know everything about Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. Particularly if you've read the books, right? How much surprise can there be in actually seeing Ron be wooed by Lavender Brown?

Trust me, I was right there with you, until I finally saw the sixth movie and was thrilled to find new things to enjoy, even in a movie that slices out some of the best parts of the book. Part of it is just seeing the world come to life, part is the maturation of the series' main actors, and part is just a bit of genius on part of the filmmakers. Below, my five favorite surprises from Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, with no spoilers for the movie, but maybe a few from the book if you haven't read it. And if you haven't, seriously, what are you waiting for?

He's been skulking in the background of the last few pictures, as Harry took on villains far more significant than petty meanie Draco Malfoy. But in the sixth book Malfoy finally tiptoes toward his long-awaited redemption, albeit via some pretty nefarious means, and Felton digs into the role as if it's what he's been waiting for all along. As he's grown his face has become all sharp angles and daggers, and it's a wonder to see it all crumple as he cries in front of a bathroom mirror, overwhelmed at the task at hand. As Daniel Radcliffe's acting skills have seemingly shrunk with age, Felton has just gotten better. It sure doesn't hurt that he's also gotten handsome.

None of the Potter films have really known how to handle Quidditch, the wizarding sport that seems so logical on the page but baffles most filmmakers. Yates memorably cut it out of the fifth film entirely. But in depicting one particularly challenging game for Ron as the Gryffindor team's new Keeper, Yates makes the game exciting and even mostly coherent. The technology for depicting these matches has improved immensely since Ron and Harry first learned how to ride brooms, and watching Ron dive to catch Quaffles or the Beaters swinging their bats, the heights and the rushes of wind actually feel real. Added bonus: they show us Luna Lovegood's crazy roaring lion hat, which looks exactly as great as you imagined.

Harry and Dumbledore don't spend nearly as much time delving into Voldemort's memories as they did in the book, mostly because it would be a fairly frustrating movie if it were made up entirely of flashbacks. But two key memories-- Dumbledore's visit to Tom at the orphanage, and Slughorn's memory-- are intact, and Yates captures an excellent ephemeral, dreamy quality to both memories. It's hard to describe, but seeing teenage Voldermort turn into a wisp of black smoke looks effortless, almost as if it was what was there in the books all along.

The climactic scene of the book, in which Harry and Dumbledore undertake a dangerous journey inside a cave, is the scariest part of the series for my money. And when I heard that Half-Blood Prince had earned a PG rating, I was concerned they would tame down the scene, cut the terror felt by Dumbledore or the horrifying creatures living within the cave. And wouldn't you know it? They actually increased the scares. Nothing can ever be as frightening as what you imagine, of course, but using his clever visual style and a powerhouse actor like Michael Gambon, Yates makes you feel the chills all over again.

There will be a lot of talk about the humor of this film, how it focuses on teen romances and even pratfalls rather than the usual dark meditations on evil and coming-of-age. And while Rupert Grint's the best comedian in the bunch-- look forward to seeing him struck by a love potion-- the real surprise is Daniel Radcliffe, who gets to cut loose when Harry takes another kind of potion that makes him feel, well, a little drunk. In the book Harry was full of purpose and energy after drinking the potion, but Radcliffe's version is a bit more manic, and way more fun, than we've ever seen him before. It's a brief scene, but maybe the freshest of the whole series.

It’s easy (and likely accurate, depending on how you look at it) to assume that Warner Bros. split the final chapter of the Harry Potter series into two for monetary reasons. With only a couple of years left in the series, the studio was faced with either coming up with new material to win back that diverse audience or extending Potter’s stay. The choice was simple.

Yet, readers of the novels may note just how necessary it is to split the adaptation of the last book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, in two. An epic filled to the brim with characters, non-stop action, and handfuls of vital scenes, the book lends itself far better to four hours than it does to two. In my opinion, the studio made a smart decision both financially and artistically.

Now as the flick is filming, director David Yates is letting out details onf just how he plans to break it up. Speaking to the LA Times this weekend, Yates said, “I will get the benefit of two budgets, the running time of two films and all the resources that brings with it to tell this huge adventure…With two films, much less will be lost."

Yates also touched on just where he may decide to end the first part and beginning the second. “The idea now is that it will be not long after the sequence that we are filming here today [ note: read the full article to figure out which scene. Be warned, though. Spoilers are within]. That's what we're experimenting with. We've had three or four different ideas about where to cut off the seventh film.” Yates continued, “Traditionally, the movies have ended with a death or a bereavement, some sort of passage or arrival. This time we think we will end with more a cliffhanger. Again, though, that's the thought as of this moment."

Many were disappointed when it was announced that Yates would indeed direct the last film. I think a lot of people had convinced themselves that Guillermo Del Toro would actually take the director’s seat. Yates seems to know what he’s doing though and as long as his adaptations get better as they go, then I don’t think fans will be disappointed.