Layers in fantastic beasts and where to find them

[witchsmart]

Originally Posted by HMN

I felt that he singled Credence out because of his age. He seemed to court him almost as a lover. I could see Credence not necessarily being gay, but desiring real love from someone, and seeking that from Graves/Grindlewald.

To me it felt like he craved the love of a father/parent, given the cruelty of his home and how Grindelwald made him feel accepted and needed. Grindelwald definitely had some awkward face stroking moments, but personally I read it as more of a paternal "seduction" (which sounds very wrong but hopefully I'm expressing myself okay ).

[Liselle]

Originally Posted by HMN

I think Grindlewald saw what happened to Ariana and sought out another like her to try and harness the power. That Ariana was the catalyst for his research into how powerful he could become if he found another. He seemed to have a premonition of sorts that there was a child like this in NY which included Credence, but I'd like more explanation on how that happened. Was it a prophecy? I don't think Grindlewald was using Dumbledore for his sister, I think when she died, he went running - to America - and it caused him to seek out more power in the same form with another child.

Another prophecy just what we need! I'm joking of course but it does raise an interesting point, we know how well the Wizarding government in the UK kept hold of prophecies and it would makes sense that the American authorities would also have a means of recording it also.

How long had Grindelwald been masquerading as Graves? Was there ever really a Graves? It doesn't seem to have been polyjuice potion either thats its own set of complex magic potentially that's not been seen before either.

I suppose the way Dumbledore has been portrayed - almost like a loveable rogue with a core of steal who's trying to atone for something in his past will always make me think well of him (Although we saw a lot of times he doesn't deserve it) but I am interested in how this relationship with Grindelwald will be played out.

To me it felt like he craved the love of a father/parent, given the cruelty of his home and how Grindelwald made him feel accepted and needed. Grindelwald definitely had some awkward face stroking moments, but personally I read it as more of a paternal "seduction" (which sounds very wrong but hopefully I'm expressing myself okay ).

I know what you mean but it was 100% bordering on creepy. I am not sure myself in my own head if Grindelwald knew it was Credence all along and was trying to prompt him into a reaction or if he really was taken by surprise that it was Credence all along and not Modesty.

[witchsmart]

Originally Posted by Liselle

How long had Grindelwald been masquerading as Graves? Was there ever really a Graves? It doesn't seem to have been polyjuice potion either thats its own set of complex magic potentially that's not been seen before either.

I read in an interview (and the website kept giving me pop up spam so I don't want to link it here) that David Heyman said it was definitely polyjuice potion. So to me it feels like the movie franchise forgetting its own rules.

Another interesting statement by Mr. Heyman was that Credence would show up in future sequels, so I guess that final wisp of escaping smoke meant something after all. I wonder whether he will play a crucial role in the series or just show up for one more movie for the shock value?

[Liselle]

Originally Posted by witchsmart

Another interesting statement by Mr. Heyman was that Credence would show up in future sequels, so I guess that final wisp of escaping smoke meant something after all. I wonder whether he will play a crucial role in the series or just show up for one more movie for the shock value?

I'm behind in following up on interviews but that is interesting, I'm sure it will be more than a flash back. Do we know off we'll see modesty again?

If it was polyjuice then there was definitely a Graves at some point in the past, how no one noticed after an extended period of time (Which I'm assuming it is based on how long Grindelwald Graves as I will call him was cultivating a relationship with Credence) that Graves wasn't himself is a bit concerning. What else is being hidden?

[HMN]

Originally Posted by Liselle

Another prophecy just what we need! I'm joking of course but it does raise an interesting point, we know how well the Wizarding government in the UK kept hold of prophecies and it would makes sense that the American authorities would also have a means of recording it also.

Agreed! I'm seeing it again tomorrow, so I'll pay more attention to that part. It's enough with the prophecies though!

How long had Grindelwald been masquerading as Graves? Was there ever really a Graves? It doesn't seem to have been polyjuice potion either thats its own set of complex magic potentially that's not been seen before either.

I had assumed that there was no Graves until Grindlewald created him. And then confunded everyone to get into his position of power. The papers in the beginning of the movie mention that Grindlewald was missing - so I wonder if they say what the timeframe is.

I know what you mean but it was 100% bordering on creepy. I am not sure myself in my own head if Grindelwald knew it was Credence all along and was trying to prompt him into a reaction or if he really was taken by surprise that it was Credence all along and not Modesty.

TOTALLY creepy. It was a cross between a parent and a lover. Super gross.

Originally Posted by witchsmart

To me it felt like he craved the love of a father/parent, given the cruelty of his home and how Grindelwald made him feel accepted and needed. Grindelwald definitely had some awkward face stroking moments, but personally I read it as more of a paternal "seduction" (which sounds very wrong but hopefully I'm expressing myself okay ).

Ew parental seduction. That's totally what it was, because there was a sexual element to it.

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by HMN

Agreed! I'm seeing it again tomorrow, so I'll pay more attention to that part. It's enough with the prophecies though!

I had assumed that there was no Graves until Grindlewald created him. And then confunded everyone to get into his position of power. The papers in the beginning of the movie mention that Grindlewald was missing - so I wonder if they say what the timeframe is.

I thought that at first, too, but then, how long would it realistically take for a wizard to rise up through the ranks to be top dog like Graves was? Plus, given the size of the wizarding community and the fact that every witch or wizard from a given area just about goes to the same school, it's a really "small world" where I doubt that inventing a persona really works.

It must have been a Polyjuice Potion-esque disguise, though of course if it is Polyjuice Potion, it doesn't exactly jive with previous canon.

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by willfitz

I thought that at first, too, but then, how long would it realistically take for a wizard to rise up through the ranks to be top dog like Graves was? Plus, given the size of the wizarding community and the fact that every witch or wizard from a given area just about goes to the same school, it's a really "small world" where I doubt that inventing a persona really works.

It must have been a Polyjuice Potion-esque disguise, though of course if it is Polyjuice Potion, it doesn't exactly jive with previous canon.

Polyjuice has been confirmed.

[Liselle]

I hate it when they mess with my theories

polyjuice has been confirmed

I think I need to see it again as well and have a read of the screen play to get things more straight in my head.

It will be interesting to see how they fold in the world war into it was well. Kudos for bringing prohibition to life though - I still can't get over the Giggle water I did really like how integrated (or how integrated it seemed) that magical creatures were with wizarding folk in the speak easy. It seem to be more than Europe were doing at the same time.


I'm glad you're agreeing with Grindelwald's actions as Graves and how just wrong it was - completely wrong. It shows him in an awful light - will this come into play with the Dumbledores? Who knows.

[Liselle]

So I did find an interesting article from yesterday from the Leaky Cauldron .......there be spoilers!

Following on from J.K. Rowling’s revelations concerning the houses of certain Fantastic Beasts characters, one fan on Twitter picked up on something concerning Queenie Goldstein, or more specifically, her abilities as a Legilimens:

@jk_rowling I was wondering, wouldn't Queenie have noticed the change in Graves' thinking even though he looked the same?


The thought process behind the tweet revolves around the fact that Queenie, a powerful and natural Legilimens, was never able to read Percival Graves’ mind (even accidentally) and pick up on the fact that he was really Grindelwald. However, Grindelwald was not your average Joe wizard, he was evidently a man of many talents, one of which Jo has finally confirmed:

Occlumency

As we remember from the Harry Potter series, Occlumency is a practice in which a wizard learns to close and protect their mind from Legilimency, preventing the Occlumens’ thoughts from being extracted. As Grindelwald has now been outed as a practitioner of the skill, it would explain why Queenie would never have been able to read his inner thoughts while he was disguised as Percival Graves.



Having said that, it wouldn’t be entirely crazy to think that Queenie would then find it suspicious that Graves was hiding his thoughts. However, let’s not forget that the real Percival Graves was a powerful wizard in his own right, especially since he was head of the Department of Magical Law Enforcement prior to his kidnapping. To have gained such prestige in MACUSA, the man would’ve been of great skill, with Legilimency and Occlumency acting as tools of his trade. Putting this into context, one could easily assume that Queenie therefore wouldn’t have thought anything was untoward, that Graves was just a good Occlumens thanks to his job.

It has in fact been rumoured for some time that Grindelwald was an Occlumens, a suspicion that can be dated back to Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. While searching for the Elder Wand, Voldemort paid a visit to Grindelwald in his cell at Nuremgard. Even he, the presumably most powerful Legilimens in wizarding history, was unable to read Grindelwald’s mind, and thus he had to verbally ask his predecessor for information. Thanks to Jo, we now have another of the European dark wizard’s skills confirmed.


In terms of the significance of Grindelwald being an Occlumens, the reveal tells us a lot about his character and gives us some possible theories. A good place to start is, of course, comparing the man to Dumbledore. As we are told in wizarding world lore, Dumbledore is a Legilimens, which means that he can read minds (as a side note, although Queenie has the same skill, her skill is much more powerful as it can delve deeper into a person). As Legilimency and Occlumency go hand in hand as polar opposites of eachother, it seems that the cliché is a perfect form of symbolism for both Dumbledore and Grindelwald, if one thinks about it.


Like Legilimency itself, Dumbledore is analytical, a seeker of truth (not intending to quote Mary Lou Barebone) as he searches for the Hallows. In short, he always delves deeper into things, just as Legilimency analyses a person’s memories and digs deep into their inner being to seek truth. As for Grindelwald, he is a closed character, a secretive, strong-minded, stubborn individual who blocks out anything that will seek to destroy his ‘Greater Good’. This of course parallels him perfectly alongside Occlumency, which is practiced so that one can block people from getting inside your mind, from getting too close to you. Putting these two together, you get get a sense of perfect symbolism, with a clash of ideals that will surely stir up magnificent tension in the upcoming sequels.

However, if one wants to scratch that bit little bit lower below the surface, one may be able to understand exactly why Grindelwald chose to study Occlumency. Reverting back to Dumbledore’s Legilimency, it would make sense that Gellert would need to learn to block him out, especially since he had ideas for the Greater Good that Dumbledore would never agree to carry out. However, I think we can find an even better explanation than that.

Going back to what we said about opposites, isn’t it true that they…attract? It is well known that in the Harry Potter series, Grindelwald and Dumbledore shared a bond that was more than just friendship, with Dumbledore even being an openly gay man. However, the same cannot be said for Grindelwald. We as an audience do not even know his sexual stance as of yet, nor how he feels about Dumbledore due to his secrecy. That being said, is it possible that, on a more personal level, Grindelwald practices Occlumency…to hide his feelings about Albus? Is he, in effect, either in denial of or is trying to suppress his sexuality? Only time will tell!

I thought that this was really interesting, as it not only confirmed that
1) Graves was a real person
2)Grindelwald is an Occulemns - tying in as the author of the above article points out about the elder wand and the visit from Voldemort
But I love the whole opposites piece that thats pointed out. Like Queenie and Tina being near total opposites, the no maj world v maj world. Dumbledore and Grindelwald, the buzz of the city and excitement and the threat of the Obscurial. Actually the out of control nature of the obscurial and the almost complete control of an Occulumens.

[Spirit]

Originally Posted by witchsmart

I did wonder about this when he mentioned "seeing" the child. If it was a vision, it didn't reveal the identity of the child. Maybe it was a "sense," like when he (incorrectly) said he didn't sense a drop of magic in Credence and told him he was a Squib? Or maybe he just said it for Credence's benefit.

I didn't see anyone already say this in this thread, but I might've missed it. A few days ago, JK Rowling wrote on twitter that Grindelwald was a Seer, but that he was lying to Credence about what he "saw."

The twitter question to JK Rowling was: "What did Graves-Grindelwald mean when he said: 'My vision showed only the child's immense power'? Is he a Seer or was he lying?"

JK Rowling's answer: "He is a Seer AND he was lying."

We don't know exactly what part Grindelwald was lying about and what was true though.

But I do find Grindelwald being a Seer interesting though. JK Rowling never fails to surprise.

Polyjuice has been confirmed.

OH, and the Polyjuice Potion Grindelwald was using to transform into Graves? It wasn't Polyjuice Potion at all. JK Rowling explained that on the website jkrowling.com. If it had been, Revelio wouldn't have worked. Grindelwald was skilled in Transfiguration, so he used a spell that made him look identical to Graves without needing to keep drinking a potion every hour on the hour. I like this a lot better because that would've contradicted canon. It also is interesting because in the newspapers we saw at the beginning, one of them said that Albus Dumbledore was pushing for Un-Transfiguration classes at Hogwarts, so it was kind of like he knew Grindelwald would use Transfiguration at some point.

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by Spirit

OH, and the Polyjuice Potion Grindelwald was using to transform into Graves? It wasn't Polyjuice Potion at all. JK Rowling explained that on the website jkrowling.com. If it had been, Revelio wouldn't have worked. Grindelwald was skilled in Transfiguration, so he used a spell that made him look identical to Graves without needing to keep drinking a potion every hour on the hour. I like this a lot better because that would've contradicted canon. It also is interesting because in the newspapers we saw at the beginning, one of them said that Albus Dumbledore was pushing for Un-Transfiguration classes at Hogwarts, so it was kind of like he knew Grindelwald would use Transfiguration at some point.

She needs to have a conversation with David Heyman. He seems to think it was polyjuice!

[Spirit]

Originally Posted by snapes_witch

She needs to have a conversation with David Heyman. He seems to think it was polyjuice!

Maybe she was okay with Polyjuice first, but then she changed her mind to make it fit canon better... Lol!

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by Spirit

Maybe she was okay with Polyjuice first, but then she changed her mind to make it fit canon better... Lol!

Who knows!

[Liselle]

Originally Posted by Spirit

Maybe she was okay with Polyjuice first, but then she changed her mind to make it fit canon better... Lol!

I like things being neat and clean

[witchsmart]

Originally Posted by Spirit

I didn't see anyone already say this in this thread, but I might've missed it. A few days ago, JK Rowling wrote on twitter that Grindelwald was a Seer, but that he was lying to Credence about what he "saw."

The twitter question to JK Rowling was: "What did Graves-Grindelwald mean when he said: 'My vision showed only the child's immense power'? Is he a Seer or was he lying?"

JK Rowling's answer: "He is a Seer AND he was lying."

We don't know exactly what part Grindelwald was lying about and what was true though.

But I do find Grindelwald being a Seer interesting though. JK Rowling never fails to surprise.

A powerful Occlumens and a Seer? No one it took Albus Dumbledore to bring this guy down. I know it's far in the future, but I hope the movies do that epic battle justice.

I do wonder what he was lying about, because he did genuinely seem to think Mercy was the Obscurial. If he knew Credence was the Obscurial all along, he did a poor job of harnessing his energy for someone who appears to be so strategic. He had Credence's support for a long time, he would have gone with him willingly before Grindelwald rejected him.

She needs to have a conversation with David Heyman. He seems to think it was polyjuice!

Exactly. I suppose it's not crucial to the overall plot, but for nitpickers and dissectors like us, it's an important distinction!

[Spirit]

Originally Posted by witchsmart

A powerful Occlumens and a Seer? No one it took Albus Dumbledore to bring this guy down. I know it's far in the future, but I hope the movies do that epic battle justice.

I do wonder what he was lying about, because he did genuinely seem to think Mercy was the Obscurial. If he knew Credence was the Obscurial all along, he did a poor job of harnessing his energy for someone who appears to be so strategic. He had Credence's support for a long time, he would have gone with him willingly before Grindelwald rejected him.

Occlumens, Seer, master of the Elder Wand... can take on two dozen Aurors with a wand that isn't even his... I can understand how he came to be a huge problem. I just have to wonder how being a Seer impacted things with Dumbledore way back when. I have a bad feeling he told a lot of lies to teenage Albus about his "visions."

I don't think Grindelwald knew Credence was the Obscurial. I think he truly did think it was Modesty (not Mercy, but close ). I think he completely did think Credence was a nothing - once he thought Credence was no longer useful, he told him goodbye. But then he realized he told him goodbye way too fast, and he paid for it. I don't think he knew that.

So then I have to look back at what Grindelwald did tell Credence he saw. The official lines from the script is:

Graves: My vision showed only the child's immense power. He or she is no older than ten, and I saw this child in close proximity to your mother - she I saw so plainly.
Credence: That could be any one of hundreds.
Graves: There is something else. Something I haven't told you. I saw you beside me in New York. You're the one that gains this child's trust. You are the key - I saw this. You want to join the Wizarding world. I want those things too, Credence. I want them for you. So find the child. Find the child and we'll all be free.

I know the twitter user only said, "'My vision showed only the child's immense power'?" But I think that part Grindelwald said was 100% true. I think JK Rowling was referring to the NEXT part, where Grindelwald elaborates on his vision.

- "I saw you beside me in New York." Hmm. Maybe.
- "You're the one that gains this child's trust." Maybe.
- "You are the key - I saw this." Maybe. Starting to sound doubtful.
- "You want to join the Wizarding world. I want those things too, Credence. I want them for you." That's where I call the lie. Grindelwald doesn't really care about Credence; he only wants to use him to find the Obsurcial and then dump him once he's no longer useful. And Grindelwald knows darn well that a Muggle or a Squib cannot ever be taught.

"You're unteachable. I'm done with you," was how Grindelwald had said it when he was telling Credence goodbye. I think that's what Grindelwald was prepared to say even if Credence had led him to the Obscurial, because that was all he wanted from Credence. I think he never suspected Credence as having any kind of magical power, so he would've known that Credence was, at best, just a plain Squib. A plain Muggle or Squib that would never join the Wizarding world, ever.

I'm pretty certain it's that part of the "vision" that is the lie.

[Liselle]

Actually, we don't know how long Graves/Grindelwald was cultivating Credence.....maybe it was over and extended period of time, the fact that we know he plays the waiting game and there may not have been a younger adopted child around Credence at the time? I'm just throwing it out there.

That and i really really need to buy the screenplay of fantastic beasts!

[Spirit]

Originally Posted by Liselle

Actually, we don't know how long Graves/Grindelwald was cultivating Credence.....maybe it was over and extended period of time, the fact that we know he plays the waiting game and there may not have been a younger adopted child around Credence at the time? I'm just throwing it out there.

That and i really really need to buy the screenplay of fantastic beasts!

You should -- it's excellent! I read it all in almost one sitting while waiting for my car to get done. Best time at the car mechanic ever.

We know how long Grindelwald was cultivating Credence from the script because we know how long Grindelwald was there in New York City (just HOURS before Newt arrived at port). Somebody else recently pointed it out online; I can't believe I didn't catch it when I read it the first time. Grindelwald was Graves for an extremely short amount of time. We don't know what the Graves/Credence thing was though. It seems to me like they weren't strangers, so I think Graves knew him somehow, but we don't know what their dynamic was.

It's actually surprising that Grindelwald was only there a few hours before Newt was. It seemed like he had been doing it for a long time, but the script clearly says:

Scene 1 -- EXT. Somewhere in Europe - 1926 - Night
A large, isolated, derelict chateau emerges from the darkness. We focus on a cobbled square outside the building, shrouded in mist, eerie, silent.

Five Aurors stand, wands aloft, tentative as they edge toward the chateau. A sudden explosion of pure white light sends them flying.

We whip around to find their bodies scattered, lying motionless at the entrance to a large parkland. A figure (Grindelwald) enters the frame, his back to the camera; ignoring the bodies, he stares out into the night sky as we pan up toward the moon.

MONTAGE

We see various magical newspaper headlines from 1926 relating to Grindwald's attacks all over the world: Grindelwald strikes again in Europe, Hogwarts School Increases Security, Anti-Wizard Feelings on the Rise, Where Is Grindelwald?, Is Anyone Safe?

TRANSITION TO:

Scene 2 -- EXT. Ship Gliding Into New York - Next Morning

A bright, clear New York day. Seagulls swoop overhead.

Bold/underline mine. That's Newt coming the US. The next morning. Grindelwald escaped only hours before. He was impersonating Graves for a short time.

[TWZRD]

Originally Posted by HMN

I think the didn't sense a drop of magic comment was just to screw with his mind. To express that he was being used the whole time and the connection wasn't real.

… And perhaps a thing said in frustration that wasn't deeply thought out.
I did assume Grindy gave Credence the wand, and that he stayed with that awful woman because he was working for Grindy/Graves. But to be called Credence implies that she's had him from pretty young, so that is where Graves found him. If there was a sort of war with Grindy and followers like the Deatheater wars, then we ought to have orphaned wizards about.

[witchsmart]

Originally Posted by Spirit

Bold/underline mine. That's Newt coming the US. The next morning. Grindelwald escaped only hours before. He was impersonating Graves for a short time.

I watched the opening newspaper montage again (Some of the titles are really great, personally I want to know what the "Ginger Bronx Witch" one was about) and there seems to be so many different headlines for only a few hours. But reading over the scene you provided that does seem like the case. Still, Grindelwald would have had to have worked incredibly fast to get everything set up in just a few hours. Do we know where he escaped from? They seem to know he's in America, perhaps he was being held in a prison there?

Is it definitely that Grindelwald is Graves for the entirety of the movie? Do we ever see the real Graves, perhaps earlier on, and then Grindelwald takes over partway through?