Why "The Secrets of Dumbledore" Bombed
The failure of the newest entry in the "Fantastic Beasts" franchise isn't about J.K. Rowlings's transphobia, but it should've been.
The newest entry in the Harry Potter prequel series has arrived. Not with a triumphant bang and box office success, but with a fizzle and little fanfare. In fact, “Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore” is the worst performing Harry Potter movie ever, with an opening weekend gross of $43 million at the domestic box office.
This follows the trend of steady decline from entry to entry we have seen so far. The first “Fantastic Beasts” opened at $74 million, and the second at $62 million. But this was a dramatic drop-off. While there is an argument to be made that Covid has had an impact on theatre attendance, that doesn’t track with other current movies such as “Sonic 2” making $71 million in its opening weekend. What else is going on?
The Wizarding World as a franchise is inseparable from J.K. Rowling, as much as Warner Bros tries to say that it can be. So how does having an openly transphobic person as the mind behind the magic affect a movie? Surely calls to cancel Rowling over her views have had an impact on the viewing public for the Harry Potter franchise. While this could be a contributing factor it isn’t the only controversy around these films. There is also the recasting of Johnny Depp in the role of Grindelwald due to the allegations of abuse against ex-wife Amber Heard.
While a transphobic creator and a very public recasting have impacted some of the public views of the “Fantastic Beasts” franchise the truth of the matter is that the real reason it isn’t succeeding is that the movies are just bad. Any follow-up to a world-renowned franchise has a lot of work to do. The first entry in the series starred some loveable characters and set the stage for an interesting chapter in the Wizarding World that hadn’t been shown in other pieces of media. Yet the second entry was released to much critical dismissal, and the third entry has received similar feedback. Let’s look at the Rotten Tomatoes score for each entry: the first comes in certified fresh at 78%, the second rotten at 36%, and the third also rotten at 48%.
“Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald” ended with a plethora of loose ends and cliffhangers. “Secrets of Dumbledore” spends most of its runtime wrapping all of these up with nice bows, and while Grindelwald survives, he slinks off to the shadows. The franchise leaves itself in much the same state as Grindelwald, mostly finished with the light implication it could return in the future. Originally planned to be a five-movie series, “Secrets of Dumbledore” leaves the viewer questioning if this won’t go down as a trilogy.
But the audience for Harry Potter is still there, and it is still avid. Let us imagine that this is the last “Fantastic Beasts” movie. Warner Bros steps away and comes back with a surprise announcement, a film adaptation of “The Cursed Child” the sequel play written by Rowling and seen on the West End and Broadway. It is bringing back all the original stars, including Daniel Radcliffe as an older Harry Potter. This movie would easily reach the top box office of the year, maybe even of all time. Fans want more Harry Potter. How many of them would overlook similar controversies to see this movie?
The low box office of “Secret of Dumbledore” speaks only to the poor quality of “Fantastic Beasts” as a piece of Harry Potter media. It does not signal a change in how people cope with the personal views of its creator and the moral issues with supporting her financially. I would love to say that the mass disapproval of J.K Rowling led to fans walking out and killing “Fantastic Beasts” as a franchise, but that’s just a fantasy.