A Street Cat Named Bob (Film Review)

Honestly, the cat stole the show. A Street Cat Named Bob is a film based on the book of the same name which was written by James Bowen. Though Luke Treadaway plays James Bowen, Bob is played by none other than Bob himself. And Bob is simply ADORABLE.

The title itself, A Street Cat Named Bob, was probably inspired by A Streetcar Named Desire. I'm not too familiar with the story but there's a famous line from the play which goes, "Whoever you are, I have always depended upon the kindness of strangers." We basically see this in the film a lot. The film and book is based on how James managed to overcome drug addiction and lead a fulfilling life thanks to his furry friend. 

When we first see James, he is homeless and pathetic. He carries a backpack and guitar around, struggles to find food and a space to sleep, and gets persuaded by his friend to take drugs in an unlocked car that does not belong to them. He plays his guitar while people just walk by, and the money he scrapes up isn't enough for a meal. Although someone kind leaves him a sandwich, he gets told off at a diner because he was a few pennies short (the waiter even dumps the food into the sink! How wasteful). He doesn't have a good relationship with his father, who sees him busking on the street and hands him some money out of guilt, but his wife quickly drags him away and clearly doesn't want James around for Christmas, thinking that he'll be a bad influence to her two daughters (who are portrayed as spoiled brats. I mean, even if you were allergic to cats, is it necessary to scream when you see one?).

Thankfully, his support worker, Val, believes that he deserves a chance to turn his life around. She puts him on a methadone programme and some sort of supported housing programme. It was in this flat where James finally meets Bob, his life saver. Bob snuck into the kitchen to have some corn flakes, and James is happy to share the meagre amount of food he has with him. Initially, James tries to find out if the cat belongs to anyone living on the estate, but it seemed like it was a stray. He meets Betty, who stays in the same estate, is a vegan and animal lover, and tells James that the cat told her that his name is Bob. When Bob gets injured, James brings him to the vet and pays for the medicine with the money his father had given him.

It is comical to see James trying to feed Bob his medicine and Bob just refusing to do so! And when James releases Bob back on to the street, Bob follows him to the bus stop and even on to the bus. Bob gets a nice view from the window seat and even sits comfortably on his human's shoulder. He goes grocery shopping with his human and sniffs the canned food to express his approval or disapproval.  They even have a routine in the morning: James would get up to brush his teeth, Bob would abandon his food bowl to watch James do human things in the toilet, and the rat seizes the opportunity to eat Bob's food. SO CUTE. Bob is an instant hit and he draws crowds as James strums his guitar and sings in Covent Garden. He makes his human famous and they appear on an article in the newspaper.

While some strangers are absolutely delighted to see the cat (one lady even knits Bobs a cute little scarf and gives him some cat food), others still treat James and Bob like dirt. An idiotic dog owner makes his dog pee on James's guitar case as he is busking. The crowd went into a rage and because of this incident, James was banned from busking for a few months. This shows how cruel and unjust society can be. It wasn't even James's fault, and the dog owner got away without punishment. (Sounds all too familiar. It's just Mailbox cat all over again!)

Obviously this meant that James would not have any form of income, so he decides to make some money by selling The Big Issue. There's a rule whereby sellers have to stick to their own areas or marked out zones to sell the street newspaper, but a fan of Bob's forcefully grabs a magazine from James and gives him the money when James was just walking (and not selling!) outside his specified zone. Another seller saw what happened and reported James, who had to starve for a while because he was not allowed to sell the magazine and thus had no source of income. (Bob had to starve as well and meowed pitifully at home) And another horrible incident happened with a stranger: a presumably rich woman drops by to see James and Bob selling the magazines with her son, and offers to take the cat off his hands, claiming that she could provide for Bob in a way that James couldn't possibly dream of. What a nerve!

Towards the end of the movie, James decides that it's time to kick the habit once and for all. He goes cold turkey and Bob just... stares. There's nothing much Bob can do but cats are not dumb. Bob probably knew something horrible was happening to his human and just tried his best to watch over James. It's already amazing enough for Bob not to leave James's side. Bob would also willingly give strangers hi-fives even without the use of expensive treats. (My cat only gives hi-fives when there's food in my hand, and she glares at me for sneezing loudly. Yet the community cat in my estate would rub itself against my legs and sit on my lap, especially when I'm on my period. Maybe street cats are just more affectionate.)

Later, James is contacted by people from a publishing company who want him to pen down his journey (with help, of course). Betty moves away but stays in touch with James, as she is seen at the bookstore where James and Bob conducted a book signing session. The lady who gave Bob his first scarf was there, and so was James's father (there was a scene where James visited his father for the second time, after the disastrous encounter during Christmas, and they made up. Aww). The movie ends with James singing "Satellite Moments" and getting the crowd to sing along.

There's no particular grand moment or a climatic scene in this film, but that is what makes A Street Cat Named Bob a realistic movie. It definitely isn't cliche -- there is no 'happily ever after' between Betty and James since that isn't the focus of the story (you can watch cheesy romcoms for that sort of thing). It's about James and Bob's journey together. How often do you see a cat bonding with a homeless man who's trying to get over his heroin addiction? And despite the fact that James was having trouble providing for himself, he took the trouble to provide for another living creature, which plenty of people wouldn't have done, even if they were wealthy enough to do so.

In addition, Bob is extremely well-trained. Bob was going to have 10 ginger cats as stunt doubles, but he proved that he was better than everyone else, and the extra cats weren't really needed. There are plenty of films which feature pets as the main characters. I can think of so many movies about dogs: 10 Promises to My Dog, Hachiko, and Marley & Me. But dogs are easy to train. Another cat I can think of that I've seen in movies is Orangey, the ginger cat that appeared in Breakfast at Tiffany's. This comparison isn't fair though; Orangey was an animal actor, trained by his human who's an animal handler. Even Homeward Bound made use of multiple dogs and cats for each animal character. 

The film essentially shows how terribly kind and how terribly mean people can be to one another. As a human and cat who live on the streets, James and Bob have probably seen all kinds of people. It is easy for others to despise the homeless, but that's because they have proper social support structures in their lives that they have taken for granted. In the film, James has to search for some kind of support: from Val, Betty, and Bob, from all the strangers who watch him sing, and from organisations like the Soup Kitchen and The Big Issue. Bob has to do the same too: he found James, who in turn found him an animal clinic and strangers who completely adore him, instead of possibly throwing things at him and calling him a stinky alleycat.

The big issue (pun intended) here is that society isn't doing enough for people like James. Sure, there are some charities that try to help. But is it so hard to just forgo nine pence, or to just keep your dog on a leash? Is it so difficult to give others a chance? In the film, people at the bottom rung of society are constantly competing with James; Val puts her neck on the line for James, and sellers of The Big Issue feel that it is unfair for James to snatch their business. And it isn't their fault; they behave in such a manner due to society's attitude towards people they deem unworthy of their time.

People who live on the streets are dehumanised and stigmatised. Yet with Bob, people are able to relate to James and approach him in a friendlier manner. Although the film sends a hopeful message, it reminds us of what would have happened if not for Bob and people like Val. Baz, James's friend and fellow drug addict, comes begging for money. James gives him some but makes him promise that it's for food, not drugs. When James comes back at night, he and Bob finds Baz lying on the ground, dead due to an overdose.

Moana (Film Review)

Disney's Moana was an enjoyable movie to watch! Moana is obviously the first Polynesian "Disney princess" and the daughter of a village chief. (Sounds familiar? Think Pocahontas) I thought they were doing away with naming their movies after the characters, with titles like Tangled, Brave and Frozen, but I guess in this case, since Moana also means 'ocean', it makes sense. The ocean can even be considered a character on its own in this case.

So far, the movie doesn't seem as popular as Frozen. I'm guessing that's because there isn't an empowering song that gets stuck in your head immediately. (Which is a good thing, because I'm sure that everyone got sick of "Let it Go" after a while) Instead, the song that got stuck in my head was the villain song! Not that I mind, of course.

I couldn't help but compare Moana to other Disney animated films. Disney probably has a formula for creating their films, and these are a few I've noticed.

1. Short film: Inner Workings

I didn't like this short film that much. Okay, initially it seemed to be just about how this ordinary man goes about his mundane life. He gets up, takes a bath and goes to work. At the same time, they show how his body parts function: his brain, heart, lungs, bladder, etc. Soon, it becomes clear that the conflict is between the man's head and heart; his pragmatic side vs. his emotional side. Deep down inside, he wants to have fun and indulge in life's pleasures. But his head tells him that he has to go to work on time. His job? Some boring, clerical work. A desk job. (Sounds like Paperman, right?)

During lunch break, everybody produces lunch that they had brought to work in a paper bag. The man basically thinks: this stinks. I'm going to die anyway. He then rushes out for some pancakes and spends some time at the beach. At this point I thought he had quit. But no, he returns back to his job and actually makes it fun. Good for him, but it's totally unrealistic that he has the time to do so much during his short lunch break. And come on, how is it possible for your heart and lungs to "wake up" when they have to be working even throughout your sleep? I still prefer Pixar shorts like La Luna, Partly Cloudy and Piper.

2. Narration

I want to roll my eyes whenever Disney starts with narration. Okay, I guess it is necessary to explain that Te Fiti is an island goddess and Maui is a demigod who stole her heart (a small pounamu stone). I don't know much about Polynesian culture and I'm really glad the filmmakers took the time and effort to do proper research. But narration? Again? Thank goodness they've done away with the cliche "let's flip open the pages of a story book and begin like we are reading a bedtime story" type of narration. They did mix it up a little with Flynn Rider narrating in Tangled. But the start of Moana reminds me most of 'The Gospel Truth' from Hercules. 

3. The song which sets the scene (Where You Are)

For example, in Beauty and the Beast, the song 'Belle' follows the main character around town and everyone sings 'Bonjour' at first to remind the audience that this is supposed to take place in France. In Moana, the song 'Where You Are' is mainly sung by her parents who tell Moana that she belongs in her village. The villagers are shown weaving baskets and coconuts. (Consider the coconut!) They are eager to have Moana as their next chief, but Moana is drawn to the ocean and always tries to escape. This is just like 'Under the Sea' in The Little Mermaid, where Sebastian tries to tell Ariel that she belongs, well, under the sea and not up on the shore with other humans.

4. The "I want" song (How Far I'll Go)

Come to think of it, there are so many songs in Disney animated films where the main characters express their desires in song. I can think of 'Almost There' from Princess and the Frog, 'When Will My Life Begin' from Tangled, 'Part of Your World' from The Little Mermaid, 'Out There' from The Hunchback of Notre Dame... The list just goes on and on. I think Moana's "I want" song sounds like a mix of 'Go the Distance' from Hercules and 'Just Around the Riverbend' from Pocahontas. It reminds me of Pocahontas because Moana also has to make a decision: should she stay in her village and do what is expected of her, or should she leave? And it also reminds me of Hercules because he was also uncertain about his place in society until he sets off on his journey and discovers who he really is.

5. The distraction song (You're Welcome)

During this song, Maui explains that he did so many things for humans. He lassoed the sun, pulled up the sky and pulled islands from the sea. At this point, we get to see his moving tattoos up close and they definitely reminded me of pottery from Hercules. With his magical hook, Maui is also a shapeshifter like Genie from Aladdin. At one point, he turns into Sven from Frozen! This is just like Genie when he pulls Sebastian the crab out of nowhere, an obvious reference to The Little Mermaid, and when he turns into Pinocchio and calls Aladdin a liar.

Some songs from Disney movies seem to be just 'filler' songs. The kind of songs used to entertain children but they don't actually add any value to the plot. Or songs that are just fun! Like 'Fixer Upper' from Frozen, 'Trashin' The Camp' in Tarzan, 'Be Our Guest' in Beauty and the Beast, and 'Les Poissons' in The Little Mermaid. These songs temporarily distract the audience from the main plot, and brings attention to the subplots: like the fact that servants have been turned into household objects in Beauty and the Beast, and the fact that Anna and Kristoff should get together. But the one most similar to Maui's song would be 'I Just Can't Wait to be King' from The Lion King. Both Simba and Maui wanted to distract other characters -- Simba and Nala wanted to get Zazu off their back, while Maui wanted to steal Moana's boat and get off the island he was trapped on.

6. The villain song (Shiny)

I love the villain song! It was totally unexpected that the villain song was the song that got stuck in my head after the movie. For most part, I think that it reminded me of Ursula's 'Poor Unfortunate Souls' from The Little Mermaid, maybe because both songs are sung in underwater caverns by evil characters who have their own interests at heart. Villain songs are always awesome -- remember 'Be Prepared' from The Lion King? Not only does Scar get the best lines, he also gets his own villain song too! The song 'Gaston' from Beauty and the Beast gets the job done by showing us how absolutely disgusting Gaston is (and makes you wonder if LeFou is gay).

'Shiny' sounds like a typical villain song, except for the fact that the chorus sounds too cheery and catchy. This is not surprising, though. Recently, Disney is making villain songs less "villainy". 'Mother Knows Best' from Tangled initially doesn't sound like a villain song at all, because sounds fun and seems to be sung by an overprotective mother. It only sounds evil when she sings the reprise. And in Frozen, 'Love is an Open Door' isn't even a villain song at all! Even though Hans sings part of the song, it is more like a love duet.

Tamatoa, the huge crab, loves collecting all things shiny and lives in the realm of the monsters. It's so funny that he wanted to talk about himself in song form! In his song, he tells people that it's what on the outside that counts. He breaks the fourth wall a couple of times, asking the audience to look up 'decapod', asking if we enjoyed his song and asking the audience for help in the post-credits scene. He even mentions Sebastian! I find it really funny that he also bothered to explain that Moana had tricked him with bio-luminescent algae or whatever.

7. The song about identity (I Am Moana)

This was the most touching scene in the movie. I must confess that I teared up at this point. It was Moana's grandmother who saw that the ocean had chosen Moana. Her grandmother kept the heart safe, and encouraged Moana to set out on her journey and return the heart of Te Fiti. Gramma Tala was also the one revealed to Moana that her ancestors had been voyagers. When Maui thinks that he can't defeat Te Ka and leaves, Moana doesn't know what to do. She's all alone until her grandmother shows up in the form of a manta ray! Aww. This makes sense because she told Moana that she wanted to become a manta ray when she passed on. Sadly, her death was inevitable, and showing up in spirit form is conclusive proof that she has died. But once again, it's Gramma Tala who reminds Moana to listen to her heart and remember who she is.

This scene is very similar to the one in Lion King. When Simba forgets who he truly is, Rafiki brings him to see his own reflection and tells him that his father, Mufasa, lives in him. Simba then looks up to the sky and Mufasa speaks to him. This makes sense because Mufasa had already told Simba that the late kings become stars when they die. In Moana, the scene with Gramma Tala also takes place at night, under a starry sky. Also, Gramma Tala reminds me of Grandmother Willow. Pocahontas always goes to Grandmother Willow for advice, just as how Moana approaches Gramma Tala.

8. No love duet this time

The wonderful thing about Moana is that we do not get a love duet. She doesn't need a man in her life to make her feel complete. In the first place, it is unrealistic for the characters to harmonise perfectly out of nowhere. And secondly, it's been done over and over again: 'I See the Light' from Tangled, 'A Whole New World' from Aladdin, 'Something There' from Beauty and the Beast, and if we go back even further, there are songs like 'Once Upon A Dream' from Sleeping Beauty and 'I'm Wishing' from Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.

Instead, we get 'We Know the Way' in Moana, a song which pays homage to Polynesian culture. The movie focuses on the idea that Moana's ancestors were wayfinders who were able to navigate the seas by reading the stars. Since there was a period of time when voyages across the South Pacific stopped, Moana is Disney's interpretation of Polynesian history, I guess.

'We Know the Way' is actually just another song about identity, but it isn't just Moana's identity at stake here. Her entire village has lost its way too. Instead of a love song, we get a spectacular song which depicts Moana's love and appreciation for her own culture.

Hopefully, this shows that Disney is moving along with the times. Merida (from Pixar's Brave. She is technically a Disney princess as well) rejected all her suitors and proudly proclaimed that she would shoot for her own hand. Elsa didn't even have any male suitors. And Moana sure doesn't need Maui. I mean, did you see her back there in the realm of the monsters? Maui would have been a total goner if she hadn't been there. And before that, she quickly manages to escape the cave Maui traps her in (destroying the narcissistic statue Maui made of himself at the same time). Talk about girl power.

9. Disney making fun of Disney

In Moana, Maui makes fun of Moana and says that she has to be a princess because he sees her with an animal sidekick, Heihei the chicken (she also has Pua, her pig, but the pig was smart enough to stay on the island). Well, Moana isn't a princess in her world, but Pocahontas is considered a Disney princess too, even though she, like Moana, is the daughter of the village chief. So technically, Moana is a Disney princess.

And yes, Disney princesses tend to have animal sidekicks. Jasmine has a tiger named Rajar, Anna has talking snowman Olaf, Ariel has Flounder (and Sebastian), Mulan has Mushu and her cricket, Pocahontas has Meeko and Flit, Rapunzel has Pascal (and Maximus)... somehow Disney princesses are able to tame animals and speak to them in some way or another. Snow White gets all the adorable-looking woodland creatures to help her do the dishes! And the dudes in the movies have their own animal sidekicks too -- for instance, Kristoff has Sven the reindeer, Prince Eric has Max, his pet dog, while Aladdin has his monkey friend Abu.

However, all Moana has is a dumb chicken. Even the studio admits that Heihei is probably the dumbest character ever. But I guess having a dumb animal is little more realistic than having an extremely smart animal sidekick.

In Frozen, Disney made fun of itself by getting Elsa to remind Anna that she can't marry a guy she just met. But obviously, the best Disney film that makes fun of Disney itself in the best way possible is Enchanted, where Amy Adams aka. Giselle bursts into song in Central Park, New York ('That's How You Know'). Giselle and Prince Edward sing a cliche love duet ('True Love's Kiss') at the very beginning, which concludes with Edward saying that they shall be married in the morning. As if that isn't clear enough, Giselle also gets animal friends to help her with chores, and these animals turn out to be cockroaches, mice and pigeons in New York City ('Happy Working Song').

I love it when Disney makes fun of itself -- it shows that they are aware of how cliche their stories can get.

10. Overall message: Safeguard your culture / Stop destroying nature

The main message is extremely similar to the one in Pocahontas. As I've mentioned earlier, both Moana and Pocahontas are daughters of the village chief. Both Pocahontas and Moana are protectors of nature. Pocahontas has an entire song dedicated to nature ('Colours of the Wind') while little Moana was shown protecting a sea turtle as it tried to make its way back into the ocean. She defended the sea turtle from predators and because of this, the ocean chose her to return the heart of Te Fiti.

Both save their people in some or another. Pocahontas saves her tribe from being annihilated by greedy Englishmen, while Moana saves her village by restoring the heart of Te Fiti. (If she hadn't done so, her people would starve to death because there's no more fish in the reef to catch and the coconuts are all black and rotten on the inside)

By saving their people, they are protecting their way of life. In Moana, the main goal is to restore the heart of Te Fiti, the island goddess, the personification of nature. Te Fiti gives life to the land, the plants and animals. But when Maui steals her heart to please humans, the world fell into darkness. Te Fiti becomes Te Ka -- a lava monster. Both still represent nature, since Te Fiti represents greenery while Te Ka represents rock and magma. But this transformation shows that nature can be destructive; if humans keep taking whatever we want from nature without giving back, nature is going to turn its back on us.


--

The "Loophole" in Moana

Recently, someone pointed out to me that there was a major plot loophole in Moana. Maui himself pointed it out in the movie: if the ocean was so powerful, why couldn't it return the heart of Te Fiti? 

I didn't know the answer until I read this article. The idea of girl power is as clear as day, but I didn't get the religious references. This is probably because I'm not a religious person, but in hindsight it should have been obvious. I had suspected that when Moana walks towards Te Ka, it was a reference to the parting of the Red Sea, but there is so much more to Moana than just that.

When coconut pirates called kakamora try to steal the heart of Te Fiti, Moana calls on the ocean to help her, but it doesn't. Maui says that the ocean wouldn't help because you have to help yourself. It's just like the saying "God helps those who help themselves". And I'm sure the ocean, aka God, was the one who sent the thunderstorm which caused Moana to land on the island which Maui was on. 

So Moana is the "chosen one". I didn't think much about this. Harry Potter is considered the "chosen one" too, and so are many fictional characters out there. But in Moana's case, the ocean has chosen her to find Maui, deliver him across the great ocean, to restore the heart of Te Fiti. I'm sure there's some biblical tale about someone transporting people somewhere. Yes, it does sound familiar. How about the story behind St. Christopher, who helped Jesus across a dangerous river?

Gramma Tala comes back as a manta ray. This was a reference to reincarnation, which is something pretty obvious. My mother is always telling me that we should do good things so that we can come back as humans again, but I always tell her that I want to come back as a cat and not a human. I think in actual fact, cats occupy a higher position on the reincarnation ladder than us lowly humans.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them Explained

There have been so many ridiculous questions about the movie on the Internet that I think another post is required. (You can find my previous post here)

1. If Newt Scamander was expelled, why does the textbook state that he graduated?

So many people have been asking this question. In the film, we find out that he was expelled. I've a few explanations for this. Newt might have been expelled after completing his OWLs. It was not specified when exactly he was expelled, but I mean, you could always say that you graduated with OWLs, right? I mean, even Harry and Ron didn't stay to do their NEWTs. Only Hermione went back to Hogwarts to complete hers. For instance, why couldn't Fred (if he were still alive) and George claim that they graduated from Hogwarts with OWLs, since they chose to leave? (But obviously they wouldn't want to claim that they graduated. It would hurt their credentials.)

I'm guessing that Newt got his job at the Ministry in the House-Elf Relocation Office because he didn't have NEWTs and it was considered a lowly position at the Ministry. Although Harry and Ron got jobs at the Ministry of Magic even without NEWTs, this was largely because they saved the magical community from Voldemort. Newt Scamander only saved the magical world from Grindelwald in 1926, way after graduation. It was probably thanks to his newfound reputation, coupled with being the author of an awesome textbook and all, that led higher positions at the Ministry. So basically, he worked really, really hard. All his hard work paid off, so maybe the publishers thought, who cares whether he graduated or not? Let's just say he did! (It's the 52nd edition already, so we can do whatever we want!)

However, I think the most obvious reason is that the publishers deliberately decided to print the book that way to appease everyone. Under the "About the Author" section, even Muggle textbooks usually have someone scholarly-looking there, with degrees and PHDs. This makes the author sound like a respectable person and it definitely sits well with parents. If you've read The Tales of Beedle the Bard, you would have also read Dumbledore's analysis of 'The Fountain of Fair Fortune'. In his analysis, he explained that parents (i.e. Lucius Malfoy) disapproved the fairytale because in it, a witch marries a Muggle. Lucius Malfoy wanted to ban the book from Hogwarts' library. Dumbledore was against this of course. (I am still so sad that he died. He's the champion of human rights and he believes in the power of love.)

Anyway, you see where I'm going with this. They aren't exactly the same issue, but I would think that there would always be troublesome parents out there, whether in 1927 or in 2001.

2. Why did Newt Scamander get to keep his wand when Hagrid's wand was supposedly snapped into two?

This is a silly question because there are so many things we do not know. We don't know how the Ministry of Magic operated back then when Newt was expelled and when Hagrid was expelled. Laws change. The people in charge definitely changed. The jury was different. And in general, the Ministry of Magic has always been portrayed as one that is pretty messed up. They prosecute innocent people (and Hippogriffs) and perpetuated lies about Harry Potter. It therefore shouldn't come as a surprise to see that they aren't concerned with being consistent.

However, there are a few differences that may explain why Hagrid's punishment was more severe. First of all, Hagrid is a half-giant. As mentioned earlier, there are still racist pure-blood wizards and witches out there. And as Hermione would say, the magical community is still enslaving house-elves, for crying out loud! Madame Maxime's unwillingness to admit that she's a half-giantess says it all. (Big bones? Ha!)

Secondly, the degree of rule-breaking here is different. Hagrid was accused of unleashing a beast that petrified multiple students AND killed Moaning Myrtle. On the other hand, Newt was just charged with endangering a student's life, which probably did not result in death. Major difference here. 

Also, Hagrid's wand may still be intact anyway, which is why I added the word "supposedly". Harry suspects that fragments of the wand were left in Hagrid's pink umbrella, which allows him to do a little bit of magic. However, Dumbledore might have mended Hagrid's broken wand with the Elder wand, just like how Harry mended his own wand with it since he had always preferred his own.

3. Why is the Swooping Evil and the Thunderbird not found in Newt Scamander's textbook?

Yes, these creatures are not in the textbook. But the Horned Serpent, Pukwudgie and Wampus, the other three creatures that represent the houses at Ilvermorny, aren't in his textbook too. So are three-headed dogs like Fluffy. Okay, so maybe Newt did not get to see any three-headed dogs and many other creatures while he was doing his research. But in the film, we have proof that he once owned a Swooping Evil and a Thunderbird. He even has a really strong relationship with them. These creatures actually obey him -- they literally swoop in and save the day. So how do we explain their absence in the 52nd edition of Newt's textbook? 

There are so many possible explanations for this. A simple reason could be that by the time Harry Potter purchases the 52nd edition of his book, these creatures have already become extinct. Or maybe they've just gone into hiding. Who knows? It could be quite possible that wizards and witches hunted the Swooping Evil for their venom so that they didn't have to obliviate Muggles so much. And maybe people were misusing Thunderbirds to create storms? I don't know. But just like a dictionary, where new words are always being added in and words that are obsolete are being discarded, this could have been the case for Newt's textbook. Creatures that are extinct are left out, and we have to wait for other people to write about the new creatures. Another reason could just be because Newt wanted to protect them and keep them away from the public eye.

The most logical explanation would be that Newt Scamander didn't include them because his book was merely an introduction to Magizoology. He didn't claim to know every single magical creature in the world. This is also why his textbook was required for first years, but by third year, Harry had to purchase The Monster Book of Monsters, also known as the book that bites. In The Monster Book of Monsters, there are plenty of creatures that aren't in Newt's textbook, such as the Hippogriff and the Sphinx. There are probably many books out there in the magical community that are go into greater detail about other magical creatures. Perhaps some American author has already written a comprehensive book about the four creatures that the houses of Ilvermorny were named after.

4. How come Jacob Kowalski remembers the magical creatures?

At the end of the movie, there was an "Aww!" moment when we see Jacob working in his very own bakery, thanks to the Occamy eggs from Newt that he used as collateral since the eggs are pure silver and obviously worth a lot of money. His bread comes in the shape of Erumpents and Demiguises, and when he also sees his love interest, Queenie, he touches his neck -- the spot where the Murtlap attacked. WHAT DOES THIS ALL MEAN? Didn't the magic rain wash away his memories?

Many people have pointed out that according to Newt, the venom of the Swooping Evil wipes away bad memories of magic. Jacob had mostly good memories of magic as he walked around in Newt's case and even fed some of the creatures living in there. However, this doesn't explain much. If he retained good memories, why didn't he actively search for answers? Why did he go back to work? Why didn't he go looking for Newt and all the other magical creatures?

My impression of the Memory Charm, or obliviate, is that it'll be just like waking up from a good night's sleep. So Jacob probably remembered bits and pieces of it, but he brushed it off and thought his the dream factory in his brain was being over-imaginative.

In addition, Memory Charms probably work best when the subject is obliviated immediately or on the day itself. For example, usually when something catastrophic happens, the Ministry of Magic sends officials down at once to obliviate the Muggles (some Muggles get away though. There's a book entitled 'Muggles Who Notice'). However, for Jacob, the first time he encountered magic was when he first met Newt. That would mean days of memories to get rid of! Perhaps in this case, the Memory Charm didn't work quite as well as it should have.

And it isn't as if Memory Charms are foolproof. In Goblet of Fire, we found out that Memory Charms can be broken. When Bertha Jorkins accidentally discovered that Barty Crouch Jr. was still alive, Crouch Sr. used the Memory Charm to keep her mouth shut. But years later, Voldemort and Peter Pettigrew (that traitor!) managed to break the charm and got this information out of her.

So, I'm pretty sure that deep down inside Jacob's mind, he remembers Newt and Queenie and everything that's happened. AND it so happens that Queenie was a skilled Legilimens who can read people's minds. Perhaps she could look into Jacob's mind and make him recall everything that has happened. I mean, why not? Voldemort managed to break the Memory Charm and he was an accomplished Legilimens as well. Also, in Half-Blood Prince, when Harry casts Sectumsempra on Draco (felt super bad for Draco here, since he was trying so hard to save his family from Voldemort), Professor Snape walks into the bathroom and reads Harry's mind. As a skilled Legilimens, he was easily able to bring the image of the Half-Blood Prince's copy of Advanced Potion-Making to the forefront of Harry's mind. Too bad Harry never mastered Occlumency.

5. Why couldn't Newt just apparate to America (or travel there in some other non-Muggle way)?

Maybe he just liked the scenic route. Is that so hard to believe?

If wizards were allowed to apparate from country to country, it would violate the International Statue of Secrecy! Duh! MACUSA would be so pissed! Just as how Muggles have borders between different countries, I'm sure that the wizarding communities of various countries have drawn up their own boundaries too. (This obviously means no travelling via the Floo Network, since the system that we know of only connects wizarding households and buildings in Britain.)

Also, apparition is difficult. You have to remember the three Ds: Destination, Deliberation and Determination. Usually people apparate short distances or to places they've been to before. Without knowing the exact destination, I think it'll be pretty hard to apparate. Some wizarding folk don't even like apparating, possibly because you'd have to experience this unpleasant sensation which sounds claustrophobic and suffocating. According to Quidditch Through the Ages, apparition gets increasingly unreliable over long distances. I think trying to apparate from England to the United States isn't such a good idea. It's just too far. What if you get splinched? Even the Dark Lord decided to fly around when he paid "friendly" visits to Gregorovitch and then Grindelwald (who was locked away in Nurmengard) in his quest to locate the Elder Wand.

Lastly, portkeys. There are many restrictions and regulations by the Ministry of Magic with regards to portkeys. During the Quidditch World Cup in 1994, we learn that authorised portkeys were used by the Ministry to transport many groups of witches and wizards to the event. Thus, in order to travel to America, Newt would have needed an authorised portkey. However, Newt did not want to be subjected to scrutiny -- he was carrying an entire case of seemingly dangerous creatures. He was trying to protect them and if you've watched the film, you'd know the panic in his voice when his case got confiscated by MACUSA.

What about unauthorised portkeys? Barty Crouch Jr. made one, which transported Cedric Diggory to the graveyard and caused him to die (poor Cedric. I'll always remember how he wanted a Quidditch rematch with Gryffindor because he felt that it wasn't a fair victory for Hufflepuff since Potter fell off his broom due to the presence of Dementors). Well, Newt isn't really a rule-breaker or a troublemaker. Just like Harry, he doesn't go looking for trouble; trouble usually arrives at his doorstep. Besides, travelling by portkey leads to nausea and giddiness because it spins you around and throws you onto the ground. I would probably get portkey-sick if I had to travel via portkey. What effects will this form of transportation have on his magical creatures? Better not risk it.


---


There's one thing I'm confused about though. When Credence dies, his body and soul turn into black flakes that fly about in the air. This is very similar to Voldemort's movie death.

In the book, Voldemort dies pretty much like any other person who's been struck by the Killing Curse. His lifeless body hits the ground and he's dead. In the movie, however, he kind of disintegrates and we see these black flakes as well.

The only logical explanation (to me) is that both Credence and Voldemort's souls have been tainted and the movies were trying to show just that. Credence's soul was tainted by his attempts to repress his magical abilities and therefore he developed an obscurus, while Voldemort's soul was obviously tainted because he made so many Horcruxes in order to split his soul into seven parts.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (Film Review)

J. K. Rowling has outdone herself again. The plot for Cursed Child was a total disaster, but based on personal experience writing group essays at university, choosing to write with two other people was already a mistake from the outset.

Anyway, the movie was spectacular and absolutely spell-binding. First of all, Newt Scamander, the awkward protagonist, is so adorable. Just like Hagrid, he was expelled from Hogwarts because of some magical beast (and also Leta Lestrange, a witch Newt fell in love with. Obviously a recipe for disaster, considering how evil Bellatrix was). AND just like Hagrid, he was given a second chance by Professor Dumbledore, who probably knew that it was not Newt/Hagrid's fault. (I mean, why did they even believe Tom Riddle! Aragog can't possibly petrify people. You'd think they'd know better after reading Newt Scamander's book.)

Then there are the cute creatures that all Harry Potter fans would have read about in his textbook. Some were more familiar that others -- I was so excited to see the cute little niffler escape from Newt's case to steal all the shiny objects at the bank. I'm sure we had all imagined how nifflers look like when we "attended" one of Hagrid's best lessons while reading Goblet of Fire. And the Erumpent was also mentioned when Hermione repeatedly told Xenophilius Lovegood in Deathly Hallows that what he had was an Erumpent horn, not that of a Crumple-Horned Snorkcack. This time we actually see an Erumpent, and who knew they could be so scary and endearing at the same time? It was so funny to watch Newt as he tried his best to attract the female Erumpent (that was in heat).

Speaking of the Lovegoods, Luna eventually married Newt's grandson, Rolf Scamander. Luna's love for magical creatures made her do proper research and she admitted that the Crumple-Horned Snorkack didn't exist. Aw, that's too bad. Since Rowling mentioned that there would be exactly 5 films, I hope that they eventually at least mention Luna at some point. She's one of my favourite characters from Harry Potter because she's not afraid to speak her mind, she's not afraid to be herself and best of all, she stays calm in the face of adversity. (Okay, so the films are set from 1926 to 1945. But maybe they can give us a clue as to why the Lovegoods thought that the Crumple-Horned Snorkcack existed?)

The most troubling unanswered question is this: Was Ariana Dumbledore an obscurial? Immediately after leaving the theatre, I googled this question but there was no definite answer. But there are so many similarities. Both Credence Barebone and Ariana had powers that they have no control over. Both of them had been bullied in some way or another. Credence was always whipped with a belt by his "mother" and after Ariana was bullied by some Muggles, she wasn't right again. Both were mistaken for squibs -- Grindelwald thought Credence was a squib too, while the rumour around town was that Ariana was locked away because she was a squib. Both had to be calmed down -- Newt was trying to calm Credence down (and almost succeeded, if it weren't for Grindelwald and MACUSA) while Aberforth had mentioned that he was always able to calm his sister down. Both of them lived past the age of 10 -- many believed that obscurials don't survive for long but they were exceptions. Ariana died when she was 14 and I'm not sure how old Credence was, but he's obviously not 10 anymore. It also explains why Grindelwald thought he was a squib and was stunned to discover that the obscurial was Credence the whole time.

The only difference is that Credence could control his powers transform into an obscurus when he became angry. He would then seek revenge on those who wronged him. After Senator Shaw insulted him and called him a freak, he was killed. When Mary Lou wanted to whip Credence again, she was killed. After Grindelwald (who was disguised as Graves. Should've known -- he passed Credence a necklace with the sign of the Deathly Hallows) called him a squib and told him that he could not be taught to learn magic, he went berserk. Ariana, on the other hand, could not control her powers. She accidentally killed her own mother and eventually died in a three-way duel between her brothers and Grindelwald.

Wait, Grindelwald! Both of them (Ariana and Credence) knew Grindelwald. Everything makes sense now. Initially I thought that perhaps Newt could help Ariana, but that's because I got the timeline all messed up. It was 1926 and Ariana had died decades ago. BUT Grindelwald knew her and he would have known about the destructive powers that obscurials possess. This is why the newspaper clippings at the start of the film showed that he disappeared. His goal was to travel to New York to track down the obscurial there.

So was Ariana an obscurial? I'll be waiting for J. K. Rowling to uncover this mystery. But obscurial or not, the message is clear -- we should be ourselves. This is not something new -- in Frozen, Elsa tried to conceal her powers before finally learning how to control them and she eventually becomes the new ice queen, creating ice rinks for everybody. In X-men, mutants are shunned until they realise they can be enrolled in Professor Charles Xavier's School for Gifted Youngsters and learn to control their powers too.

Well, in Fantastic Beasts, Credence was looking for acceptance. He wanted to truly fit in somewhere and he wanted to learn to control his powers as well. His witch-hating mother would never accept him, and sadly the magical community (despite Newt and Tina's efforts) did not as well. And in the larger scheme of things, Newt is fighting for magical creatures to be accepted and understood. Eventually he was awarded Order of Merlin, Second Class for his contributions to Magizoology, and was also honoured on chocolate frog cards. However, it was probably a hard-fought battle -- in the film, MACUSA immediately pins the blame on Newt and his animals and even sentenced him and Tina to die. Extremely harsh, don't you think? And your life literally flashes before you as you die -- the MACUSA official extracts memories from Porpentina to get her to relax (and supposedly get swallowed up by some creepy-looking black liquid. Honestly, Avada Kedavra seems like a better way to die.)

There are so many misunderstood magical beasts and beings (There is a difference! Refer to Newt Scamander's textbook for a hilarious introduction to the definition of magical beasts and beings) that pop up in the Harry Potter series. For instance, Ron thought that Crookshanks wanted to eat his rat but Crookshanks was a really smart Kneazle that could tell true animals from animagi.

Buckbeak is the prime example. Everytime I read Prisoner of Azkaban, I get so pissed with Draco. I would always be thinking: Come on, Draco. Why did you insult that majestic Hippogriff? Why did you have to get your father involved try to get Buckbeak executed, when it was clearly your fault? But let's face it. In the real world, this always happens. Humans are somehow stupid enough to provoke animals (even when these animals are much larger than us humans) yet the animals are blamed for their actions. 

This reminds me of my own experience with Mailbox Cat. She was an ordinary community cat who lived downstairs. She made lots of friends who regularly feed her, and she would always meow at me, jump on my lap and knead me. But one day some idiotic human provoked her by letting his/her dog bark at her. Probably on purpose. The human was attacked and Mailbox Cat was exiled. Seriously? I mean, come on, just walk your dog and leave the stray cats alone! Jeez.

Also, HARAMBE. Okay rant over. Just watch the movie so that we can geek out about Harry Potter together.

Other super adorable creatures include the overly attached Bowtruckle, which helps Newt escape his death sentence by picking the lock (Muggles don't really notice them because they blend in with the trees. Harry was bitten by one in Order of the Phoenix, during Professor Grubbly-Plank's class), and also the gorgeous Occamy, which Newt eventually re-captures by getting his friends to throw a cockroach into a teapot since these creatures have the ability to shrink their bodies to fit into any space. The furry invisible creature known as a Demiguise was taking care of the Occamy (Aww!) with stolen candy. Apparently, according to the textbook, its fur can be used for invisibility cloaks. The Murtlap looks gross, but this creature has been mentioned before in Order of the Phoenix -- Hermione used Murtlap essence to heal Harry's cuts because Umbridge was torturing him during detention by making him write "I must not tell lies" in his own blood. Who could forget that nasty evil witch? Can't believe she's a cat lover, ugh.

And there's the Thunderbird -- the reason why Newt travelled to America was to release this Thunderbird and let it go back to Arizona where it truly belongs. I'm so glad that I was sorted into Thunderbird house. Perhaps we'd get a glimpse of Ilvermorny in the sequels.