I've just come across this explanation in the book "Quidditch Through the Ages" .. page 90:
"Too cumbersome to turn at high speed, the Oakshaft  never gained
much popularity with those who prized agility over safety, though it
will always be remembered as the broom used in the first ever Atlantic
broom crossing, by Jocunda Skyes in 1935. (Before ...
Obscurus aka Obscurial
Several times throughout the film we see a blue beetle flying through the city called a Billywig.
There is no need to watch any Harry Potter movie to understand Fantastic Beasts.
Here is why:
Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them is not a prequel to all eight Harry Potter movies. The Harry Potter franchise is set in the '90s while Fantastic Beasts is set in 1920's.
No one from Harry Potter exists in this era, except Albus Dumbledore. And there are ...
I think you can watch this as a stand alone movie. Apart from a few references to the Harry Potter world in the movie (name drops of Albus, Hogwarts - total of around 10 small references through out the entire movie) etc., rest of it is completely new. Its set in the 1920's era. Before Harry Potter started.
So no, you don't have to watch the Harry Potter ...
Graves outspoke. He said referring to the obscurial Newt kept trapped:
So it’s useless without the host?
Then Newt confronts him by saying
That is a parasitical magical force that killed a child. What on earth would you use it for?
Graves realized he had spoke too much, and tipped his hand. Killing them would be the safest bet to keep his intentions ...
Thanks to Rand al'Thor, here's a run-down of modes of transport that we know of that could and couldn't work as international modes of transport:
Portkeys - yes.
The answers to this question show that Portkey travel can be international. Copying quotes from my and DVK's answers over there:
from various places to the Sahara desert:
Probably - but it's more likely he lost them and regained them later
"In the past it was often the Dark Lord's pleasure to invade the minds of his victims, creating visions designed to torture them into madness."
Severus Snape, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
Here, Severus Snape is talking about the Legilimency, a form of magic that can best ...
@ibid on scifi.SE found a JKR quote to support an answer about the max range of portkey travel which exactly answers this question, too:
From this Twitter exchange:
Q: Loved the movie. Burning Q from my wife though: How come Newt travels by boat to cross the Atlantic instead of apparating?
J.K. Rowling: There's a limit to how far you can Apparate. Inter-...
This scene offers us our first glimpse at the person who will act as the "big bad" of the Fantastic Beasts franchise - Gellert Grindelwald, played by Johnny Depp. The scene you are talking about is intercut with newspaper headings talking about Grindelwald's rise to power and the fact that no one knows where he is - this is our first clue that the man in ...
Well experienced wizards, such as Albus Dumbledore, Grindelwald or Voldemort would be able to probably cast minor spells without a wand.
We can assume that Graves aka Grindelwald can do much more without a wand.
Also, one final but important info. Wandless magic is not rare. JKR shared some info on Magic in America in Pottermore.
“The Native American ...
So some of this may be slightly incorrect, but these are the reasons from what I understand:
Newt couldn't apparate, because he had never been to where he needed to be before. Anyone who apparates in the HP universe goes somewhere that they have been to before, or that they can see directly.
Apparating randomly is very risky, as you can ...
It's probably because none of them had any reason to. Each of the creatures were well looked after inside the suitcase by Newt, in environments that were ideally suited for them.
The only ones that did escape had specific reasons to do so:
Niffler: looking for gold to collect, was trying to escape even when the suitcase was closed.
Erumpent: the glowing ...
During that scene, we see everything that is affected by the obliviating rain. This includes newspapers. Rather than getting soaked and unreadable, the newspapers are instead magically changed to read something else. In addition, people inside (who aren't in immediate contact with the rain) are also affected by its magical effects. So this means that it'...
It is not a reference to Fantastic Beasts.
These lines are meant to be clues to Harry, Ron, and Hermione (and to us) that Hagrid’s interaction with this inconspicuous person with a dragon egg was actually something rather important.
In the movie (not the books), Hagrid is the kind of person that will divulge possibly important information –- and not ...
The movie is roughly based on the book of the same name, which is a fictional textbook that's used by Hogwarts. The movie is essentially the story of the guy who wrote the textbook, and is not directly related to the main Harry Potter story.
Rowling has specifically said that the movie (which is supposed to be a trilogy) is neither a prequel nor a sequel to ...
I believe the realisation that Frank was their only/best option has a few reasons to support it.
Firstly, Frank’s bond with Newt was clearly very strong- it seems as though this particular beast has a strong emotional intelligence and, as is revealed in the story, was rescued by Newt from Egypt. The very reason that Newt is travelling through America ...
There will be five total movies.
As a five movie saga, the assumption is that the set will lead up to and end with the battle between Grindlewald and Dumbledore.
I think Graves said something along the lines of "for the greater good" which is the punchline and motto of you-know-who-2. The whole speech he gave was reeking of you-know-who-2's ideology
Also he attacked the ministry with quite expertise.. which ministry employee would do that?
The way he interacted with Credence and how he egged on Credence to unleash ...
Now that the movie has been released, we can complement KutuluMike's answer.
Tl;dr : the new Fantastic Beasts saga is more a
than a prequel to the Voldemore saga.
As said in the accepted answer, the 2016 movie is independent from the Harry Potter saga. In particular, people that never watched or read Harry Potter can fully enjoy the movie.
However, it ...
Yes, it is understandable without having watched the other HP films, but you might want to pre-explain certain aspects of JKR's wizarding world - about the separation of the magical & non-magical worlds, how the magical world has it's own government (specifically the Ministry of Magic), Aurors, Muggles, magical schools, the wizards' newspapers with their ...
The newspapers were filled with stories about Grindelwald. He is renowned or feared as a great wizard. All the magical community has Grindelwald on their minds.
I think the sheer scope and skill of his magic is what gives Newt the idea that Graves is Grindelwald. That is why Newt uses the Revelio spell.
A piece of writing released earlier this year by Harry Potter book author JK Rowling on her website Pottermore (which is considered as canonical as the books, and more so than the films, for information on the Potterverse) confirms this:
The wizards of America had played their part in the Great War of 1914-1918, even if the overwhelming majority of ...
Yes, four more sequels are planned to be exact.
“We always knew that it was going to be more than one movie — we knew that from the start — so we set a trilogy as a sort of placeholder, because we knew there would be more than one movie, “Rowling said at the Empire Theatre in London.” But I’ve now done the plotting properly, so we’re pretty ...
Yes, I'd say so. I've watched the movie. The difference is Harry Potter is in Britain, and Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them is in America. Besides the no-maj and muggle thing, I guess you're OK. Also, no-maj and muggle mean no magic.
I think it was a deliberate choice made by the director/writers rather than any hint as to the obscurus' origins.
In the movie we find out that they usually come about when a magical child represses or hides their abilities, usually becoming "infected" with an obscurus. These are children that are usually unaware of the magical community and are alone, ...
It seems it is attracted to any glittery object.
Nifflers are gentle by nature and could even be affectionate towards their owners. However, they could destroy belongings looking for sparkly objects, and for that reason it was inadvisable to keep them as a house pet.
Same is mentioned at PotterMoreSite
Long-snouted, burrowing creatures ...
Neither. The movie "Fantastic Beasts" simply referenced a line in the previously written Potter book so as to tie them in to each other.
Don't forget; the whole Potterverse was meant to end with the final Harry Potter book. Rowling never had any intention of going beyond that.