October 20, 2019, 06:50:47 PM

Author Topic: Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald || SPOILER ALERT  (Read 1265 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

November 17, 2018, 01:17:29 PM

atschpe

  • April's Fool
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
Alert: this thread will contain spoliers if you have not yet seen the film.




The film is finally here. What did you think? What did you like? What did you not like?


Let us explore anything from the smallest detail over the big surprises to the new questions raised.


As the thread holds a spoiler warning, feel free to post openly, but only in here.




I am still digesting, I'll start with one thing:
I had heard about Queenie possibly turning, but I was still sad to see her make the choice. It made sense though seeing how pushy she was when we meet her at the beginning of the film. This makes me wonder where her insecurity comes from. This is probably not to be found in her upbringing, unless she and her sister were treated very differently. Compare that Leta giving herself up to save those she loves.  Harking back to Queenie's comment "she was a taker, you need a giver" in the first film, this throws for me a very different light on them both. Queen seems to interpret the images and thoughts she gets from her own teinted view. Plus, she is a wonderful example of how you see your own faults in other people (whether they are like that or not).


"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)
Logged
November 17, 2018, 02:53:23 PM
Reply #1

wordsaremagic

  • The Only Wizard Bob the Duck Ever Feard
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 195
I finished the screenplay a few hours ago but haven't yet seen the film (and probably won't for a few days).
If anyone cares, there is a plot summary available on Wikipedia. Yeah, that would count as a spoiler.
The identity of Credence and Grindelwald's knowledge of it stretches "credulity," if you don't mind a Latin based pun. First, how could this person NOT be known. Second, if Grindelwald was aware of this name and identity, what would have led him to suspect Modesty Barebones as the obscurial in the first movie? Wrong age and wrong gender. That would suggest some knowledge was gained between the two stories.
---
Queenie is a problem from her first appearance in this story. Her spell on Jacob is disturbing, and her choice at the end is puzzling (although the two could go together I suppose). I didn't see anything in the first story to suggest this kind of personality in her. Also, her comment to Newt that Leta was a taker, not a giver, is clearly not quite the case, since Leta "gave" everything.
Logged
November 17, 2018, 06:33:24 PM
Reply #2

atschpe

  • April's Fool
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
The identity of Credence and Grindelwald's knowledge of it stretches "credulity," if you don't mind a Latin based pun. First, how could this person NOT be known. Second, if Grindelwald was aware of this name and identity, what would have led him to suspect Modesty Barebones as the obscurial in the first movie? Wrong age and wrong gender. That would suggest some knowledge was gained between the two stories.

Yes, this is one of the things I am digesting. At first I wondered why Rowling would include the long winding red herring about the Lestrange family, if it leads no where. Possibly there is more to that? And then Grindelwald proclaiming him to be a Dumbledore. Fawkes seems to confirm this to be true (I am assuming this is Fawkes, as the bird looks the same and it would start the explanatory story of how he and Dumbledore met).

One thought that came is whether this Dumbledore-family (I assume a cousin or even 2nd or 3rd degree relative to Albus) is not on speaking terms with Albus' family. Similar to Petunia not wanting to know about her sister's husband and then son, could there be some aspect that these two families did not stay in touch. Albus' father being in Azkaban could have put shame on the family, or maybe his mother even cut off correspondence to the greater family, which he and his brother have not (or even will not) rebuild? Not sure, if this is vaild enough a reason for him not knowing. I might have to convince myself that this could be true.
Queenie is a problem from her first appearance in this story. Her spell on Jacob is disturbing, and her choice at the end is puzzling (although the two could go together I suppose). I didn't see anything in the first story to suggest this kind of personality in her. Also, her comment to Newt that Leta was a taker, not a giver, is clearly not quite the case, since Leta "gave" everything.

I was not too fond of Queenie in the first film. Yes, she is nice and very supportive. But her seeming to even not want to control her gift as a legilimence when as to, put me on a edge a little. That said, I would not have guessed she would have switched sides based on that. Even when I read the theory online I was on the fence.


I really felt for Jacob. So caring and thinking ahead despite it meaning that he would not accept a marriage, due to what this meant for her. And so forgiving to. I don't think I would have welcomed her back so easily after being under her spell and in away kidnapped across the world. Not to mention she just leaves him behind in London with probably no means to go home if he wanted to. She just expects Newt to take him in, if she is even thinking that far. She comes across quite egoistical in a way, or like a little child.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2018, 06:42:21 PM by atschpe »
"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)
Logged
November 17, 2018, 07:13:02 PM
Reply #3

wordsaremagic

  • The Only Wizard Bob the Duck Ever Feard
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 195
There is just an enormous about of explanation needed to blow the smoke out of my head. If Credence is Aurelius Dumbledore, how did Grindelwald learn this, since he did not seem to know it in the first Fantastic Beasts story. The Screenplay identifies the swapping of the babies aboard the ship as occurring in 1901. That would make Credence at least 26. Albus is identified early on (an the dome of St. Paul's) as being 45. He would have been around 19 or 20 when Aurelius was born. I was trying to look up passenger ships that sank in 1901 to see if I could make some historical connection. Didn't come up with anything obvious.
Grindelwald, just prior to telling Credence who he is, says, "There is a legend in your family that a phoenix will come to any member who is in dire need." Earlier, Albus told Newt the same thing, "There's a story in my family that a phoenix will come to any Dumbledore who is in desperate need."
And Albus also tells Newt, "An Obscurus grows in the absence of love as a dark twin, an only friend. If Credence has a real brother or sister out there who can takes its place, he might yet be saved."
The wikipedia article identifies Aurelius as Albus' brother.How would it happen that Grindelwald would know about the birth of a Dumbledore and Albus not know? Or did he know and because the infant had supposedly been lost at sea not make a connection at all?
And why would a baby Dumbledore be sent across the ocean?
Who is "Credence's aunt" on the ship with young Leta, Baby Corvus, Baby Credence, and Irma?
Why did Grimmson kill Irma (apparently on the orders of Grindelwald)?
No doubt I am missing some connections that will come to me as a watch and re-read.

~~~

Edited, as part of the text size got jinxed too extremel small ~atschpe
« Last Edit: November 17, 2018, 08:09:07 PM by atschpe »
Logged
November 17, 2018, 08:07:44 PM
Reply #4

atschpe

  • April's Fool
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
I am always careful with wiki, as there are quite a few mistakes being made there (and even when correctly changed back at times to the mistaken version). So for now I'll stick with cousin or further removed until we get more clear information.


The 1901 indication also got me scratching my head. For one it makes Credence even more older when they are looking for who the obscurus is. For another, why would he still be living in the orphanage when he is over 20?


The other theory drfiting around is that the movie is referencing the titanic with the sinking ship. That would make Credence 14ish at the time of the first movie, which fits more. He looks older, but I could excuse that for the fact that being an obscurus would take a tool on the body or similar. Might we be looking at a Rowling mis-calculation as we have had before in the series?
"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)
Logged
November 17, 2018, 08:54:32 PM
Reply #5

wordsaremagic

  • The Only Wizard Bob the Duck Ever Feard
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 195
Yes, I always told my students never to trust Wiki with anything important. It is a nice background information tool, but it is not reliable. I wouldn't let them use quotations or citations from Wiki in their essays. In fact, I usually discouraged use of regular encyclopedias except as a place to start learning about a subject area so that decisions could be made to narrow to a small topic.
The thought of the Titanic occurred to me too. That was 1912 if I remember correctly. That would make Credence about 15 during the events of this movie. That would seem a bit more reasonable in terms of the time frame but NOT in terms of his being Albus' brother since Kendra is supposed of have died about 1899. Aurelius would be about 27 or 28 in this story and that doesn't seem reasonable either.
Of course there is the possibility that Grindelwald lied about the whole thing. He would be perfectly capable of lying. Still, there had to be some special reason he wants Credence/Aurelius in particular. He went to a good deal of trouble to keep him alive.

Logged
November 18, 2018, 04:59:33 AM
Reply #6

RiverSpirit

  • You can count on me!
  • Forum Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
  • Maroon to the Bone
I just left the cinema with more questions than answers. I am guessing that Dumbledore has always been aware of Credence's existence. The age difference seems to indicate a later life child but this confuses me as Percival was supposedly in Azkaban until his death. Is Grindelwald spinning a yarn or is Credence the result of a prison dalliance?
  
Logged
November 18, 2018, 10:02:04 AM
Reply #7

atschpe

  • April's Fool
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
It confuses me too, RiverSpirit. I still think we are looking at a cousin or cousin's child with Crederence – if Grindelwald is to be trusts. According to the potterwiki:

Percival died [in Azkaban] sometime later after 1890.


Sadly, I could not confirm this with a more reputable source (I quite agree, wordsaremagic, about the use of wiki). Am I wrong in thinking the brother-thing is more an assumption in fandom, or is it actually stated somewhere in the film or screenplay? Whether we'd go by the 1901 Atlantic crossing or the mathematically more probable Titanic crossing, both of Albus' parents look to have died too long before that event.


However, if Percival did outlive the 19th century. One could argue that he somehow got out of prison (and yet, we are told Sirius is the first to manage this … unless he finally spoke up about why he did what he did after Ariana's death), found a new wife and is taking his new family to the US to start anew. That could explain why Rowling is bending the timeline so much to make it all fit – though this would also work with the Titanic theory, come to think of it.
"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)
Logged
November 18, 2018, 04:15:00 PM
Reply #8

wordsaremagic

  • The Only Wizard Bob the Duck Ever Feard
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 195
I am reading the screenplay again. I do not yet find anything in the text that confirms the assumption that Credence/Aurelius is really Albus' brother. Wiki said it, and one fan site critical of the film said it. I could easily have missed it; that is why I am re-reading.
It is going to take a lot of work on Rowling's part to patch up the holes in this timeline. I would like to believe she already has, but it does seem to be a mess.

Yes, The Titanic crossing would come closer to Credence apparent age (about fifteen or so in these two FB movies). But as far as I know not even wizards had the ability to freeze embryos in 1912.
If this timeline is not a mistake, but intentional, then Grindelwald's claim that Credence is really Aurelius Dumbledore is either a lie or it means he is from some other unidentified branch of the Dumbledore family. I do hope that any resolution will not involve time turners.
If Percival is his father, then Credence is well over 30, at least 37.
If Kendra is his mother, then he is about 28.
Rowling may have wanted the 28 age, because the screenplay has him on the boat in 1901 as an infant, along with Corvus Lestrange. Why Aurelius would be on the boat with someone identified as "Credence's Aunt" is not yet clear to me. Who would have been sending Aurelius away. But the 1927 film setting, that would make Credence about 28 (makes me wonder why everyone keeps calling him "the boy").
Wouldn't Bathilda Bagshot have known that her neighbor had a baby? Elphias Doge? Surely Rita Skeeter would have dug up that juicy bit of gossip about a woman in Godric's Hollow having a baby 9 or 10 years after her husband supposedly died in Azakaban.
Logged
November 18, 2018, 05:51:46 PM
Reply #9

Rudius Hagrid

  • Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 99
    • The Discussion Station
So I have come to the conclusion that the timeline is a bit iffy.  I think credence's birth year may be a typo.  The reasoning I have behind this is as follows:

Credence in the first movie is clearly under the influence of his adopted mother.  At an age of 26 he would not be taking her beatings any more; and would have long since moved out, possibly by lieing about his age and joining the army during world war 1.  He most definitely would not be handing out leaflets, being of working age.

The only trans atlantic ships to sink in this period going in the right direction was the Titanic in 1912.  Coincidentally moving Credence's birth year to 1912 would move him to a more believable age of 15 -given his desparation to find a family and dependance on his adoptive mother. 

As for his revealed identity I have to give some ahem - credence to the idea Grindelwald is lieing, but the phoenix makes me doubt that.  I think given Grindelwald lived with his aunt in Goderic's hollow he probably knew more about the Dumbledore family tree than we do at this point in time.  If a Dumbledore child had been lost at sea he would have known about it and the fact that another Pureblood family had lost a child at that time may has been known by him as well.  When he realised the Obscurial was a teenage boy he would have been able to guess that maybe - just maybe Credence was one of the two.

The only facts we have about the Dumbledore family are the ones Harry gleaned which were directly about Albus and his family unit.  We do not know if his father had any brothers, and I think this the more likely scenario than an unmentioned Dumbledore sibling or child.  The possibility exists that Dumbledore had a cousin who had a child, the family moved to the US and their lifeboat floundered at sea.  The aunt could easily have been his mother's sister who came along for the voyage.

I would speculate that Grindelwald only knew for sure who's child survived once he had heard Leeta's confession and/or seen the baby phoenix.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2018, 05:55:51 PM by Rudius Hagrid »
:hagrid: Welcome to the Discussion Station!! :hagrid:
Logged
November 18, 2018, 06:49:20 PM
Reply #10
Before the reveal, didn’t Grindelwald make a statement to Credence about “your brother being determined to kill you,” or something along those lines? That would make the assumption of the brother relationship reliable, at least as far as anything Grindelwald says in reliable.
Logged
November 18, 2018, 08:49:04 PM
Reply #11

atschpe

  • April's Fool
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
Oh interesting, HerHighandMightyness. I do not recall that, but also do not have the screenplay (still pondering if I should get it). Maybe wordsaremagic could help us confirm that ::) ?

Up until now I have been thinking along the same lines as Rudius Hagrid. I even feel like overlooking the 1901 indicated in the screenplay and hoping it is a mistake. Titanic and Credence being 15ish fits more with what we've seen so far. Unless there are purely wizard liners that muggles don't know about :p .

But if we take Grindelwald's revelation for true – Rudius Hagrid, I like your thinking about him knowing moer about hte extended family due to living in Godric's Hollow – would Aberforth or Albus be the mentioned counterpart ot Credence. I don't recall the exact wording, but there was something along the lines of a sibling being the positive counterpart and possibly saving the obscurial? Or would that be the now dead Ariana, meaning that he can no longer be saved?
« Last Edit: November 18, 2018, 08:51:54 PM by atschpe »
"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)
Logged
November 18, 2018, 08:53:11 PM
Reply #12

wordsaremagic

  • The Only Wizard Bob the Duck Ever Feard
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 195
Rudius, I am inclined to agree that the 1912 date makes far more sense, but it pretty well excludes the idea that Credence is Dumbledore's brother.
I did look up shipwrecks in 1901 just in case something caught my eye. However, there were quite a few UK ships that sank, most not in the right places. I won't compile a list here, but there were some that would fit (for example one sank near Newfoundland in November 1901). Turns out there were a lot more shipwrecks than I would have thought.
I can easily imagine Grindelwald trying to manipulate Credence/Aurelius into thinking so in order to generate anger.
The phoenix is a problem, however. I can easily imagine that at some point Albus may have told young Grindelwald about the family legend of the phoenix (which Albus told Newt about very early in this story), so Grindelwald could have arranged a phoenix, I suppose.
But if Credence ever stopped and thought about the timeline, he'd realize that he is being manipulated. I would assume that Grindelwald believes he can keep Credence in an emotional state sot he won't start counting and checking.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2018, 02:37:02 AM by wordsaremagic »
Logged
November 18, 2018, 09:17:10 PM
Reply #13

Rudius Hagrid

  • Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 99
    • The Discussion Station
The comment about the brother wanting to kill him and the sibling to replace the obscurus both came when the speakers seemed to believe Credence was Leeta's younger brother. 

Remember Yusuf Kama was indeed hunting for the man he believed to be Corvus to kill him; Yusuf could have been the brother referred to here.

Albus Dumbledore believed his family member to be lost at sea and probably believed Credence to be Corvus and hoped Newt could save him and convince Leeta to take him in and give him the love he needed to replace the obscurial.

Wordsaremagic, that is entirely possible as is the fact that Jo could just as easily use a fictional boat sinking.  I by no means base my conclusions on the date of the Titanic sinking but rather on the behaviour of Creedence and note that, coincidentally, using 1912 gives us a more fitting age for the character to behave the way he does in the movies.
:hagrid: Welcome to the Discussion Station!! :hagrid:
Logged
November 18, 2018, 09:44:03 PM
Reply #14

atschpe

  • April's Fool
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
The phoenix is a problem, however.

True, that makes it tricky. But I have also been thinking: it looks like grindelwald is forcing the Phoenix to grow up. He does some thing that makes it go from chick to fully grown up bird. So if he is influencing or even forcing the bird in that respect, could he somehow also be influecing the bird to bring off his story of "you"re  Dumbledore"?


But if Credence ever stopped and thought about the timeline, he'd realize that he is being manipulated. I would assume that Grindelwald believes he can keep Credence in an emotional state sot he won't start counting and checking.


Talking about his manipulating Credence. That reminds me of the blood-packet we learn about. Could Grindelwald have even been manipulating Albus? It feels like he could have talked Albus into this. Albus I think states that he was aware of Grindewald's thoughts early on, yet was too in love to break things off earlier (have I got this right? Need to grab Deathly Hallows again I think). Seeing the Grindelwald seems to carry the blood-packet with him at all times, he seems aware that it could be broken (and we know it can be, unless Albus finds another way around it). So, he could have planned even then to try and keep Albus at by: manipulating him into a position where he could not act.
"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)
Logged
November 19, 2018, 01:34:19 AM
Reply #15

wordsaremagic

  • The Only Wizard Bob the Duck Ever Feard
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 195
Talking about his manipulating Credence. That reminds me of the blood-packet we learn about. Could Grindelwald have even been manipulating Albus? It feels like he could have talked Albus into this. Albus I think states that he was aware of Grindewald's thoughts early on, yet was too in love to break things off earlier (have I got this right? Need to grab Deathly Hallows again I think). Seeing the Grindelwald seems to carry the blood-packet with him at all times, he seems aware that it could be broken (and we know it can be, unless Albus finds another way around it). So, he could have planned even then to try and keep Albus at by: manipulating him into a position where he could not act.
Grindelwald impresses me as an egoistic sociopath -- egoist rather than egotist. It is not that he sees himself as the best, but as the ONLY. He is the center of all things and others exist to play a role in his game or else they are to be eliminated. I am certain that he never cared for Dumbledore (or anyone else) for a minute.
--
On another topic, I wanted to ask your thoughts about Dumbledore and the Mirror of Erised.
Logged
November 19, 2018, 02:30:39 AM
Reply #16

RiverSpirit

  • You can count on me!
  • Forum Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
  • Maroon to the Bone

On another topic, I wanted to ask your thoughts about Dumbledore and the Mirror of Erised.

This is another thing that has me completely bamboozled. Surely the memory of the blood oath is not the thing that Dumbledore most desires? Unless his greatest desire was to be reunited with the vial.  I was unaware of the mirror's power for just reminiscing.  The only other reason I can see for the mirror's appearance is to back up the Dumbledore/Grindelwald relationship for those who had not yet caught up.
  
Logged
November 19, 2018, 03:08:39 AM
Reply #17

wordsaremagic

  • The Only Wizard Bob the Duck Ever Feard
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 195
... I don't recall the exact wording, but there was something along the lines of a sibling being the positive counterpart and possibly saving the obscurial? Or would that be the now dead Ariana, meaning that he can no longer be saved?


You might be referring to this dialogue:
---
Scene 29
EXT. VICTORIA BUS STATION – EVENING

 
Footsteps nearby. Both ready their wands, but the footsteps
die away, They walk on. 

     DUMBLEDORE

Credence is in Paris, Newt.
He is trying to trace he real
Family. I take it you've heard
The rumors about who he
really is? 

     NEWT
No.
 
DUMBLEDORE and NEWT board a stationary bus.
 
     DUMBLEDORE
The purebloods think he's the
last of an important French
line, a baby who everyone
thought lost . . .
 
A look between them. Newt is astonished.
 
NEWT
Not Leta's brother?
 
DUMBLEDORE
That's what they're
whispering. Pureblood or
not, I know this: A Obscurus
grows in the absence of love
as a dark twin, an only friend.
If Credence has a real brother
or sister out there who can
take its place, he might yet
be saved.

    (beat)


Wherever Credence is in
Paris, he's either in danger or
a danger to others. We may
not know who he is yet, but
he needs to be found. And I
rather hoped you might be
the one to find him.
 
[The scene continues with Dumbledore giving Newt Nicolas Flamel's card.]
 
 
« Last Edit: November 19, 2018, 03:12:48 AM by wordsaremagic »
Logged
November 19, 2018, 10:36:48 AM
Reply #18

atschpe

  • April's Fool
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
Thanks wordsaremagic, that was the passage I was thinking of. I find two things interesting here.


A) Dumbledore specifically refers to the rumours and leaves them uncommented. This could leave room to his known or having deduced the Dumbledore link (if true). He has a way of handling information carefully, as we know when he was careful what and how much he told Harry or Snape.


B) The real brother mentioned: let us say Grindelwald is really playing Credence here and making a yarn of him being a Dumbledore. He speaks of Credence being the only one who could defeat (or is it kill?) Albus. I.e. could he being using the brother-link to his advantage in setting Credence up to get rid of Albus?


I agree that he is using people and thus might well have used Albus' love for him. Both in getting the blood-pact as well as maybe even a way to get close the Dumbledore family for other reasons. Whilst I doubt he would even then have known about the obscurial he will come to meet, there might well have been other things I he wanted to learn or develop?






As to the Mirror of Erised. We have seen Dumbledore to use magical object beyond what they are initially made for. The pensieve might be a tool to review memories, but he knows to use it in a way that he can compare and combine thoughts. One example is when he shows how Harry his deductions around Snape and Harry as snippets of memories join together (I believe in the Goblet of Fire?). We also have seen magic where the wizard has to alter their emotions (patronus and you could reason blocking legilimens).


So I could see Albus using the mirror beyond just looking for desires. Could he be studying his desires from a third point of view, to learn where he went wrong? Or, whilst the pensieve looks at thoughts, might the mirror help him sort through his emotions?
"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)
Logged
November 19, 2018, 08:57:01 PM
Reply #19

roonwit

  • *****
  • Posts: 484
I have also been worried about the timeline for Credence being Albus' brother. From DH chapter 18 Rita claims that after Kendra's death "Dumbledore went home to Godric’s Hollow, now an orphan and head of the family" and this was presumably the same summer that he and Elphias Doge left Hogwarts and were about to set out on their world tour, which would make it 1899 - as Albus was born in 1881 according to Pottermore and that fits with his age in the screen play if we also believe Rita in the same chapter writing he was almost 18 when he left Hogwarts so would have a June, July or August birthday and the main events of the film happen no later then June 1927. The "head of the family" line is supported by Aberforth in DH chapter 28.
We know from Elphias Doge DH chapter 2 that Albus started school school barely a year after Percival attacked the muggles which would mean that Percival would have been in Azkaban no later than 1891.
So it would seem that Percival and Kendra were both dead by 1899, and Percival would have been in Azkaban for much longer, thus it seems impossible for either of them to have a baby could be swapped with Corvus without anyone noticing immediately in 1901 which is also the year when Corvus was born.

It is however plausible that Credence is related to Dumbledore because of the phoenix (unless that was a set up by Grindelwald) and because he does seem very powerful, given his first spell with a wand, and it would also make sense that Grindelwald might believe another Dumbledore might be a match for Albus.
On the other hand it might be in Grindelwald's interest to turn Credence against Albus by claiming he was rejected by his brother who has also tried to have him destroyed which is what he seems to be doing at the end.

If Credence is a relative of Albus then he might now suspect it, but even if he did know of the ship sinking, it seems unlikely he would know about Leta's baby swap until Newt presumably told him over tea with the niffler.

As to why Grimmson killed Irma it would help to keep Credence isolated so Grindelwald can continue to lure him and he wouldn't want Credence learning about his supposed sister (Irma would think that Leta was his sister unless she realized the babies were swapped before she gave him to the Barebones).
« Last Edit: November 19, 2018, 09:22:41 PM by roonwit »
Logged