Newt Scamander is Doctor Who!

Upon seeing the trailer for Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, one might look at Eddie Redmayne’s acting as the protagonist Newt Scamander and his costume/character design, and find some humour in seeing a resemblance to the Doctor from the BBC’s long-running science fantasy series Doctor Who, in particular the Matt Smith version: a quirky and awkward British figure with bad but noticeable fashion sense. It’s especially funny if you saw the Eddie Redmayne sketch on BBC Children in Need 2016, which depicted Redmayne in costume on the set of the film and, at one point, talking on the phone with Peter Capaldi’s version of the Doctor (and his hastily expositional jokes). Seeing these two differently awkward characters together like this makes it feel like an interaction between two incarnations of the same Time Lord. Upon watching the film, more similarities are made apparent, leading one to declare to oneself, “This is Doctor Who! I’m watching Doctor Who!”

Now, this article is not meant to give evidence to a fan theory that might say Eddie Redmayne’s character in the film is literally one and the same as the Doctor, or even any old Time Lord, nor that the Wizarding World is actually the planet Gallifrey because our minds would burn like Donna Noble regaining her memories. This is simply an informal comparison pointing out similarities that Fantastic Beasts shares with the science fantasy series. (This is also not a full critique of Doctor Who, either as a whole or on the progression of “New Who”, since such a monumental subject would be better discussed in another article, assuming we venture down that road, peer through that looking glass and open that can of worms.)

David Yates’ Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is the prequel to, and ninth installation of, the Harry Potter film series based on J. K. Rowling’s novels, and is David Yates’ fifth film in the franchise, written for the screen by J. K. Rowling herself, who has announced that this will be the first in a five-part series of films. Right away we have another comparison: no one will let these franchises die.

Newt Scamander is a traveller who conceals his identity/species from most of the human population, just like the Doctor. He has a magic wand, which is somewhat comparable to the Doctor’s sonic screwdriver, and, like the TARDIS, which transports the Doctor, Scamander carries a briefcase that is bigger on the inside than on the outside as to contain an environment of sorts within. Scamander also points out that wizards and non-magic folk have subtly different physiologies; for example, wizards have stronger bones than humans and we already know of their (potentially) longer lifespans. Time Lords have been shown having enhanced durability, and longevity is one of the key characteristics of their species. Scamander also finds a companion in this story, Jacob Kowalski (Dan Fogler), a No-Maj who stumbles onto Scamander’s hijinks and through him is introduced to another world, an amazing world he never conceived of, much like the Doctor has done for his human companions. There’s also a goofy gesture where Scamander pulls a helmet out of his suitcase, almost seemingly out of nowhere (like a magic satchel), and makes Kowalski wear it to compensate for his human physiology when finding a potentially dangerous creature, which seems a lot like something Matt Smith’s Doctor would do to Rory Williams. And yes, before you mention, they both wear bowties. That’s irrelevant! Bowties are overrated.

Taking these parallels into account, how does this Harry Potter film hold up as an episode of Doctor Who? To a once avid fan of the show, it feels like a fresh start. As Doctor Who continues for nearly its thirteenth year in a row, its fanbase practically at war with itself online, there are several factors as to why a portion of the fans can feel alienated; for example:

• Conflicting or ambiguous demands from different sects of fans to update the show, make it more relevant, and/or replicate “Classic Who”
• Creators exploiting the show’s “anywhere, any time” story engine, overusing their ideas, their supporting characters and catchphrases, and crudely mixing and matching genres and subgenres, all generally to create just because they have the power to do so
• Questionable writing and inconsistent aesthetics as the series goes on
• The representation of the Doctor (not limited to most recently the unrelatable nature of his apparent omnicompetence and fix for most anything)
• The time at which an audience is introduced to the series and their reception to the change of tone as the series continues

There is a portion of the fanbase that defends the show regardless of constant shifts in quality and identity, watching either out of a sense of obligation or to continually observe situations without limitations.

But the purpose of bringing this topic up is not to debate those who continue to enjoy the show. The question is: Why is Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them a breath of fresh air to a former Doctor Who fan who has drawn a comparison between the two? For one: the main character. This article has already compared Smith’s Doctor to Redmayne’s Scamander, but Scamander’s seems like much less of a forced performance, or at least a more naturalistic one. His awkwardness is humanising, especially as the story develops, rather than (generally) becoming progressively alienating. There’s a bit of silliness here and there, but since it’s not overplayed it’s all well and good. The dialogue doesn’t feel stilted and the characters feel like characters. The protagonist’s companions don’t romanticise him to the point of excess, instead simply experiencing the wonder of the worlds they are introduced to. Kowalski may be grateful to Scamander but he doesn’t go out of his way to be poetic or philosophical about him or the setting. Scamander is clever but he doesn’t have some impossible foresight or a fix for everything (at least not on the level of, say, Capaldi’s Doctor), therefor the audience can actually get invested in the character overcoming challenges and obstacles, and most refreshingly he’s not completely full of his own ego.

Taking into account that these texts are, or belong to, two unrelated entities, the film feels like a good unofficial one-off revival of the series. It is a single adventure, taking place in a single historical setting, wherein is told a relatively simple and focused story: a group of creatures are set loose in the modern world where they are out of place and must be brought back, but matters are complicated when other factions interfere and a dark entity causes casualties throughout the city. The concept is easily something that could be a Doctor Who episode. In my opinion, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is the best episode of Doctor Who that I’ve seen in a long time.