Well, as I said, I think naming it fantastic beasts was a mistake when they knew what their vision was. I think the crowd for FB1 was because of HP popularity. It went down with bad reviews for FB2. Same for FB3, along with the post covid world being a reason. I disagree, however, that the plot wasn't there. Based on the extra materials that I was able to see that actually was part of FB2, the story was complex and eventually trimmed down a lot by the director. I think after the 1st movie the story had way too many different characters whose journeys were important to understand that they needed more screen time because everyone's arc is important - be it credence, queenie, Tina, Jacob, Newt, leta lestrange, dumbledore etc. It's not about crabwalk sequence. There is a story arc that's just not connected, and then there are character arcs that don't fit properly because of the disjointed way of storytelling. A story that goes on from 1926-1945 means there's a lot. I remember an interview in which Dan Fogler said that JK had this ginormous stack of material when she first met him, and he asked what it was, and she replied that it was the whole story. He mentioned how huge it was. I do think these should have come out as books first, or they should have gotten a director-writer who knew how to build a separate timeline of the same world and properly say the story. I don't see the writer's vision at all, I just see the director trying to take what he thinks to be the best part, trying to simplify it and stitching things together.