Why I Am Still Hesitant About "Fantastic Beasts"

I am a big fan of Harry Potter. I have read all of the books. The movies are the only major film franchise that I have seen all movies in the theater. I participate in Pottermore, listen the the MuggleCast podcast, and used to be active in Harry Potter message board forums. I was excited to hear that J.K. Rowling would be writing movies set in the wizarding world, but over the last year I have become more and more hesitant about the upcoming "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" movies.

The EW Synopsis

In November 2015, "Entertainment Weekly" had a cover story about "Fantastic Beasts" and included the following synopsis:

Eccentric magizoologist Newt Scamander ... comes to New York (for a reason we won’t disclose) with his trusty weathered case. This case is one of those way-way-way-bigger-on-the-inside magical devices, and within are expansive habitats for a collection of rare and endangered magical creatures from Newt’s travels around globe. He discovers the American wizarding community is fearfully hiding from Muggles (who are called “No-Maj” in the States, ...) and the threat of public exposure is an even graver concern than in the UK (remember the Salem witch trials?). Fantastic Beasts is the story of what happens when this uniquely skilled English wizard travels to wiz-phobic America and a variety of his creatures, some quite dangerous … get out of their case.
Emphasis Mine

For a movie set in America, it seems to be very anti-American. First, it seems Americans are too stupid to understand an word like "Muggles" and instead they call no magic people "No-Maj"s. It's possible it was only 1920s slang, but I still don't like the term. Second, the synopsis describes America as wiz-phobic, which I will discuss in a later point.

"Harry Potter and the Cursed Child"

The next part of my concern came after the opening of "Harry Potter and the Cursed Child". It is called the "eighth Harry Potter story", though it was not written by playwright Jack Thorne, not J.K. Rowling. Rowling insists that it should be considered canon, despite the fact that it continually contradicts her original stories. This is not the place for my review of "Cursed Child", but the fact that J.K. Rowling approved this terrible story to be part of her created world does not help ease my fears about her other upcoming additions.

The Story

My biggest source of apprehension is in the story. It's called "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" and does feature Newt Scamander, the author of the textbook the movie get's its name from, and does show magical creatures but it seems that there are two other stories as well.

Ever since the EW synopsis, it has seemed that they are going to be using "wiz-phobia" as a metaphor for "homophobia". Openly gay actor Ezra Miller is playing Credence Barebone, an adopted son of the leader of the anti-wizard "Second Salem Society" and who is probably secretly a wizard. Auror Percival Graves tells Credence about his mother's group, "If they succeed, we will be forced to stay in the shadows forever. And we've both lived in the shadows too long." That takes on a double meaning if wizardry is being used as a metaphor for the LGBT lifestyle. My problem with that is that is the X-Men movies thing. The wizarding world already contains messages about racism. They don't need to steal X-Men's analogy as well.

And now it seems that "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" is actually going to be five movies that are going to depict the wizarding world's war against the dark wizard Grindlewald. This seems like a bait-and-switch, or at the very least major retconning. We know that Dumbledore defeats Grindlewald. Are they now going to say that Newt Scamander was involved as well? Or is the four sequels going to shift away from Newt's story and be about other characters? The character poster for Graves contains a Deathly Hallows symbol necklace. At the time the symbol was known as Grindlewald's mark. He may be the link to the Dumbledore-Grindlewald story. At first it made me think that he will be revealed to be on Grindlewald's side, but Percival is the name of Dumbledore's father and is also Albus's first (of three) middle names.

Canon

And finally, my concern is how the movies fit into the Harry Potter cannon. We have the seven books, the eight movies, and one play. The movies are not canon because they contain many differences from the books. The same goes for the play (see above). "Fantastic Beasts" are movies only, but they are written by J.K. Rowling, so how do they fit? For example, the Lumos Maxima spell was created in the movies, but it is also used in "Fantastic Beasts". If "Cursed Child" divided Potter fans over what is considered canon, these movies will only complicate things.
---

I really want want the "Fantastic Beasts" quintilogy (is that a word?)* to be good. I just have many reservations about them. I hope the first movie proves me wrong!

*The correct word is pentalogy.