In the movie Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find them, the protagonist uses the Accio spell at the end to get the bad guy's wand (don't want to say his name to avoid potential spoilers).
Why doesn't he use Expelliarmus instead?
Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for science fiction and fantasy enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this communityIn the movie Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find them, the protagonist uses the Accio spell at the end to get the bad guy's wand (don't want to say his name to avoid potential spoilers).
Why doesn't he use Expelliarmus instead?
It's not Newt who performs the Accio spell, it's Tina and she's following the direct orders of the President.
MADAM PICQUERY: (to the Aurors flanking her)
Aurors, I’d like you to relieve Mr. Graves of his wand and escort him back to—
You may also want to note that the screenplay reveals that Graves had already dropped his wand, hence casting the disarming spell (Expelliarmus) would have been completely pointless. This isn't immediately obvious in the film.
Graves tries to hold it off as it tightens, but staggers, struggles, and falls to his knees, dropping his wand.
TINA: Accio.
Graves’s wand flies into Tina’s hand. Graves looks around at them, a deep hatred in his eyes.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them: The Original Screenplay
Expelliarmus is the Disarming spell. It doesn't mean that you will automatically get your opponent's wand, it just means that they'll lose it, such as the wand flying out of their hand, and after that they can easily just regain it, as @R.Skeeter said is the comments.
Accio, however, Summons the wand, and ensures that Newt will get the wand.
Accio is going to be how Grindelwald keeps the Elder Wand, if you drop the wand you can't be disarmed. Therefore he wouldn't lose the Elder Wand and he wouldn't care about any other wand.