Review: Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkaban

Originally posted by <<Solo>>
I just saw it and here's my two word review:

Freaking Awesome.

All of the people saying the movies suck,is now over. Because the new director, made it super freaking awesome.(The directing was a lot better then the rest of the movies,you can tell).Just like Donnie Brasko.

It's just my opinion. There wasn't anything entertaining about it, IMO, and I don't see how anyone can say this was better than either of the first movies. The story was choppy, the characters were blander than ever, it was devoid of excitement, there were mere traces of the storyline until the 4th segement, and it had one of the most diappointing finishes in my recent movie memory. The directing didn't make the movie any better than the originals, and I don't understand why Columbus bowed out?

Eh, but I'm sure it will make tons of money, regardless.

I should say the fact that the series is getting darker, and the kids getting older, is probably going to have a negative impact on the movie franchise, especially those who don't read the books, and expect a cheery movie about wizardry.

Originally posted by Destructo
Dumbledore looks and sounds heaps gayer than the original

🙄

He looks a little different from Richard Harris, given this newer actor doesn't seem as old, and his voice was a little raspier. I like the new Dumbledore.

As for Oldman delivering, he had very few speaking lines. I think his best acting was when he had to scream on the animated "Wanted" posters.

Call me crazy, but I think alot of people who don't otherwise read these books are going to be disappointed.

Yeah..do the dementors look good?

I tell u what I think about harry pothead, i think it is a disgrace to all of the disgracei givr harry pothead a o out of 5 u wankers how could u like such a foolish film.

who the hell r u?

LOL
he told me that he's distructo's friend!!!!!!!!!.............

Originally posted by LMCFARLANE
I tell u what I think about harry pothead, i think it is a disgrace to all of the disgracei givr harry pothead a o out of 5 u wankers how could u like such a foolish film.

You've got some serious anger management, and quite possibly multiple identity, issues, bro.

True.

can someone tell me if emma improved. and how exactly? i'm gonna see it tomorow any but...

The characters acting was no better, IMO. Same actors, just a year or two older, which is actually a negative if their acting skills don't evolve any over 3 years.

She's cuter, for what it's worth, and a little more agressive.

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
You've got some serious anger management, and quite possibly multiple identity, issues, bro.

^ i 100% agree!!!!!!!!! 😄

I seen this movie tonight,I was pleased with it.it was a fun movie but cineaddiction is right the acting of the main characters is just as bad as ever...sometimes it's decent sometimes real bad...thank god for editting.

I think the kids could use acting classes for the next film.

I like how the characters are developing though..

Originally posted by badkittykitty
I seen this movie tonight,I was pleased with it.it was a fun movie but cineaddiction is right the acting of the main characters is just as bad as ever...sometimes it's decent sometimes real bad...thank god for editting.

I think the kids could use acting classes for the next film.

I like how the characters are developing though..

I think the character's acting was abit better but not enough to make a difference.

I think Dan Radcliffe was a big improvement-- I say 5 steps forward... but he's still not there yet... maybe just a little bit more and hopefully he'll be there by the 4th film, let's give him a chance.

But I'll say it again, Rupert Grint has always been at least 3 steps ahead of Dan Radcliffe in terms of acting talent, from the 1st movie up to this latest one-PoA. IMHO, among the trio, he's the one who most delivers "satisfactorily" what is expected of him, as JKR envisions Ron to be.

But Emma Watson is the real revelation-- coming from the same place where Dan Radcliffe was before, I think she leaped and bounded past Dan, and landed just half-a-step behind Rupert.

Columbus knows how to point a camera at things that are moving and encourages his actors to caricature human emotion for that "larger than life" feel. Cuaron can direct actors and frame his shots - in fact he can do both those things pretty well. As a result HP1 & HP2 were bland franchise popcorn movies and HP3 PoA is an attempt to make a serious melodrama from what is essentially a pretty overwrought kids book.

Bad things? The book has some massively dumb ideas towards the end (Scabbers? Please - that's just pushing coincidence a little too far.) and the film includes them. The book has some great conflict and bickering between the 3 principles and the film skips it. The story gets a little muddled in places and almost unravels towards the end before a fantastic last 10 mins or so.

Good things: almost too many to mention. Free of Columbus we finally get to see who can act (Watson take a bow) - The CGI and effects are amongst the best I've ever seen in a film and, to my amazement, we get a hint at the *ahem* complexity of the relationship between Lupin and Sirious. Also there are a few small things not fully explained that only people who have read the book will understand: Rather than leave stuff out completely Cuaron simply hints at it and leaves us to fill in the gaps. {SEMI SPOILER I.E. The stag partonus and the identity of moonie, padfoot, prongs and wormtail go without explanation. SPOILER END}

I can only hope that we have an extended directors cut of this movie to look forward to on DVD. Go and see it.

[I'd be sad that Cuaron wasn't down to Direct HP4 if they hadn't already announced Mike Newell at "the helm". Roll on 2006.]

Originally posted by Mr Zero
As a result HP1 & HP2 were bland franchise popcorn movies and HP3 PoA is an attempt to make a serious melodrama from what is essentially a pretty overwrought kids book.

"attempt", being the keyword there. Besides, how many kids can appreciate a director's approach which tries to be "dark".

Not many, I assure you. Like I said, this is pretty much where the movie franchise sells out on the avergage movie going public, who actually liked the colorful and fun movies, with KIDS being kids.

This is now officially a "tweener" franchise. Like a modern day Nancy Drew or Hardy Boys.

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
The directing didn't make the movie any better than the originals, and I don't understand why Columbus bowed out?

CC: Mrs Doubtfire, Home Alone, Stepmom, Bicentenial Man.

AC: Great Expectations, Y tu mamá también, The Children of Men.

That's why the directing makes it better: because that's what good directing does. I don't know why CC bowed out either - but bless him for doing so: the man is a sterile point-and-shoot hack.

Don't get me wrong i'm not saying HP3 is a work of cinematic art: just it's a vast step up to being a real movie rather than a step-by-step crib notes with pictures like the first two.

IMHO.

That's the thing. How many of the kids, that these books and movies were originally towards, are really going to care about filters, and colors, and depth of characters?

If it ain't broke don't fix it. This is certinaly a turning point in the series, when people start becoming analytical of it. That's like dissecting Alice in Wonderland, or Bambi.

Was it to reach a more vast audience? I don't see how making $1.5 Billion dollars over the last two movies wasn't good enough.

Alright they just totally ruined Hermoine's character. Emma Watson is too pretty but its the fact shes not even playing the part shes being herself. She's wearing stylish clothing and she cares way too much about her looks. The part where she says "Thats what my hair looks like from the back?" wtf? Hermoine is not suppossed to be attractive her hair is suppossed to be bushy and shes suppossed to have buck teeth and not give a crap about it.

This movies Hermoine wasn't Hermoine. It just wasn't. it totally ruined her character. My sister made the point to me saying she hadn't read the two books before seeing the movies for SS and COS. But she loved Hermoine. They made you love her for who she was. Nows she totally changed into some totally differant character, you cant even see as being the same person...

The whole clothes things was ridiculous and your right about the movie being very choppy.

I also didn't understand why Alfonso felt he had the right to cut out most of the book to save time but instead wasted time with stuff not even in the books. Does he think he is more talented than J.K. Rowling?

The cuddling also bothered me. There is no cuddling in the books. Why is Hermoine cuddlign with both Ron and Harry. Plus I have to mention they didn't even show the fight hermoine and Harry and Ron were havign when they weren't even talking to each other. Im guessing because of the whole Broomstick part being cut out but even Hermoine's and Rons fights weren't as serious as they were in the book. i know they had to save time but they missed out on major character development. Especially with Trewlawney they didn;t illustrate her as cooky as she actually is.

I hated the new Dumbledore...he didn't do it for me. he doesnt have the character at all of the old one. i think they should've concentarted soemwhat harder on finding some with more of a softeness like Richard Harris had. I miss Richard Harris so much!

Call me a pessimest, all I can concentrate on at this point is what I dont like. I need to see it again and hopefully be able to notice more of the good things...anywayz I needed to rant.

Originally posted by ElvenQueen
I also didn't understand why Alfonso felt he had the right to cut out most of the book to save time but instead wasted time with stuff not even in the books. Does he think he is more talented than J.K. Rowling?

I assume you - like me - loathe the LOTR rings movies for the same reason - as Jackson butchers both characters and story narrative far far worse than Alfonso does? Eh?