Review: Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkaban

Started by <<Solo>>8 pages

LOTR was awesome.
POA changed a little but not enough to make a difference.

I like the film. I actually enjoyed it, enough for me to sit through it for two screenings.

Alfonso Cuaron did a good job. while he deviated from the book a few times, at least he did it with panache. This film depicts how the characters, the story, and even the world of HP is evolving. It is darker, and the storylines are becoming more mature, so it goes without saying that i have no problem with Cuaron making this film a bit dark.

The dementors are quite terrifiying, i must say. The new Dumbledore is alright. Except for the voice (which sounds younger than Harris's) one does not really feel too much difference.

Gary Oldman and David Thewlis are, as always, very good. Engimatic, I would say. No wonder Daniel felt slighlty starstruck being in a scene with them, add Alan Rickman to that.

The three main leads' acting have improved. Not Oscar-worthy, but that isn't really what this films are all about, right? Emma Watcson was given a lot of screen time alongside Daniel, and they did very well. Although Rupert had fewer scenes than the other two, he held his own and had his moments.

My only rant?

NO OLIVER WOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!! waaaahhhh!!! and more quidditch....i hoped for that....more quidditch....

here's to fillm 4...🙂

You used the word panache

Marvelous! I love that word.

Well here is a thought, If the writer of these series says its a great adaptation of the book.... who is going to say that she is wrong?

Originally posted by Samas-adian
Well here is a thought, If the writer of these series says its a great adaptation of the book.... who is going to say that she is wrong?

certainly not me! 🙂

The movie was fun. I appreciated the new style on the series, but i do prefer columbus. The story in this film was deffaintly the downfall of the movie. The so called twist ending was very anti suspensefull, but the movie was fun. However they do miss the sense of wander columbus brought to the films

Originally posted by Samas-adian
Well here is a thought, If the writer of these series says its a great adaptation of the book.... who is going to say that she is wrong?

Much like anyone else, it's her opinion, honestly.

I disliked it, and was greatly disappointed.

The biggest mistake was

Spoiler:
Harry's eyes were clearly blue in a few scenes and they made a big deal about him having his mother's eyes, GREEN, plus they should definately have included when Gryffindor won the Quidditch Cup, that was an essential part of the book.

I thought it moved too fast and the loose ends did not tie in nicely.

What are you talkinga bout Cinemaaddiction?

Personally I thought part three was really good. It was different from all the others, and I wish it was longer. But I still think I like the second one the best. The only part about the movie I did not like was how they switch some things around. Like how he got the firebolt at the end, and in the book he got it in the middle. And I wish they would have thrown more Qudditch into the scene's. But the Visual affects were awesome, So if you haven't seen the movie you really should, because it is something you need to see if you like the Harry Potter books.

Originally posted by Samas-adian
If the writer of these series says its a great adaptation of the book.... who is going to say that she is wrong?

What are you talking about Cinemaaddiction?

Just because she wrote it, and thought it was a great adaptation, doesn't mean any of her fans, myself included, have to agree with that.

From what I have read in reviews for the bookreaders, ALOT was left out of the movie by this director, for the supposed sake of his "art".

Now, has she actually said that this was a great adaptation?

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
has she actually said that this was a great adaptation?

JK said in an interview with Reuters that PoA was "the best movie so far."

Further -

"[Alfonso had ... ] good intuition about what would and wouldn't work in his film version. For the very obvious reason that books and films are such different media, to do a very literal adaptation wouldn't serve the material best, and I think he's done exactly what I hoped he would do."

Now go and watch Citizen Kane again and come back when you have learned something.

Learned something? Citizen Kane would be great if I were an insomniac.

BTW, welcome to KMC, leave your ego at the door.

I seen Harry Potter last tuesday....

my opinion was simply like the other two, great ideas and imagination....but still isnt my type of thing.

they say this film got darker, i thought the 2nd film was darker than this one, the domenters merely reminded me of the nazgul from lord of the rings....

Emma Watson is a babe in the movies now, perhaps because she is becoming sexually active in the film 😉

Originally posted by CaPtaInCLaUdiA
he is so not mundane, I havent seen the movie, but I am pretty excited about seeing it, I mean its the director from y tu mama tambien !

i don't think he is mundane, either.

I watched Y Tu Mama tambien, and thought it was awesome. A Little Princess was very good, too.

I don't think anyone has to worry about the directing, coz for tehe fourth, it will be helmed by Mike Newell...

But the writer of the series knows the material the best because she wrote the books. So people cant say that it wasnt a good adaptation.
People can disagree with her if she said it was a great movie..but not on adaptation of her books.

My review: Great!

I think Harry Potter is foolish and a wast of time.

hmph 😠
i think its awsome!!!!!!!!!!.....well not the first 1 but the second 1 is good 😄

I am not cottonmouth or lmcfarlane although they are one person