Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban Reviews

The new Harry Potter film is brilliant

Frankly I don't know where to begin with Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. Having not entirely been enamoured by the previous two films both of which were far too long to sustain their storyline and didn't have enough humanity to make the viewer care what happened to anyone I went in with a certain forboding. My main, if not only reason for turning up this time was the knowledge that Alfonso Cuar?n, who directed the beautiful Great Expectations and thrilling Y Tu Mama Tambian was behind the camera -- I wanted to see if someone with his talent would be submerged within the needs of this kind of franchise. I needn't have worried.

The new Harry Potter film is bloody brilliant.

I know. I can't believe I typed those words either. But its like watching a whole other film series. The closest comparison I can think of is Star Trek : The Motion Picture and The Wrath of Khan. In that case, out went the massive set pieces, the portentious dialogue and the assumption they needed to be answering all of the big questions and in came a revenge drama mixed with a meditation on the legacy of the past -- and so happens here. From the opening moments when Harry is practicing his magic under the covers so as not to attract the attention of his Uncle which is presented in such a way as to imply that he's doing the wizard version of what other teenagers his age might be doing under the covers, its obvious that we're in the hands of a director who has a clear vision how he wants to tell the story of how Potter is growing up. Unlike the previous films were the characters forever felt like puppets wheeled in to speak their lines on cue, here they gain all kinds of dimensions and so we actually care about what happens to them. It's quite a shock -- from watching an animated storybook illustration to a real film. For more evidence watch for the moment when the kids are trapped on the stairs and the new head boy dashes about trying to take charge and is roundly ignored.

Remember in previous films how the Quiddich game was the main feature for nigh on half an hour, with the build up and the sports film style presentation with a beginning, middle and end in which we essentially waited for Harry to win by catching the snitch? Here the game becomes something the kids do as part of their normal school year -- we don't even find out who won (although its implied). Hogwarts the school has developed into somewhere which feels like a real place rather than a bunch of sets and for the first time we even have a sense of the geography of the place. And perhaps more significantly the costume design has become more varied, with Harry and friends in their civies more often and Haggrid in particular displaying a greater wardrobe.

Is it all down to Cuaron? Well the scriptwriter Steven Kloves is the same as on previous projects (perhaps he was happy to have greater flexibility), and its widely acknowledged that is the best novel of the series. But we welcome as photographer Michael Seresin, whose previous work includes Angela's Ashes, Birdy, Fame, Bugsy Malone and Midnight Express and there are some similarity in the camerawork with those films -- the pallete in particular which includes blue and greens in comparision to the reds and browns of the past. Its more fluid, with greater use of hand held and steadicam. Throughout you feel like you're in the action instead of watching from the outside. Its visceral to an impressive degree.

But the real improvement is in the performances. Its still a British character actor's convention but even they seem to be having fun this time with more dramatic performances. David Thewlis as Lupin and Gary Oldman as Sirius Black prove yet again why they're continually hired to play the grey areas in us all -- both share some very touching scenes with Daniel Radcliffe as Harry, as does Maggie Smith. But they're greatly helped by the fact that this time they have something to bounce off, because the kids have gown up slightly and actually give proper performances. Radcliffe shows the power bubbling under, especially in the Gilliamesque opening scenes. Rupert Grint's Ron Weasly used to be a collection of facial expressions. They're still there, but now he has something behind the eyes even though on this occasion he's mainly the fall guy. The real revelation is Emma Watson who given the chance to relax and probably offers the performance of the film as Hermione, suddenly a kickass, passionate, intelligent role model -- no longer the annoying, grump know-it-all.

So I loved it and can't wait to see it again so that I can pick up on all the details I missed. Two things can happen from here -- it's either going to be the turning point in the franchise as later episodes make the first two as reductive as The Phantom Menace or it'll be the aboration, the good one, the Live and Let Die of the Roger Moore James Bonds. My great fear now as I await The Goblet of Fire is that it'll be back to business as usual, the magic of this one bleeding away. It's being directed by Mike Newell who on the one hand has made things like Enchanted April and Awfully Big Adventure which would suggest something in the old mood. But he also made Four Weddings and Donnie Brascoe so it could go either way ...

Better than the first two

Having only seen the first three films at this point and never having read the novels...I can honestly say this is the best of the first 3 films. I think I'm probably the only person in the world not to have been blown away by the franchise - so I didn't see what the fuss was with the first film and found the second film dull and over-long. But this film was somewhat better. It was interesting, engaging and a great deal more developed. Gary Oldman completely steals the film as you'd expect and the kids are actually beginning to act now. It was enjoyable and to some extent fun - but I'm afraid to say that I'm still not a convert. Maybe the next film will change my mind?

[Highly rated reviewer]

Expecto Patronum!

The virtue of this film is that it makes a genuine effort to fit the story, not simply marching in lockstep with the book's events. The screenplay is sparing, simplifying many details not unequivocally pertinent to the plot. But it attains a great deal of the book's enchantment and comedy. The first two films fell short in this respect, because they lacked the daring to tinker with the facts, even though it was key to abridging the story whilst remaining loyal to its atmosphere.

In spite of everything, the movie stays true to the book. Many of the scenes are precisely as I had anticipated. When it strays, it does so based on an appreciation of the story and characters. This is apparent in the way they demonstrate, for example, the Knight Bus; Hermione's overflowing timetable; and the introduction of the Marauder's Map, a scene that encapsulates the twins' impish traits.

Surely this has something to do with the new director. Columbus's line of attack was to adhere to the books as factually as possible, frequently draining them of their sensitivity. For example, where the books merely insinuate that Dumbledore can see through the invisibility cloak, the former movies make it unmistakable. The new director never patronizes the audience in that way. This is a children's movie, but it is also a fantasy-thriller that we can take seriously, since not everything is spelled out for us. We're allowed an opportunity to think.

Typical Potter film - tragedy compared to the book

Continuing in the same vein as the other Potter film adaptations - i.e. nowhere near as good as the book.

There is too much in what is arguably the best Potter book (so far...) to try and cram into the film, resulting in a film which is too bitty for those who haven't read the book, and missing too much for those who have read it.

Some interesting deviations from the book, as well - a talking shrunken head on the Knight Bus; dementors flying for example. But the most glaring omissions from the book are an explanation of who Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs (authors of Harry's map) actually are, and a fuller explanation of what goes on in the Shrieking Shack.

Read the book anyway - you'll need to in order to get the most out of the film.

Worst yet

The acting is sub-standard, the plot incongruous, the film simply unsatisfying.

The film does not gel and HP's uber-powers seem convenient rather than intrinsic to his character.

Am I the only one to be (a bit) Disapointed?

Well it does seem like I am the only one who has some reservations about the latest Harry Potter film.

Its still a good watch but I was disappointed because this is my favourite Potter book and I suppose a film can never do full justice to the original.

The film strongly focuses on the three main characters, which is great and are acted wonderfully by the maturing actors. But I felt this was to the detriment of the story's undercurrant - the life of the school, all the fantastic characters, and their histories and motivations.

My main complaint is that I wasn't scared! I am easily scared, I found the previous film was too scary/dark, and I was gripped reading the Prisoner of Azkaban. The dementors were visually spot on, but I guess the imagination is more powerful than sight. I just didn't get that feeling that there was danger lurking, that Harry really was scared of Sirus Black.

However the climatic events of the story were realised faithfully and brilliantly. The scenery and photography were stunning and lavish and Buckbeak the Hippogriff was just right.

I guess this film did acheive for me what the first one did - it motivated me to read the books, and I left the cinema wanted to reread the Prisoner of Azkaban.

So I'm not saying you shouldn't see it, I'm sure you'll enjoy it just fine and I expect the DVD will be packed with lots of fantastic extra features as usual. But go read or reread the books too.

[Highly rated reviewer]

A***OLEKASPAZTIC

Fantastic bollocks from the entire cast

I solemnly swear this film is wicked.

Philosophers Stone: Light, bouncy film for the kids. CHAMBER OF SECRETS: Getting darker, but basically still for the kids, PRISONER OF ASKABAN: A Dark, creepy, stunning film thats not just for kids! We loved it!

The Franchise potters on

The best of the Potter films so far and it still only gets 4 stars.

The Spanish/South American Director knows his stuff and has managed to make the most effective filmic storyline of a bog standard Potter storyline.

Usual things:- The main actor, 'Harry' can't act for toffee, Most of the other children are awful. The adults are mere pantomine dames. Gary Oldman even manages to act in a slightly sub standard way.

On the up side, the ghost things are clever and inventive and I like the marauders map.

Confusing

I love the Harry Potter films and this one keeps the same sense of magic. I did, however, find this one quite confusing in the middle and the storyline seemed to peter out towards the end. Its not as good as the first two, but still worth watching.