What's new

DVD Review HTF REVIEW: Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban (HIGHLY RECOMMENDED). (1 Viewer)

Don Solosan

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 14, 2003
Messages
748

Yes, but he doesn't do it, and who takes kids seriously when they say things like that anyway? In the first two films he does kill people/monsters in gruesome ways. Okay, so one is accidental, one is luck, but he dispatches Tom Riddle rather calmly and coolly.

In PoA, he also blows Professor Snape out of his shoes, an action for which he suffers no ill consequence.
 

Ernest Rister

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2001
Messages
4,148
"Darker" does not mean "better". When we are children, we're shielded from books and movies with graphic violence or mature subject matter. When we become teenagers, we want to be seen as adults and so we shun that which we associate with childhood, and we embrace that which was held from us, thinking it makes us more mature or adult. This period lasts a while, even into the 20's. Some people never grow out of it. But eventually, most people come to realize that many of the things we choose to expose our children to represent the best of humanity, the best of human potential.

This brings me to the notion that I often see tossed around on the internet in film discussion, the notion that because something is "darker", it is therefore "better". I don't think "darker" films are instantly "better" -- not inherently anyway. Especially when it comes to sequels. In fact, films and video games that are excessively "dark" just to appeal to a teen audience -- these eventually wind up looking every bit as manipulative and condescending as those childhood books and movies we rejected in our tweens.

Granted, no one is suggesting that The Care Bears in Wonderland is a superior film to The Godafther Part II -- but I would submit that the original, more sentimental and cheerful Jurassic Park is miles better than the grim, violent, soulless follow-up, The Lost World. Back to the Future is superior to the "darker" Back to the Future Part II. Regardless of how well they adapt the books, the joyful musical The Wizard of Oz is superior to the grim, distressing Return to Oz. And so on and so forth.

People counter with films like Empire Strikes Back. Is this really a superior film because everybody loses? Or is it a superior film because it is the best acted, best directed, best imagined, best scored, and best written of the SW films? Attack of the Clones is dark, but despite all the years of negative opinions, I've come to the conclusion that The Phantom Menace is actually more fun to watch.

So now we come to Potter. The darkest book so far, in my opinion, is probably Order of the Phoenix, since the students are so stressed out, and the climax so severe and the final knowledge so haunting. I think it is going to be the least-grossing of all of the Harry Potter films. Goblet of Fire is a tremendous assemblage of action set pieces, tailor made for wowing people in cinemas, and it has a whopper of an ending. If the original cast does not come back, the new cast might catch the blame for the film underperforming all the others, but the issue is the story. Sure it is "darker", maybe even "the darkest" of the HP books. Does that make it the best?

Let's just stick to the HP movies that have been made so far. Undoubtedly, the darkest is Chamber of Secrets -- I don't think there is any contest in that regard. I think more people seem to have enjoyed the first and third films more than the 2nd. And yet the second is darker - shouldn't it be better? No.

Discuss.
 

Craig Morris

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 10, 1998
Messages
195
I noticed the wavy lines in the blackness immediately. I actually swapped out the disc to try the Matrix just to see if I had some new intereference in my system. It is definitely the disc. I didn't note specific times, but it was all over the first ten minutes of the film when Harry runs away in the dark.
 

DanaA

Screenwriter
Joined
Nov 21, 2001
Messages
1,843
Only watched it once, but noticed neither the picture abnormalities, nor the numbers, but now that specific times have been listed, I'll go back and have a look.

Regarding the darkness of the film, they only reflect the movement of Rowlings work. This film had to be darker in order to transition into No. 4, my favorite thus far and a lot darker than POA.
 

Shane S.

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Aug 10, 2003
Messages
98


According to Video Buisiness

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban was on pace to reach the mark of 6 million units in first-day sales set by the franchise's last installment, Chamber of Secrets.

I believe the record is still Finding Nemo with 8 million but Id guess that 6 has to be a fair showing.
IMO one of the reasons that POA didn't do as well (not that it did all that bad) was the fact that they realesed it during the summer. To me the movies seemed like they fit better around the Holidays.

The real question is with a cost of 408 million how well will GOF do?
 

Ernest Rister

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2001
Messages
4,148
"Wow - I agree with Ernest on something. Cue the apocalypse."

We actually agree on far more than we disagree. We just have sharp pronounced disagreements on certain titles, as will happen between people with strong opinions on film.
 

Ernest Rister

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2001
Messages
4,148
"The real question is with a cost of 408 million how well will GOF do?"

*cough! sputter!*

Say what? That can't be right.
 

Walter Kittel

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 28, 1998
Messages
9,771
Several comments regarding the subject of darker material.

Scanning through the thread, I don't believe that anyone has expressly stated that the third film is better due to the darker tone of the material. Heck, there isn't even an concensus on the third film being darker than both of the previous entries. For myself, if I have any preference for the third film it has more to due with reasons already mentioned in this thread including the more assured performances of our young protagonists and the visual style of director Alfonso Cuaron.

I tend to believe that the notion of darker equates to better may be an adverse reaction to those Hollywood films that feel obligated to 'tack on' a happy ending no matter what has transpired previously. Of course, there is also the matter of personal preference given the subjective nature of film appreciation. Wonderful films exist in all genres and tones, so I don't believe that one form lends itself to excellence over another.

But then again I love noirs, so perhaps my opinion is biased. :)

- Walter.
 

TheLongshot

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 12, 2000
Messages
4,118
Real Name
Jason

Actually, I kinda think of II and III as one story, and in my mind the combination is pretty close to the original film in my mind.

Jason
 

Shane S.

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Aug 10, 2003
Messages
98


woops you are correct is actualy 308 million

"Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is also set to become the most expensive movie ever, with a current budget of $308 million."

Thats from Veritaserum.com I've read it several other places. A magazine article somewhere comes to mind they were comparing it to the fact that all 3 LOTR rings movies cost less.

ok I found this bit

The film, which starts production in April, will cost an estimated £170 million ($308 million), reports the Sunday Mail. That's £5 million ($10 million) more than the entire Lord of the Rings series.

Newell commented that directing a Potter picture carried huge responsibilities:

"I think of myself as being really lucky. I'm going to make the most expensive film there has ever been. These things are not like ordinary films they are world events. I have millions of 10-year-olds who must not be disappointed. Making Harry Potter is like being President of Brazil. It is a colossal undertaking."

A few other odd points are that they are pretty firm that this will be a single 2 and a half hour movie but they are still going to fit in the Quiditch World cup. Youd think if they were looking to trim fat from the book for the movie that would be a good place to start as many of the plot points could have been pretty easily explained away.
 

Sam Davatchi

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 15, 1999
Messages
3,150
Real Name
SamD

Wow, that’s a lot of money. What are they doing to spend that much? It’s just incomprehensible. Are they throwing money out of the window? If Lord of the Rings can do it, they should be able to do it for less money.
 

Sean Laughter

Screenwriter
Joined
Aug 3, 1999
Messages
1,384
I dunno, if any "fat" was going to be cut from Goblet I always assumed one of the challenges was going to go. I have to admit that Goblet is probably the book that least interests me from a sturctural standpoint. I just found it so mundane, once they get to school it's far too episodic because of the tournament plotline and you basically sit there waiting for the next challenge to roll around. I understand how you have to have a beginning, middle, and end to the tournament, but the story just feels padded to me because of it.
 

Don Solosan

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 14, 2003
Messages
748

Didn't Fox spend $500 million on Cleopatra (in adjusted dollars, according to the DVD released a few years ago)? They probably mean the highest budget ever green-lit. And who knows, maybe if the whole production team's incompetent/greedy/picky, they can beat Cleopatra!
 

JonZ

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 28, 1998
Messages
7,799
Theres seems to be some real problems with this disc.

I overspent and couldnt afford it last week. Glad I couldnt - Ill pick it up somwhere at a discount instead.
 

Sam Davatchi

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 15, 1999
Messages
3,150
Real Name
SamD
What I have seen in the dark scenes (no lines) is that the brightness changes suddenly from time to time! It's very annoying. Has this been mentioned?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar Threads

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,815
Messages
5,123,817
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top