*** Official HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[JonZ]

"Philosopher's was fantastic in it's sense of wonder, aided a lot by it being the first to film and in the series - it's always easier to ditch emotional and plot baggage when there's a lot of introduction to be done, so many things to be seen for the first time. However, each scene felt hacked together, and the story told almost as if someone reading it did so in monotone and abruptly stopped after each chapter, taking several seconds to turn the page, and then to begin again in monotone."

Since it was the first film I think they really went out of their way to be faithful to the book. I think as the series progresses we'll see more license with the material,as we did in HP&POA(especially as the books have gotten longer).

My rating of HP&SS over the others may be due to the fact that I didnt read the books before seeing the film and was suprised how much I enjoyed it.

 

[Galen_V]

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchi...arrypotter.htm

Good News: Box Office Mojo estimates a take of $92.64 million dollars this weekend, beating out the opening weekends for the previous two movies.

"Bad" News: Azkaban put up a much poorer Saturday than was originally expected (had the Friday numbers held up it would have been on pace for somewhere around 100-115 million); in fact, it had a weaker Saturday than the previous two movies. Granted those two opened with little competition during Thanksgiving, but a drop of 17.7% is still pretty startling.

 

[Sean Bryan]

Well, I enjoyed this quite a bit. Very well done. Definitely the best of the three, in my opinion.

I'm a fan of the books, and I liked the first two films. But this film just had a better "feel" to it all the way through for me.

The young teen actors' improved acting skills certainly helped, as did the the new direction. Of course, the story (as adapted from the book) is simply a better story also.

Being a book fan, there is always the PERSONAL CHALLENGE to let go of the book and enjoy the film for what it is instead of demanding that the movie is simply "the book on film". As someone who enjoys books, films, and a films adapted from books, it can be tough at times to learn to let yourself separate the two.

I didn't have any problems with plot elements being lost in the adaptation. But with ALL THREE films, the things I missed the most are some of the little character elements that just make you care that little bit more about the outcome of the story.

Still, I think this one did a pretty good job at touching on the most important character stuff.

We got:

Harry doubting his personal strength because he passes out when the Dementors were near, but the others didn't.

Harry dealing with the Slytherins making fun of him because of the above issue.

Harry having to hear his mother being killed when in the presence of Dementors (though I wish they emphasized this a bit more).

Harry's anger that Black was a friend of the Potters and betrayed them, and his resolve to kill Black.

The Bond developing between Lupin and Harry.

The antagonism between Ron and Hermione and the tiniest of seeds of some budding teenage attraction between them (though I would have liked to have seen a bit more arguing between them about stuff other than whether Crookshanks ate Skabbers).

Hagrid's anxiety about doing well as a professor (though this was just touched on).

Fred and George Weasley came across so much better in this film. They had that sense of likability and mischievousness that I just didn't feel came across in the other films.

Harry's joy at the thought that he wouldn't have to live with the Dursleys anymore and would be living with a Wizard who was a good friend of his parents. Then this possibility of a better life is just as quickly yanked away from him when Pettigrew (who is the only proof of Black's innocence) escapes.

Harry thinking his father has somehow come from the beyond to help him and then having the excitement/expectation that he would get to see his father. Only he then realizes that it was Harry himself who saved him and not his father. But this moment of disappointment is also blended with a new sense of self confidence that he could stand up to the Dementors, and he conjures up one hell of a Patronus!

Harry, who never had much of a sense of family connection with any adults, gets the possiblity of two new adults becoming part of his life that were close to his parents and almost like family. By the end of the film, both are taken away from Harry.


So the high points were definitely there for me.



As for things I thought could have used more fleshing out:

Hermione's exaustion at taking on such a heavy course load. This was touched on, but just briefly. Since it was the reason that she was given the Time Turner at the begining of the year by Dumbeldor, it think they should have played this up just a bit more than the fun stuff they did with her appearing in classes a few times.

A bit more information shedding light on the antagonistic relationship between Snape and the Potter/Black/Lupin/Pettigrew click would have been nice. In my opinion, this kind of information is important for character motivation.

Explaining that being an Anamagus is difficult and not very common and that Anamagi need to be REGISTERED with the Ministry of Magic would have helped add a bit more significance to what Black and Pettigrew can do (and also help explain how Black escaped).

I always thought that how Potter, Black, and Pettigrew taught themselves to be (unregistered) Anamagi during their Hogwarts years so that they could be with Lupin when he turned into a werewolf and would typically hangout in the Shrieking Shack during the "wolfing out" (thus helping with it's reputation as a "haunted house") was a great story element that tied these characters' pasts to the present story elements was really cool and nicely written. Unfortunately, all of this was lost in the adaptation. And this information could have been given in probably no more than one minute of exposition. That was frustrating.

In relation to the above, it would have been nice to learn that the four names on the Marauder's Map (Mooney, Wormtail, Padfoot, and Prongs) were Lupin, Pettigrew, Black, and Potter. People who didn't read the book and can pick up on small details in the film may have been able to figure out that Lupin = Mooney (werewolf - Moon, get it?), Pettigrew = Wormtail (Scabbers the rat), and Padfoot = Black (dog). That Lupin seemed to know the Map was definitely a clue to the audience that it had been his. But I doubt anyone would be able to realize that Prongs was James Potter and that he was also an Anamagus. His form was a Stag, which is what Harry's Patronus looked like. Very cool, and just slightly hinted at in the film. But I'd imagine that this great character/plot point was lost on 99% of the audience who didn't read the book.

A bit more back and forth between Lupin, Black, and Pettigrew about how and why he betrayed the Potters would have been nice.


So as far as book stuff that didn't make it to the film that I missed, I think most all of it is related to this one element that has all kinds of great character stuff associated with it but isn't absolutely necessary for the movie adaptation. The history of the Marauder's Map, the four friends (one a werewolf and the other three learning a very difficult Wizard skill to be with him), Snape's history with those fellows, and how this ties into the events of this story is what I think would have made this a near perfect adaptation if it had been included. The frustrating thing is that this information could have been given in probably under 5 minutes (you can do A LOT in 5 minutes in a film).

The one little thing that could have been done which I think was a missed opportunity was ending with Harry learning that Sirius Black sent Hogwarts a signed permission slip giving him permission to go to Hogsmead. Even being considered an evil, escaped prisoner by the rest of the Wizarding World, he is still Harry's Godfather and has the authority to grant that permission. I thought that was such a great touch when I read that in the book, and I was expecting that in the film. Especially since they set it up by saying how only a legal guardian could sign the form and it would have taken 10 seconds at the end before he gets his new broom.

Oh well. I choose to focus more on how much the movie got right and I'll enjoy it for what it is instead of what it isn't. This is definitely my favorite of the three by far, and I can't wait to see it again.

 

[Dome Vongvises]

Props to whoever said this first, but I do feel that there are a lot of deleted scenes out there. Personally, I could live with a three hour cut, but then again I don't start drinking till late either.

 

[Joel C]

Sean-

I agree with you 100% about the history of the map. I felt the same way about the under use of Ginny in CoS. Just add in a few minutes of footage or exposition and the story flows much more smoothly. Really explain what happened, how Pettigrew framed Sirius, that would have been nice too.

As it was, I liked it the best of all the films but I still didn't think the story flowed all that well. As has been said, Rowling's books are mysteries that always add up in the end, and I feel Steve Kloves and both directors haven't always been good judges of what "clues" are the most important. This is why I fear for Goblet of Fire as a cohesive story. I think they'll try to cram in the Quidditch World Cup and everything else and leave out too many of the character moments and motivations.

I also don't like the way Cauron handled the dementors. I don't think he got them right, implying they went around sucking souls all the time like that, instead of really focusing on the way they leech happiness from a person. He needed to focus on Harry's horrible memories (i.e. the reason for his fear).

All in all, though, it was enjoyable. There were no horrible parts, like the last 30 minutes of CoS with the horrible talky scene with Tom Riddle ("Yes, Potter, it was I who... snore") or the "Yay, Hagrid!" ending, which is possibly one of the most saccharine things ever filmed.

 

[Kevin Grey]

I think this was mentioned earlier but evidently there was little cut footage for this one. Supposedly all of the major cuts were made at the script stage so they were never filmed.

 

[David Forbes]

I'm pretty sure Buckbeak wasn't done by ILM.

 

[Galen_V]

Well, there HAS to be one about Hagrid telling the kids about Buckbeak's hearing before he tells them that he lost. The kids played the scene like they already knew he had to go to London for the hearing, but it is never mentioned earlier in the movie (nor is it mentioned that they helped him with the case).

Another thing that no one has mentioned yet is that the Quidditch game would have been a great time to introduce us to Cedric Diggory, as most of us know that he plays a rather large role in Goblet. However, seeing as no one was cast in the role to begin with, there obviously isn't a deleted scene.

Also, maybe it was just me, or did anyone else see Sir Cadogan running around the paintings in the background during the Fat Lady slashing?

 

[DustinC]

You're right, Cuaron said in this week's Entertainment Weekly that there really isn't any deleted footage because, as Kevin already said, it was simply cut from the script before even filmed.

 

[Dome Vongvises]

Makes you wonder why.

 

[Chad R]

No, it makes perfect sense to trim as much as you can in the script stage to save money on shooting extraneous footage. More films should do this.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

This was my only problem with the execution of the Dementors. I can understand not hearing the parents' death so as to ensure the PG rating, but it was key to their terror.


Perhaps my favorite moment of the film was the long shot of Lupin walking out through the empty classroom with his briefcase. It really conveyed the loneliness and isolation of his condition.

 

[Patrick Sun]

In the EW article, Kloves (screenwriter) and Cuaron wanted to focus on the main theme of the film, and excise as much as possible while still delivering a satisfying installment of the Harry Potter saga. Once the cuts were done in the script stage, it made for less excessive footage being filmed.

 

[Kevin Grey]

I think they are holding the relationship between the four and Snape for one of the later films. It will likely be prominently highlighted in Phoenix since Snape's relationship to the four comes to the forefront.

 

[Kevin Grey]

*Double Post*

 

[Dan Paolozza]

I agree with you Jon, and I even think it was the prudent way to go - my main point is that I'm SO glad that we're getting some more meat to the cinematography and ambience...and I suppose I'm also saying it could have begun in part 2.

I found this movie to be just as jam-packed and breakneck as Philosopher's Stone, but the scene transitions, story focus and passage of time executed with much more skill - personally, I feel they're hardly comparable in this respect.

When the first installment came out, I was pretty twitchy about anything being dropped or altered from the book. After the second page-to-screen job (Chamber), I was anxiously anticipating some altered and well-edited content. Chalk me up as one of those people who doesn't need a visual play-by-play of the books.

In my opinion, Cauron found the essence of the story, focused well on it, packed in as many "little side moments" as he could (Lupin's repetitive chocolate remedy), and I found his interpretations extremely satisfying.

 

[Mark-W]

How many people heard grumbling after the film was over?

As I was leaving the theater, I heard several people say,
"What a dissappointment." and so on.

I wonder if this is going to be a case of a film better regarded by cinephiles but less so with the casual movie-going public.

I have not read the books,--I plan to, soon.--,
but I do think that I miss the time taking dealing
with "insignificant details" in the first two films
that helped me feel immersed in a wizards' world.

The scene with Julie Cristie comes to mind, and
I agree that, based on the comments mentioned before me, that it was not clear to me
that Emma Thompson's character was a "fraud,"
and we didn't really get
to know her the way we got to meet the other profs
from the earlier films; I even felt I had a better
sense of the professor who taught gardening in
Chamber of Secrets.

As for James being a buck, I just thought that
was a nod to Princess Mononoke,
No seriously,I did think there was some more
powerful wizard conjuring the Patronus,
so that all worked as it should have...
Maybe like the snake in the first film which
reveals Harry is a Parcelmouth in the second film,
the buck will take on additional meaning
when James's animal form is revealed in a later film.

 

[L. Anton Dencklau]

..

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

Compared to Matrix Reloaded's estimated $10M Wednesday night haul prior to its official Thursday opening, Azkaban's midnight showing take is so inconsequential that it is not even broken down in any of the trade newspapers.

~Edwin

 

[Kevin Grey]

I don't know- my wife, who didn't really enjoy either of the first two and hasn't read the books, thought this one was significantly better. Can't say I heard much grumbling in the theater either- the audience seemed to enjoy it based on their reactions to what was happening on the screen.