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

[Hank VT]

Amazon was using the 23rd but it diappeared a dew days ago, Ooops, spoke to soon. The 23rd is back on the site.

I loved this movie. My daughter, who read the book, did not like it that much. I did not read the book and have found that I enjoyed it a lot more than those who read the book.

I read two of the books and found them to be literary swill. But the movies are incredible. You can watch them over and over and not get tired of them.

 

[Ernest Rister]

"...and found them to be literary swill."

Then tell me where I can go get some more swill, because while the books are not The Greatest Achievement in English Literature, they are very entertaining and very imaginative and I've enjoyed them quite a bit. I don't think Rowling was out to displace James Joyce or William Shakespeare, I think she was trying to entertain her readers with vivid characters and strong plotting, and in that she has largely succeeded. Goblet of Fire, in particular, is a fantastic page-turner.

 

[Craig S]

Yeah, I'll line up at that trough as well!!

I agree on the loss of context of the Maurader's Map, the four friends and their animals. I enjoyed PoA the most of the three films - I think Cuaron captured the "magic" of the books far better than Columbus - but I sure wish he could have devoted a scene to this.

 

[Tim Glover]

Hope you enjoy the film Lou. Look forward to reading your thoughts.

 

[ChrisKe]

Watched this last night and I've gotta say this is the best of the three.

I loved the presence of the clocks all through the movie hinting as to what was going to come

The sets used for Hogwarts seem to be much more elaborate than the first two and the production design was noticeably better.

I just hope that Dan, Emma and Rupert can finish the series before they are too old to look out of place in the roles.

 

[Jeremy]

Nice review but I don't understand the need to slam J.K. Rowling. What terrible things has she done to earn to earn the label "infamous"?

 

[Elinor]

Famous, yes. Infamous? I dont' get that either.

I don't think that Rowling is a very good writer (in the strict literary sense), but I think her books ARE delightful, enchanting, and will be our generations' contribution to immortal childrens' literature. Yep, right up there with Winnie the Pooh and the Wizard of Oz and the rest of the Oz books. Immortal literature is about more than technical proficiency with language ... and that is the only element Rowling lacks. The stories (plots), characters, settings, themes ... all are fantastic.

Whoever called them swill I think may just be trolling ... I can't find the original post where it was said.

 

[Dome Vongvises]

I'll be getting it. And the other two as well.

 

[Herb Kane]

I didn’t slam the author – anything but, in fact. Actually my use of the word “infamous” was really more tongue-in-cheek than anything else. But from what I’ve read, she has become increasingly more difficult to work with, with each passing project, hence my use of the word with respect to her reputation.

 

[CarlosL]

I, too, noticed the "302" pop up. I have no clue what it is -- or for that reason, why it's even there. Strange...anyone got a screenshot?

 

[Brandon Conway]

Ernest - about your "animal" complaint: Apparently, they intentionally postponed the revealing of that information to the 4th film for one reason or another.

 

[Joe Caps]

I am a big Harry Potter fan and I saw this film in four different theaters, hoping to catch a good print, but in each theater, I thought the film looked pretty poor with noticeably bad flesh tones.
the other thing I thought was strange was the time element. I don't remember if Rowling mentions WHEN this is all taking place, but from the look of the first two film, I thought perhapes the yearas after world war II or the early fifties. Whether I'm right or wrong, there was a timeless quality to it.
In this third film, the three kids are wearing clothes they picked up that mnorning at WalMart with jeans and pullover tee shirts. Nothing wrong with that but it doesn't match the looks or characters from the first two films. This third film seems to happen in the worlds longest digital rainstorm ever, with only one or two shot happening in the sunlight.

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

I could be wrong about this, but I remember reading somewhere that the first book was set in the early 90s (presumably when JKR started writing, or at least thinking about, the story). Here is a timeline based on a similar theory, but I can't vouch for its authenticity.

 

[Elinor]

I always thought it was more like the late 90's ... remember all the kids drooling over the new "Nimbus 2000" in the window at Diagon Alley?

I don't think they were popularizing items with "2000" in the name in the early 90's ...

 

[RogerH]

I'm a late comer to the series I had to see the first two movies on DVD. However since then I have read all the books released thus far and saw POA on release day in the theatres. While I really enjoyed all 3 the latest one just had something that made me enjoy it even more than the others. So I'll be getting this on tuesday for sure.

 

[Ben_@]

There's nothing explicitly stated in the books or the movies as to when the story takes place. And in that regard, the Columbus films are a little more "timeless" (in that they don't have a definite time setting).

Alfonso Cuaron explains in some of the making of material that he wanted to show the wizards in training as real kids, just like people the audience may know. Therefore he dressed them in Muggle clothes. He also altered the student uniforms to feel more modern. I've heard from a few HP fans that the modern clothes were a bad move, because supposedly real wizards wouldn't bother with muggle clothes unless they were in disguise.

As a fan of the films first, i didn't really have a problem with his changes.

 

[Ernest Rister]

"But from what I’ve read, she has become increasingly more difficult to work with."

If they continue leaving out salient points of emotional and narrative information like the meaning behind Harry's patronus, maybe Rowling has a right to be increasingly difficult.

 

[Steve Tack]

The first book has a mention of Dudley playing computer games, though there are very few references that tie things to a specific time period. I think the idea is that it's "present day" so that kids can relate to it a bit more.

 

[Matt Thompson]

Well, Nearly Headless Nick died in 1492, and Chamber of Secrets featured his "500th Deathday Party," so I'd assume the books span from 1991 - 1997. Doesn't explain how Dudley was lucky enough to get a PlayStation in 1994, but hey, what can ya do?

 

[Sam Davatchi]

This is not true. In the first movie, you clearly see modern cars outside of the houses at the beginning.