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

[Edwin Pereyra]

Mike Newell (Four Weddings and a Funeral, Pushing Tin, Mona Lisa Smile) is directing Potter 4, which started filming in March.

~Edwin

 

[Ernest Rister]

Which is an odd choice for an action-heavy film, to say the least. I would have gone with - yes - Michael Apted (The World is Not Enough) over Mike Newell. It really makes no sense to me...other than there is the beginnings of the eventual (inevitable) romantic relationships in Goblet. Was Mike hired more for the dancing than the dragon?

 

[Kevin Grey]

 

[Kevin Grey]

When Newell was hired there was still strong Oscar buzz on Mona Lisa Smile so I think they felt like they were scoring a little higher than they ended up with.

Newell will likely do a fine job but I seriously doubt that he'll be able to nail the visual aspect like Cuaron. Which is a shame because there's some damn fine imagery in Goblet of Fire.

Hopefully they get a bit more inventive again when looking for Phoenix. I won't be surprised if they make a play for Cuaron again after the great reaction to Azkaban.

 

[Ernest Rister]

I agree, KG.

 

[Ricardo C]

Cuarón said he was also offered Gobblet initially, but that taking that gig too would have meant going into pre-production while still working on Azkaban, so he opted to only do one film this time around. Only after he passed on it, did they approach Newell. IIRC, Cuarón said he might return down the line.

 

[Max Leung]

I enjoyed it too for the same reasons...good humour without resorting to too many gags. And visually I found it very well done. I very much liked how the twisting tree was used as a device for the passing of time. And the owl sailing from autumn to winter was very well done. Kudos to the cinematography is in order here! Well done!

About halfway through the movie I was reminded of The Empire Strikes Back. I'm not sure...maybe it was John William's score? Or maybe the banter between Ron and Hermione? Somehow my subconscious picked up on the similarities, but I can't put a finger on it...a re-viewing is in order.

And BTW, I did find Chamber of Secrets a real chore to get through. I liked the first half or so of that movie, but it just dragged and dragged as it got to the end. Maybe I was just too tired that day. I will have to buy that DVD (it's only $17 CDN now!).

 

[Ernest Rister]

I think the worst part of the Harry Potter mythos - in all of the books and movies - is that moment when the Phoenix comes flying in carrying the sorting hat, which magically contains a sword in Chamber of Secrets. From that point on, no matter what happens to Harry, we're all going to be expecting the Phoenix, in one form or the other. The fact that the books go to part seven tells us Harry is going to survive unitl book Seven (and perhaps no further). But no worries in part 4, 5, or 6...like an Indiana Jones film, you realize an hour in that Indy is not going to get killed, and therefore, the suspense wears off. HP at Book 5 did the same for me. It just started getting boring.

Blah blah blah Dursleys blah blah blah magic enounter on Privet drive blah blah blah repurcussions blah blah blah off to a new location blah blah blah going back to school blah blah blah early hints and first day at school blah blah blah and so on and so forth...

 

[Phil L]

Amazing to see what a real director can do with this series.

 

[Ernest Rister]

Har har...and a real story, too...no phoenix dropping a sword out of a hat this time around...

 

[Ernest Rister]

There was a bonus at the end of Chamber of Secrets as well.

 

[Ernest Rister]

"Chris Columbus, who made the first two Potter films, remains as producer but replaces himself as director with Alfonso Cuaron, director of the wonderful "A Little Princess" (1975) and the brilliant "Y Tu Mama Tambien." Cuaron continues the process, already under way in "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets," of darkening the palette. The world of the first film, with its postal owls and Quiddich matches, seems innocent now, and although there is indeed a Quiddich match in this film, it's played in a storm that seems to have blown in from "The Day After Tomorrow." I like what Cuaron does with the look of the picture, but found the plotting a little murky; just when we should be focusing on exactly who Sirius Black is and why he killed Harry's parents, there is the sudden appearance of a more interesting if less important character, Peter Pettigrew (Timothy Spall), a real rat who undergoes a change of purpose.

The actors playing Harry, Ron and Hermione have outgrown their childhoods in this movie, and by the next film will have to be dealt with as teenagers, or replaced by younger actors. If they continue to grow up, I'm afraid the series may begin to tilt toward less whimsical forms of special effects violence, but on the other hand I like Radcliffe, Grint and Watson, and especially the way Watson's Hermione has of shouldering herself into the center of scenes and taking charge. Although the series is named for Harry, he's often an onlooker, and it's Hermione who delivers a long-delayed uppercut to the jaw of Draco Malfoy.

Unlike American movies such as "Spy Kids," where the young actors dominate most of their scenes, the Harry Potter movies weave the three heroes into a rich tapestry of character performances. Here I savored David Thewlis as a teacher too clever by half, Emma Thompson as the embodiment of daffy enthusiasm, Alan Rickman as the meticulously snippy Snape, Robbie Coltrane as the increasingly lovable Hagrid, and Michael Gambon, stepping into the robes and beard of the late Richard Harris as Dumbledore.

Is "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" as good as the first two films? Not quite. It doesn't have that sense of joyously leaping through a clockwork plot, and it needs to explain more than it should. But the world of Harry Potter remains delightful, amusing and sophisticated; the challenge in the films ahead will be to protect its fragile innocence and not descend into the world of conventional teen thrillers."

--Roger Ebert

 

[Robert Crawford]

This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" please, post all comments, links to outside reviews, film and box office discussion items to this thread.

All HTF member film reviews of "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" should be posted to the Official Review Thread.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.


Crawdaddy

 

[Lynda-Marie]

Hi, all, please excuse a newbie who is just learning the forum!

My take on Chris Columbus is that he was the right director for the job - not only that he is a bankable director [the stats above by Kevin Grey for how much his films have made is the main point ANY studio would think about], but also in his experience in dealing with child actors. Case in point, he was able to deal not only with cute as a button Macaulay Culkin, as well as Culkin's Stage-Parent-From-Hell father/manager. I understand that Daniel Radcliffe's parents were initially hesitant to even let him audition for the role, but Chris was able to prove to them that he would look after Daniel and make sure that he would not get bored or burned out.

Warner Brothers managed to sign the movie rights to a real publishing phenomenon. Thus, the decision to follow the books closely was probably a no-brainer. They had a beloved series at their disposal, so changing the setting was not an option. Unlike some Hollywood adaptations, wherein the only thing the movie keeps is the title and maybe the names of the characters [Lawnmower Man, anyone?]
One rumor I read before the release of Sorcerer's Stone was that someone considered setting the books in an American high school, and the characters would be older.

Warners made, what for them, was the only logical choice: be true to the books. Ms. Rowling is in a highly enviable position for many authors, in that she has a lot of say in HOW the books are adapted, as well as WHO will play WHOM.

WadeB, the movies are made with the intent that they will be enjoyable for those folks who have read the books and watched the first two movies, as well as those who have done neither. My friend Don's little brother went with us last night and he enjoyed it immensely, even though he claimed he did not WANT to see a "kiddie" movie. Let that be your answer. Oh, and if you do enjoy this movie, rent the first two and watch them.

Myself, I have read and re-read the books several times, and seen all three of the movies [so far] on their opening days. Even though I sounded like a raving fangirl, grumbling about many details they compressed out of the movie, I still enjoyed it greatly.

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

Which line are you talking about?

I really am surprised that Roger Ebert failed to realise the aging of the characters ius intended. I mean, don't they all end with people celebrating the end of year, and Harry going back home to Privet Drive? How much clearer does it need to be?

 

[Stephen_L]

Cuaron really got the story right. In reading the books I always envisioned the wizarding world being a slightly dark ominous place. One of the elements of humor is that the magical characters move within this macabre world as if its all routine. That elevates the wonder Harry feels as he sees these things for the first time and also defuses the frights (the Hogwarts students blandly ignore ghosts hovering around their dinner table). It also means that when real beauty is revealed it shines the brighter. Columbus made the Potter world too child friendly; think Care Bears rather than Snow White. The colors were all story-book bright, Williams soundtrack too twee and cute, Hogwarts was Disneyland not a carnival fun house. It all seemed rather condescending not just to the story but to kids. One reason so much of early Disney is so good is that it includes real fear and darkness and Disney trusted kids to handle it. Cuaron's world more closely fit my own vision. My major complaint with the film was it was too short. I don't mind the cutting of nonessential portions, another plus for Cuaron's film, but I found many moments where I wish a little more time could be spent with certain characters and situations. Cuaron took the time to let Harry soar over Hogwarts on the hippogriff, but we had no time to share Hagrids terrible sadness that the creature would be destroyed. Too little time to meet and care more for Lupin (who is probably my favorite character in the book) and see how good a teacher he was to Harry. To little explanation of Lupins history with Harry's father, Black, etc. Complaints aside, "Prisoner" is by far the best film of the series and I'm disappointed that Cuaron won't be helming my favorite Potter book, "Goblet of Fire".

 

[Patrick Sun]

To be honest, the 3rd act felt a little bit like a Star Trek time travel story, or a bit of "12 Monkeys" thrown in as well.

I dug the hand-held camera work at the beginning of the film (there's a lot of it all throughout the film), but it said to me that this was going to be a much more involving viewing experience. Cuaron has a way to setting up situations that easily wring the humor from them, and can exploit the relational ties that bind even in times of confusion and stress. The camera rarely stayed stationary unless it absolutely had to, and the camera didn't move aimlessly, but with purpose.

I admit to having a hard time staying awake in either of Columbus's 2 HP films, they just plodded along, and sometimes it felt like the resolution relied on deus ex machina devices just to wrap things up. The 3rd film just sparkles and demands your attention from the get-go. Kudos to Cuaron for living up to the hype (I'm also a big fan of his "Y Tu Mama Tambien" and if HP was made with hispanic actors, I would have loved to seen how a young Gael Garcia Bernal would have done as Harry).

 

[Chris]

I really enjoyed it; though, admittedly, I enjoy the books and am glad it's something I get to share with my children & nieces / nephews.

This is not my favorite book of the series (Goblet of Fire, the next book, is) but I enjoy all of them for what they are.. escapist fantasy as detectives, and it reminds me so much of the joys of "The Hardy Boys" type books I read as a kid.

This movie stayed largely true to the book (the beginning was munged a bit) and the performances were well done.

Now, all we need is for JKR to announce when the next book will hit

 

[Ernest Rister]

"sometimes it felt like the resolution relied on deus ex machina devices just to wrap things up."

They do - it's a failing of both "Order of the Phoenix" and most notably, "Chamber of Secrets" (a bird flying in to save the day, clasping a hat containing a sword). But in Columbus' defense, that's straight out of the book.

Did you guys know Spielberg's idea was to combine "Philosopher's Stone" and "Chamber of Secrets" into one movie? Harry speaking "parslemouth" in Book one leads to the duel in book to leading to the battle with the Basilisk. Voldemort beng revivied via the diary would lead to Voldemort hunting after the stone...in the Chamber of Secrets. Rowling rejected the idea of streamlining both into one, and therefore, rejected Spielberg.

 

[JonZ]

I liked it but have 4 complaints. I really liked the scenery, especially around Hogawarts this time around.Also liked the changes in location of The Willow and Hagrids cabin. There was a HUGE difference in direction

Dumbledore was much different of course. While I kind of miss Richard Harris'frailer character - Cambon brings more power to the role.

This film flew by. I Would have liked another 20 minutes. Maybe on the DVD.

My Complaints:
1.The FX were alot worse this time around.Buckbeack was pretty impressive, but most wasnt. The Basilisk was much more awesome than anything here.
2.Worst werewolf design Ive ever seen.It really looked bad.
3.Wasnt The Grim supposed to be larger,bearlike?(Its been awhile since i read the book). I always pictured it more like American Werewolf from London but black.
4.TERRIBLE closing freezframe of Hary on his broom. YUCK!


"The best compliment I can give Columbus is that after watching the first movie I immediately went out and read all of the books."

Me too. Actually until I saw the first film on DVD, Id never ever heard of Harry Potter:b

Ratings out of 4:star:s
HP&SS :star: :star: :star: :star:
HP&COS :star: :star: :star:
HP&POA :star: :star: :star:

IMHO Goblet will probally be the best film of the bunch. Any projected release date yet?