Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with a bunch more HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN reviews... I swear, I'm not picking and choosing. All the positives are all I'm sent... And after having seen the film this afternoon, I can vouche for the below. It's a winner... But more on my views in the following day or two... For now, read on and be happy!!!
Hey Harry, just saw a nice Sunday afternoon advance of Harry Potter 3, and I can happily say that it is a great flick, as well as a gorgeous film. I won't go over the plot, you either read the books or you don't, but this is my favorite of the books, kind of like the Empire Strikes Back of the series, and it has a wonderfully dark film to represent it.
And this really is a dark film, but that fact makes it easily the best of the series so far. The whole film feel feels much more "realistic," relatively, of course. The whole world, London, the school grounds, even the kids' fashion has a much grittier and updated feel. It looses that awe and wonder that permeated the first two, and makes it feel like another year in the lives of these kids. In a perfect world the creators would already have their names engraved on the production design Oscar.
And the CGI is amazing! It's so seamless, easily the best since ROTK. The creature Buckbeak is a real achievement, the Dementors are very creepy and different enough from the Ring Wraiths not to distract. And the werewolf is awesome, Harry, you'll be very happy...
Gary Oldman only has a very small part, but is a presence throughout the film. Hopefully he has signed on for the future flicks. The actor who plays Lupin was not what I pictured from the book (you know how that is) but he definitely won me over by the end, and comes across as a very sympathetic character. The new Dumbledore isn't awful, but he's not Richard Harris, and has a much smaller part.
John Williams has sole score credit this time. The score itself is very subdued, but I guess when you make a good movie you don't need a bombastic score to make up for lack of real emotion. Outside of the established themes, the new material is mainly very light and effective variations of the "Something Wicked This Way Comes" theme used in the trailer.
The only thing you have to worry about in this film is watching these kids go through puberty before your eyes, but you get used to it after a while. I'm glad they've stuck with the same actors and allowed their natural progression to show instead of trying to control their ages with new actors every time.
If you have read the books you know all about the Back to the Future tricks at the end, but it's all faithful, and not in the same strict/boring adaptation style of the first two.
This is an amazing film, the Y Tu Yo Mama guy did a great job, and I just hope the new guy on HP4 can follow his lead.
Bud Fox
------------
Harry... been reading the site for years, but this is the first time I'm sending anything. I saw the new Harry Potter film earlier tonight in an advance screening. Thought you might like a review...
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
Direction - 3 (out of 4)
One thing that always bothered me in reviews of the first two films was the whining from people who said that Columbus stuck too close to the original books. Yet these same people seem to complain when someone alters elements of a book to fit into a film format. I felt Columbus did an excellent job on the first two films. Cuaron does an excellent job on this film as well... just in a very different way (I hope that makes sense).
It was clear that this film had a different director than the first two films. The film is darker, as befitting the story which (even in book form) was darker than the first two. Alfonso Cuaron, however, brings a different tone to the story and is less dedicated to including the full book in the film than Chris Columbus was. He does, however, deliver the story in a captivating and entertaining manner.
Acting - 3 (out of 4)
The young stars of the film are definitely growing up (Daniel Radcliffe's changing voice, as has been noticed elsewhere, is very striking) but the biggest change, of course, seeing a different actor as Dumbledor. Michael Gambon does a good job but the change, despite the best efforts of makeup artists, is very noticeable (for one thing, Gambon has a stockier face than Richard Harris... for another his voice is very different). It must never be an easy thing for an actor to take over someone else's part, but I didn't feel that Gambon conveyed the hidden strength that Harris brought. It was a different Interpretation of the part and I hope that, when the fourth film comes out, that Gambon nails the part and really makes it his own .
Gary Oldman as Silas Black didn't really work for me despite Oldman being an excellent actor. He seems too old for the part as well as -- well, just not being right for the part. David Thewlis deserves special notice for making the most of every moment he is onscreen as Professor Lupin. And I love any movie with the always hilarious Dawn French.
Arts - 4 (out of 4)
The quidditch scenes were probably delivered the best of any of the three films. Partly because the scene is not overplayed. The effects were excellent including excellent design of the dementors. John Williams delivered an excellent score, as always. Costumes, sets, and makeup were excellent (Emma Thompson, for example, is almost unrecognizable as Professor Trelawney).
Overall Reaction - 3 (out of 4)
One of my biggest problems with this film is the lack of feeling time passing. As with the first two films, the film depicts about a nine-month period of time. Despite establishing shots that show the passing of time, as a viewer I didn't feel that the passing of time was taking place. As delivered, it felt like the events take place over a few weeks. I don't see how the film could have been trimmed back much, but the film still felt a bit long and dragged out in places. The rugrats in the theater were getting anxious by the end of the film.
Overall, I recommend this film. It is, as stated above, a darker film than the first two and is rated PG. It is not really appropriate for very young children. Other than that I think most audiences will enjoy the film. It definitely left me looking forward to Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (although... how they will fit that story into one film is beyond me).
Total Score: 3.25 stars (out of 4)
Thanks,
Call me "Ungodly Sorrows"
--------------
Heya, Harry. Managed to catch the film today (Sunday) at 3 p.m.
Here's the oh-so-anticipated review:
"Only one will die tonight."
There's a very noticeable difference in the directing styles of Chris Columbus (Philosopher's Stone and Chamber of Secrets) and Alfonso Cuaron. This becomes evident as early as the Warner Bros. logo appearing on screen. The camera dollies through the two letters, which are dark and ominous (...which is kind of funny, thinking about it), into Dursleys' house, and specifically into Harry's bedroom.
The opening scenes at the Dursley house are quite a bit different from the previous two films, and establish the tone of the film quite well. Instead of being laughably bad cartoon characters, the Dursleys are a bit more real this time out. Mr. Dursley doesn't lash out at Harry for existing. When Harry wants a permission slip signed, it's obviously the older man doesn't like him, yet he still gets a very parental, "Perhaps if you behave." When Harry's aunt arrives for dinner and starts to scold him and his parents, he goes a bit with a crazy with the magic, pisses off his guardians, and essentially runs away.
Harry is whisked away by a magical bus that takes him to meet with the Minister of Magic. Along the way, he learns of Sirius Black, a murderer who's escaped from Azkaban prison. Arthur Weasley later tells him, "Now promise me that you won't go looking for Black," and Harry replies, "Why would I go looking for someone who wants to kill me?" By the time Harry finally meets Sirius, he strangles him to the ground and is quite really to murder him.
We're introduced to a new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, Lupin. David Thewlis isn't at all how I imagined him in Prisoner of Azkaban and Order of the Phoenix, but he really nailed the actions and motivations of the character. The way he speaks of Harry's parents and the sheer glee of watching Harry perform a spell to ward of the dementors is fantastic.
And this is probably what I like best about this film. It's a genuine film. Whereas Columbus' movies were essentially "A Year At Hogwarts: Part 1" and "A Year At Hogwarts: Part 2," Prisoner of Azkaban has a very definite beginning and ending. It's the story of Harry dealing with his parents' death, maturing, and dealing not only with Sirius Black but also with the Nazgul-like dementors. When that story is told, the movie ends. No end of year feast. No "Gryffindor wins the house cup!" Nothing. Just Harry.
The actors all fill their roles well. Danielle Radcliffe is leagues better than he was in the first film. Emma Watson can still nail Hermione, and I'll be honest in saying that for a 14-year-old, she's pretty damn attractive. Rupert Grint plays Ron very much the same as he did in Chamber of Secrets, but who cares when he once again shows how freaked out he is of spiders?
Michael Gambon plays Dumbledore very differently from the late Richard Harris. He's louder, quicker, and seems to enjoy life a bit more. Closer to the book, though it did take me a few scenes to work up to him. Not so much Gambon's fault as me being used to Harris' performance as the seasoned wizard.
Gary Oldman does well as Sirius, though he's only on screen for around fifteen minutes. When we first meet him, he's a raving lunatic, which definitely fits the situation. Once he calms down a bit, Oldman really nails the part and makes us very interested in the character.
All in all, I very much enjoyed Prisoner of Azkaban. It isn't going to win many Academy Awards, but it's a damn entertaining film with a good heart. Cuaron brought a much-appreciated approach to the series. It's darker, with greyer color palettes and more realistic characters. When Harry says "I hope he finds me. 'Cuz when he does, I'm going to kill him!" You believe it, and it's quite the evolution from the boy we saw in 2001.
Next up is Goblet of Fire, a book that's much greater in terms of
scope. Let's hope Mike Newell has half the same magic with the
material that Cuaron possesses.
-----------------
Hey C-Murda,
Long time, not enough talking. Glad you hipped me to FIGHT FOR YOUR LIFE. Gadzooks, what a fucking insane piece of insanity. I wish I had more time to write, but when do I not say that? Just the same, finals season is here, and I'm up to my fucking eyeballs in work. Add on top of that the smart-eyeing I'm getting from the rest of my department; look I know she's a TA, but we're both adults, what's the deal? Plus she's tall and blond, and I'm a man and she's a woman. I don't see a problem? One of my colleges is making my life more hellish, which is ironic because his last ex was 20 years younger than him (my girl's only eight). To swim in the sea of hypocrisy and irony must be sexy, or something. Well, let me just put it this way, never has tenure ever been so attractive yet felt so elusive. Speaking of dumb celebrity baby names, I happened to see HARRY POTTER: THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN the other day, and I want to write about it, but I'll have to make this a brief missive. You know if I had my druthers I'd make my tests all multiple choice, but that would surely get me laid off.
As you also probably know, this is the first non-Christopher Columbus directed Potter film (now directed by Alfonso Cuaron), and it brings Michael Gambon (so wonderful as Christopher Potter's SINGING DETECTIVE; Potter, POTTER? Someone get Oliver Stone on this) in for the zombified corpse of Richard Harris as Dumbledorf, the head of Hogwarts. It also introduces at least two new reoccurring characters (three if one makes the cut) with Emma Thompson taking up the role of tea leaf reading psychic Professor Sybil Trelawney, and Gary Oldman as Sirius Black, who may or may not have had something to do with the death of Harry's Parents. David Thewlis comes in as the new Dark Arts professor Lupin, who also has secrets (IIRC he pops up in at least THE ORDER OF THE PHEONIX). As you noted in you DVD Journal review on CHAMBER OF SECRETS, Cuaron is the shot in the arm this series needed, badly.
And what a difference a Cuaron makes! From virtually frame one, you can tell that master Cuaron is a director with a vision, someone who thinks about where to place his camera, and is always interested in involving and surprising the audience. From the intro of the WB logo, this is a different kind of film. One can also tell from the shrunken heads and the use of different midgets, his sensibility for the freakish has been influenced by Luis Bunuel and Alejandro Jorodowsky, while he also has his eye on silents, as many shots end with an iris in and fade out, while the WANTED posters for Sirius look like a silent film introduction of a mustachioed baddie. Which may make the film sound more adult; it isn't, or if it is, it's that the film is less cloying and obvious. Cuaron's visual sense is matched by his ability to get honest to goodness performances out of his leads. This is the first time Rupert Grint's Weasely didn't seem to be relegated to mugging for comic effect, and the trauma and tragedy of Harry Potter's blessed and cursed existence seems palpable. Thewlis's Lupin has numerous scenes where he acts a mentor to the young Harry, and those scenes have the warmth and generosity that radiates off screen. Though you know me and my father issues, this the first POTTER film that has non-caricatured performances.
That said, why hasn't anyone capitalized on the penetrating genius of David Thewlis? After fully fucking owning Mike Leigh's NAKED, one of the best and most underrated efforts of the 1990's, shortly thereafter he got sucked into Hollywood shinola, with stuff like DRAGONHEART and the awful (brilliantly awful, actually) ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU. An actor of his caliber should have more to show for ten years than a cameo as a bald giggling twerp in THE BIG LEBOWSKI. Thankfully this film may put him back on the map (though I don't know if Brannagh's similar turn helped him). Okay, let's say it doesn't, Hollywood, LISTEN
TO ME!: Have David Thewlis resurrect his character from NAKED and have him as either a Game show or Talk show host. Seriously. That would be the greatest TV show ever, especially if he could slip some fucks in. Have him talking to Cameron Diaz about her turn in SHREK 2, and then have that conversation devolve into the purpose of human existence and the possibility of an upcoming apocalypse while he insults her without that bubblehead ever noticing. Sure, people would look stupid, but goddamn it, it'd be the greatest and best television show ever. Ever. Ever.
Oh yeah, HP3; the change of directors makes John Williams score sound a bit out of whack at first, especially because Williams seems to be recycling so much. Maybe he's just a fuddyduddy now. Dunno. While old school players like Maggie Smith, and Robbie Coltrane don't seem to have that much to do, and though Dumbledorf gets a couple of scenes where he communicates hidden messages to Harry through adultspeak, his presence is muted, and it doesn't seem because they're embarrassed about the change of actors. In fact, if I were to draw a complaint about this film it would be that I wanted more. I could tell stuff that was left off screen from the book, and I missed much of it, while Gary Oldman (one of the world's best actors? Sure, why not) only has about thirty minutes of screen time (At most, and that's probably including his wanted poster), all at the conclusion. It's the nature of the story, and I appreciate the desire to movie it along, but little beats (like what Potter thought of to summon his Patronis) I wished were kept in. Perhaps Cuaron was too worried about following Columbus's cloying footprints.
And I guess if I were to pick at another thing - though this may be a problem with translating the book to the screen - Harry's not in as much danger in this book (or at least Cuaron didn't want to put him in harm's way as much as Columbus did), so the BACK TO THE FUTURE II conclusion (see it and believe it) has a muted quality lacking the Giant Snake/Voldemort death threats of the previous entries. But again, Cuaron's touch with actors makes most of the complaints feel like someone who wants to see a four hour movie version, instead of the fast two hours and sixteen minutes. But it's nice to see Emma Watson's Hermione Granger, Daniel Radcliffe's Harry Potter, and Rupert Grint's Ron Weasely actually drive a HARRY POTTER movie. And the Dementors and the Night Bus came out better than I expected.
Oh here's the plot: Harry potter comes back to school, where everyone's worried about Sirius Black, who's escaped from Azkaban (something no one's ever done before), and people are worried he's going after Potter, because he's thought to be a disciple of Lord Voldemort (Harry's sworn nemesis, and killer of Potter's parents). Fear of Sirius puts a clamp down on the school, while Hagrid is now teaching a course, to which asshole-ish Potter-hater Draco Malfoy (Eminem-ish Tom Felton) makes hell by offending a hypogriff. All the while Harry feels flummoxed by his near imprisonment from other's fear of Sirius, while a special map (another plot point payoff that the filmmakers must have been left for the DVD) leads Potter to freedom, and an awareness of an unsolved mystery. If my TA gets back from visiting her parents before opening weekend, I may try and catch it again then. But this is a damn good movie, the best of the series. And may always be, my thought on Mike Newell (helmer of HP4) is that he's a British Chris Columbus - though I'll always have a soft spot for DONNIE BRASCO.
Yours truly,
Pottser
---------------
Howdy all,
I just got back from a sneek preview of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (that's right, two weeks early!) and thought I'd be the first to let you know my thoughts on the film.
First off I want to say up front, I have not read any of the Harry Potter books (I've had too many good books turn out to be bad movies, so I don't read them anymore) and I'm not what you might call a huge Harry Potter fan. In preparation for seeing Azkaban I decided to watch Sorcerer's Stone (I had seen most of it but not all) and Chamber of Secrets (which I had not seen at all). I enjoyed both movies and was anxious to see what the third one would have in store.
In a way I wish I had read the book so I can tell you how the two compare story wise. But since I didn't, here's the basic outline (of which I'm sure most of you know) and what I thought of the story in general: As with the previous movies we first see Harry at home with his aunt, uncle and ever-so spoiled Dudley. While short this did show us again why Harry does not belong in a world of Muggles but with wizards like himself.
Before going off to school Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is informed (secretly, of course) by Ron Weasley's father that Sirius Black (Gary Oldman), a man seen on many a "Wanted" poster, has broken out of Azkaban prison and it seems that he broke out just to finish what his master (better not say his name) wanted to do, kill Harry.
When Harry arrives there is a new Defense against the Dark-Arts teacher who we later find out has a connection to Harry, amongst other things.
I could go on about the story but I'm afraid I'd give something away (but then again, a lot of you know the story and know what's going to happen so me saying it or not will hold no water).
The story as well as the style of Azkaban is much darker then the last two films. I belive that it's darker not only for reasons of the story but that this time around Harry and the gang have another director; Alfonso Cuarón (Chris Columbus steps back but stays on as a producer). Ever think the guy who directed Y tu mamá también would direct a Harry Potter movie? Me either. But he seems to do a good job with the material.
The cinematography this time around was diffrent as well. Michael Seresin (of Midnight Express, Fame and most recently The Life of David Gale fame comes on replacing Roger Pratt from Chamber of Secrets (and to any film buffs who want to know he replaced John Seale from Sorcerer's Stone. The look of the film goes very well with the more dark theme of Azkaban.
The acting was on par with the previous movies and if you ask me, Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson (still cute as ever) stand the chance of becoming fine adult actors (given that the take the right material). And I can't mention casting without saying something about the absence of late Richard Harris (died on October, 25 2002 from hodgkin's disease). Harris for me brought a scence of class to the previous Harry Potter movies. When he spoke, it was like hearing a man who had lived for hundreds of years and was wise beyond many of them. And while the new Albus Dumbledore (played by Michael Gambon) is good, he doesn't quite seem to have the touch that Harris did. He will be truly missed.
Over all Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban was a worthy successor in the series and is an all around good time. Good story, great acting, good special effects and good storytelling for me is what makes an enjoyable movie and this one definalty qualifys.
**** out of *****
Adam Portrais
(05-23-04)
