Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

Surpasses other Potter's

There was an outcry from Potter purist and loyalist when they found out that Christopher Columbus(co-producer with Mark Radcliffe and David Heyman) was going to be replaced by Alfonso Cuaron as director of Azkaban. While their concerns weren't misplaced their fears were ultimately unfounded. Cuaron did an excellent job of taking the baton from Columbus after Chambers Of Secrets.

Another directorial problem being that young wizards grow up with all the adolescent complexities associated. To not take this into account would cheapen Azkaban. Cuaron's directing style handled this well too! His style suits the maturing actor just fine and this gave justice to this seasoned director taking over the reins. I understand that our junior actors, to the more seasoned one's delight, were more pleasurable to work with because of this maturity. So this became a win-win situation for all, rather than a liability.

As with the previous Potter movie's Azkaban isn't sparse with special effects. In fact, in my opinion there are too many. But, in some cases the special effects are necessary to be truer to the Rowling's writings. I heard that the creative team took many liberties with the Azkaban story, but he certainly left enough to favor the throng of Potter fans as evidence by laughs in places only a true Potterite( can I say that?) would let loose with guffaws.

Still, I had wished that the effects had been toned down slightly. For instance, I didn't see the need to have two transparent horsemen flying in and out between rows of tables in the main dining room at every opportunity. They were simply a loud and distracting ruckus. But, the subtle floating candles and the living newsprint, parchment and paintings were as one reviewer put it "art" in itself.

I also think that one CGI animal per flick should be the limit. After seeing Van Heilsing earlier this year, I feel bloated by this effect. Again, the story demanded the use of CGI, but then again, did it? There is one really cool CGI pegasus-like creature who I enjoyed for it's originally and spirit, but I could've done without the others.

What I'm trying say here, is give the fans more story and less WOW. I think the Potter fan base is large enough and smart enough to absorb more details and even intrigue. And, to be fair to the scriptwriter(Steve Kloves), there was a level of complexity to the storyline at points, but it wasn't easily digested by someone who doesn't have intimate knowledge of the Potter book series. It was as if some responsibility should be given to the box office to supply it's patrons with "A Muggle's Primer To Potter."

Can I be pleased? Yes, just a little less special effects(WOW) and a little more of a thinking person's script.

The story itself, being based on the popular and hugely successful englishwoman writer J.K Rowling(of whom I am so envious of), is of course known to millions of her fans throughout the world(esp. United Kingdom and the United States). I hardly have to rehash the plot here, but in a nutshell it's about an escaped prisoner, Sirus Black(Gary Oldman) who seeks some type of retribution on our marked wizard Harry(Daniel Radcliffe). Throughout the story, Potter meets up with his friends, Ron Weasley( Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger(Emma Watson) for a third year at Hogswort.

There's a delicious preface that takes place at Potter's Aunt(Pam Ferris) and Uncle(Richard Griffiths) before this reunion takes place, but at Hogwart's Potter and his friends meet some new and old professors, new(Draco,Snape) and old enemies plus new and old mascots. Emma Thompson(Sense and Sensibility) steals the show as Professor Sybil Trelawney. They also learn a few new spells which come in especially handy throughout the score. A lot of this is not new, but it's novel due to Cuaron's spin on things. It sort of reminds me of the way Tim Burton came along to the Batman series and changed the we saw that franchise. Some will like the stylings and others won't.

I can say for certain that Azkaban adds a new spin to the way the motion picture industry adapted Ms. Rowling tale. It's bold, mature and still rings true to the series. As with the novel, both old and young(and young at heart) can share in this continuing drama. There aren't really any inappropriate scenes for children, but there are frightening scenes that younger will probably marvel more than shy away from. Some of the youngster will get part that the adult will miss and vice versa. That how well this story is blended for a wide audience of viewer. It's a testament to all involved in this project that such artistry was accomplished with so few flaws. Highly Recommended for all ages.

******
Update: This update concerns a caution about the ages that should view Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. My first assessment was that the content deemed PG by the motion picture association may be borderline PG-17. From some preliminary research it seeems that Ages 9 and up are most appropriate for viewing Azkaban, but use commonsense when taking children and know what you kids can handle.

See this link at Boston.comhttp://www.boston.com/ae/movies/articles/2004/06/04/prisoner_might_be_too_scary_for_young_viewers?mode=PF