The Harry Potter franchise is maintaining a high standard

Rating: 8/10 (11 December 2005)

Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) has entered his fourth year at Hogwarts' school of witchcraft and wizardry. Both him and his best friends Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson) are into their teenage years and are having to face the trials and tribulations that come with them. Harry will face a greater trial than either of them, though, when he is selected to perform in the deadly Tri-Wizard tournament...
One thing that has struck me about the adaptations of J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter books is that they have just kept on getting better with age. The Prisoner Of Azkaban was an improvement over the Chamber Of Secrets, which in turn was an improvement over the disappointing Philosopher's Stone.
I knew that Mike Newell had a hard act to follow when he took the responsibility of bringing The Goblet Of Fire to the screen. After all, according to yours truly, Alfonso Cuaron had not only improved "on (Chris) Columbus's (two) Potter instalments more than we could have expected", but he had created "a Potter film that truly stands on its own." The bad news is that the run of improvement seems to have come to a halt. The good news is that The Goblet Of Fire really is no worse than the last instalment. I can't say that it stands too well on its own (indeed, character familiarity will help) but this is a very minor complaint. This is a fast moving and energetic adventure capable of being enjoyed by all members of the family.
It's as if Newell realised that he would not be able to match the dark atmosphere Alfonso Cuaron created - indeed, I have heard that he did not have as big a budget to work with - but he has focused on his skills with actors, personal issues and storytelling. Despite a slow start to the film, those skills are very much in evidence.
The problems associated with adolescence are dealt with capably and in an entertaining fashion, and there is a wide array of striking set pieces for fans and non-fans to enjoy. The way Chris Columbus handled the Quidditch match in the first film now seems rather limp compared to the treats that Cuaron and now Newell have served up. Although the "wow" factor in terms of special effects is down from the previous film, there's still some delightful visual moments. That, and the film seems scarier than before.
The acting appears better than it ever was. Never mind the criticism that is being directed at the acting ability and ageing of the three leads - Daniel Radcliffe IS Harry Potter. The same is true of Rupert Grint & Emma Watson and their respective characters. I wrote last year that the best thing to do would be to hang on to the young leads for as long as possible, for stability's sake, and I maintain that stance. My only concern is that nearly all credibility will be lost by the time The Half Blood Prince comes around.
Every other regular (including a returning Jason Isaacs) is as solid as ever. Newcomers include a rather giggly Miranda Richardson as an irritating journalist, Brendan Gleeson as probably the most interesting (and bizarre) Hogwarts teacher of them all, and Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort himself. As if this wasn't enough, we have David "Doctor Who" Tennant playing somebody who's rotten to the core (this actor is more versatile than you think) and Jarvis Cocker making a surprise cameo.
As I said earlier, The Goblet Of Fire has not improved on The Prisoner Of Azkaban, but it has maintained a standard that we can only hope The Order Of The Phoenix will match.
David Yates, the camera is yours.
Rating: 8/10