Some things missing but generally a good adaptation.

Rating: 8/10 (10 June 2004)

(This review is for the cinema-goer who is only interested in if the film is worth spending money on to watch it, NOT for those who get excited about camera angles and editing!)
I was keen to watch this film as I have read all 5 books of Harry Potter and was interested to see my favourite characters come alive on the big screen. Generally I have not been disappointed. Obviously when you do an adaptation of a very successful series of books, you are bound to have missed a few things out, and rely on the viewer to bridge some gaps, but I felt that in Prisoner of Azkaban, the story could have put a few things in that were in the book. For example, in the film, it didn't really mention that Hermione and Ron were going to be in London but in the book it did. But this is only a minor point and I thought the film kept to the book pretty much faithfully. The acting is so much better this time round from the children and of course Snape is the best still, although Trelawny was a close second! Poor old Dumbledore was never going to be the same, but he still had that little charm about him. Overall, I gave this film 8 out of 10 as it was entertaining as a film on its own, and gave a good account of the book.