Spoilers! I've a love/hate relationship with this film

Rating: 8/10 (6 June 2004)

Viewed purely as a piece of visual cinema, this is an outstanding film. Alfonso Cuarón's direction is inspired. Magic, in this installment of the series, is handled matter-of-factually, except when there is something beyond the common, such as the flight of a hippogriff. It's no longer like watching a guided tour of Hogwarts-=finally, the characters are fully-integrated into their magical world.
There were many things that were handled much better in this movie than in the first few films, particularly with regard to the prickly and confusing feelings that arise in person of Harry's age. Dumbledore's superficial doddering whimsy serves to camouflage a penetrating and perspicacious mind, just as in the novels. Snape was an apparent villain, and yet, one which made you wonder what unknown qualities made him a trusted confederate of Dumbledore-this is really interesting to watch in the context of what we now know about him from Book 5. Hagrid has been consistently lovable in all three movies, though is sadly underused in this film-where are the Flobberworms? But most of all, the magical elements in this movie were given personality and life beyond anything one saw in the first two films. The Whomping Willow managed to serve as both a menacing antagonist AND comic relief, an impressive achievement considering the WW had to accomplish this feat without benefit of dialogue and facial expressions. And as for Buckbeak, he was a truly realistic creation. I cut my eyeteeth on Ray Harryhausen's work, and one of the things I do NOT like about most CGI is that the creatures don't really move like anatomically-realistic creations and appear not to be subject to the same gravitational forces and physical laws as the live-action characters they are supposed to be interacting with. This, however, was not the case with Buckbeak. The hippogriff was a perfect blend of equine and avian characteristics, and the jerky and awkward movements of the hippogriff while on land contrasted pleasingly with its grace and power aloft.
And speaking of realistically-blending awkwardness and grace, the performances coaxed from the three young leads in this installment really did portray adolescence in a way that should be recognizable to anyone who experienced it, or is in the process, thereof. From the way Hermione, so sure of herself in most situations, clung to the unlikely (for now) Ron when she was feeling frightened, to the way Harry showed the back of his head to annoying adults who didn't understand him, to the different ways that the kids walked down a hill--Ron shambling and slouching round-shouldered in the way of a boy who has grown a bit faster than his classmates and is self-conscious about it because his clothes don't quite fit, Hermione, swinging her arms and light on her feet like a real girl, and Harry, with the coltish grace of the natural athlete who moves without thinking how he must look to others---everything was true to the age group.
As for Dan Radcliffe, he IS Harry Potter and I hope they can get the production schedule speeded up so that he can continue to play the lead role in the remaining four movies. I don't see how any other actor could now be acceptable in this role.
Gary Oldman isn't physically the look I envisioned for Sirius Black, but he does a fine job with the limited amount of screen time he has. Sirius has a virile presence, for all his shattering experiences in Azkaban, and Oldman managed to portray this. I was less than enchanted with his CGI'ed 'Grim'-which I felt looked more like a werewolf than the Shepherd/Lab mix of my imaginings. My reactions to David Thewlis were more complicated. I felt his acting captured the essence of Rowlings' lonely and shabby Lupin, who is also mysterious, courageous, and exceptionally sensitive and kind. I liked his performance very much. But I was distracted the whole time by his look. He was a bit too well-fed, too smooth-cheeked--not wolfen enough. And his CGI'd werewolf form was anatomically-disturbing. I can't believe the same designer who created Buckbeak could also have created the werewolf, and I hope I find out it was indeed a different person.
Which brings me to my real nitpicks-one purely movie-related, and the rest book-based.
The cinematic nitpick is that the whole mystery surrounding the identity of Moony, Padfoot, Wormtail, and Prongs was not given sufficient exposition at any point to be understandable to those audience members who had not actually read the novel. This is such a serious problem that it rises above the level of a nitpick, to a major, major flaw. I think it should be addressed by adding footage to the DVD release, or getting the movie back into theaters again in the form of a 'Director's Cut' in a few years.
I really do not like what they are doing with Movie!Ron, though I appreciate what Rupert Grint has been able to do with what he's been given. He is not JUST the screwup pal and the comic relief. Ron. Is. Brave. He is also fiercely loyal to his family and his friends. I really hope the upcoming screenplays get closer to Rowling's version. Rowling has telegraphed so clearly that Hermione and Ron are going to end up as a couple that all but the most die-hard Harry/Hermione 'shippers can see it coming, and so it behooves the script to adhere to her concept of Ron a little more closely so that this becomes a believable pairing. Since she won't be falling for him for his family's money or his scholarly mind or for being the handsomest boy in school, they'd better do a great job of showing that he has oodles and oodles of heart.
So, I say-keep the actors, bring back Cuarón for OOTP, and can the screenwriter. And for pity's sake, do SOMETHING about that DORKY Moustache on Lupin!!!