The good and the bad...

Rating: 7/10 (6 June 2004)

Like most Harry Potter fans, I found this movie disappointing. I felt that Director Alfonso Cuaron choose style over substance, which is never a good thing in a movie.
Some critics say that the previous movies were too stiff in how they stuck close to the book. THAT IS THE POINT!! If I want to see a Harry Potter movie, I want to see the book, the plot, brought to life. I don't want to see the plot changed.
However, I must admit, I loved the darker, more Gothic look of the film. The books are taking a turn for the darker and this movie sets that tone.
But there was so many plot holes, so much left out. It was hard for this HP fan to ignore. This book, while the smallest of the 5 out there is crucial. This is my main complaint with the movie.
It introduces Lupin, Black, and Pettigrew, all of which are important to Harry, as they fill in the gaps of his past.
In this book, you discover why Snape hates Harry, Lupin, Black, and James Potter. This is important later. The relationship between Snape and Harry is important to the Order of the Phoenix.
Who is Wormtail, Prongs, Moony, and Padfoot? What is and who created The Marauders map. And why is Black an Animagus?
The above are all questions that the movie leaves unanswered (but are in the book).
I would have sat through another hour to hear the explanations and see the full story. Instead, plot points replaced by unnecessary (but yet funny) cut scenes. Not a good thing.
Buckbeak looked great; the CGI was very well done. The time warp effect was also cool. I was disappointed in how Lupin looked as a Werewolf, I thought they were more hairy.
The best part of this movie - the acting. Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson are growing into their roles and as actors. Although Radcliffe could have actually shed some tears during the Hogsmade visit. Tom Felton was great as Draco, who tries to be brash, but is really a coward under it all. He played it excellently.
The adults were also fantastic. Maggie Smith was the stern, yet almost motherly Minerva McGonagall. We needed to see more of her; she only had about 2 lines. Robbie Coltrane comes back as Hagrid and he plays the part perfectly. Emma Thompson plays a wonderfully flaky Sybil Trelawney. Michael Gambon had a tough role to fill by following Richard Harris. Gambon brings his own slant to Albus Dumbledore, which in this movie was a bit off-kelter, but I think as we get used to him in this role, it will seem more natural.
Alan Rickman.... He is the most underrated actor in this movie. The critics seem to ignore his astounding acting in these films. He is absolutely fantastic in his role as the sharp, harsh, angry, but troubled Severus Snape. Any lesser actor would have made Snape flat, but Rickman gives him life and dimension. Also, he has some of the greatest lines in this movie. "Revenge is very sweet..."
Gary Oldman was good as Sirius Black, but we didn't seen enough of him. His confrontation with Rickman was emotion filled and was one of the best parts of the movie. I wish it had gone on longer.
Timothy Spall plays a disgusting and revolting Peter Pettigrew. He looked the part and played it well.
Remus Lupin was played by David Thewlis. I was not sure what to think at first; I was hoping Anthony Stewart Head (Giles from Buffy) was going to get the part. But Thewlis was excellent, he made Lupin a character you liked and cared about, a feeling you didn't get from the book. But Thewlis makes you feel that for the character. He got a fair amount of screen time, but I wanted more. Fantastic acting. I can't wait to see him come back in the next few films.
All in all, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is an good movie, as long as you don't compare it to the book or other HP movie. The plot holes really damage the film. The acting and the feel of the movie are great, but still don't quite make up the difference.