Super Movie, But Only If You Haven't Read The Book

Rating: 5/10 (9 June 2004)

WITHOUT considering the book(s), POA is probably the best of the Potter movies so far. It looks and feels more real than either of the first two, thanks in large part to improved special effects and striking scenery changes. Somehow, the spirit of Potter's world is more believable than before. It kept me engaged, excited, and talking to the screen, which is pretty remarkable, considering that I'm 41.
BUT YOU CAN'T CONSDER THIS MOVIE WITHOUT THE BOOK(S)! Throughout the film, vital plot and character information is sacrificed at the expense not only of this story, but of all Potter stories to come.
POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD!!!
The most glaring omission is the failure to identify Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot, and Prongs. All are major characters who will play important parts in the rest of the Potter saga. Why and how they came to make The Maurauders' Map touches on a key element of their personalities, as well as their relationships to Harry and among themselves. As it stands, viewers could easily believe Lupin when he tells Snape that the map is just a Zonko's product.
The POA book also sheds some light on why Snape hates Harry, Sirius, and Lupin so much...we need to know this! It is critical to future character interactions, and it adds depth and motiviation to Snape himself.
More illuminating points that are omitted: How did Sirius (A) stay sane in Azakaban; (B) escape from Azkaban; and (C) know where Wormtail was? We see the newspaper clipping of the Weasley family, complete with Scabbers, in Egypt. That clipping has ONE purpose...to answer the above questions. But after a fleeting glimpse, we never see or hear about it again, and the questions remain unanswered.
Padfoot: The movie creation is far too menacing and utterly unlike the shaggy, boisterous Padfoot of the books. Next movie, Padfoot must survive on hand-outs as "a lovable stray." The creature we see in PoA would inspire even a dog-lover to get the gun, not the left-over roast beef! And again, considering who Padfoot is, his animagus form should not be monstrous.
Harry's Patronus: Beautifully executed on-screen, but tell us why it is a stag! In that answer lies a wealth of character expansion and emotional attachment for Harry, Daniel Radcliffe, and the viewers! Something that should be wonderfully moving is just superficially pretty.
All this leads to one huge question: WHERE WAS J.K. ROWLING WHEN THE SCREENWRITER AND DIRECTOR WERE BUTCHERING HER BOOK? Has she given up all creative control? If she doesn't step in before Goblet of Fire is released, lovers of Potter's wizarding world may riot at the box office, and the gloomiest predictions Professor Trelawney can dish out will be warranted!