Better, Worse... Or Just Different?

Rating: 7/10 (8 June 2004)

I am a little ambivalent when I think about how this movie affected me. I left the theater having not enjoyed myself nearly as much as the first two, that's for sure... but there was a lot to enjoy about the movie anyway.
Let me start by saying that I have not read any of the books; take that in any way you want.
If I didn't already know that there was a different director this time out, it would have been apparent immediately. Chris Columbus did such a magnificent job of translating the first two books to the screen that I expected something very similar here, but that's not the impression POA left on me.
The whole tone of the story was so much darker and scarier than the first two stories, I wasn't sure how to react: it wasn't really scary enough to be called a "scary" movie, but it was also not "fun" enough to really call it enjoyable. Maybe that was the point, because I've been told that the books are the same way.
Let me list the things that I enjoyed the most:
1. The acting jobs of Daniel, Rupert and Emma. Those three have become the embodiment of their characters, so much so that I hope they won't be typecast once the HP movies are over and done with.
2. Alan Rickman as Prof. Snape. He exudes arrogance and disdain but I am convinced deep down he feels admiration and protective of Harry. I have a feeling that something big will brew between them down the line.
3. The overall atmosphere at Hogwart's. This is a place where supernatural and otherworldly things happen hourly, but until now the place has seemed like a funfair haunted house. Kudos to Cuaron for doing that, although I did miss John Cleese's character!
4. The Dementors - a truly scary sight, and well realized.
What I didn't like:
1. What made the first two movies "fun" were the parts that could be described as "kid stuff" - the innocence and inexperience with doing magic, the Quiddich matches, etc. All of that was missing here. Yes, I know the kids are older and more experienced, but they are STILL KIDS. Emma Thompson's character said it best when she told Hermione that she had the heart of an old maid (or words to that effect). Kids are most enjoyable to watch when they having FUN being kids. Even the Quiddich match in this movie was dreary, an extension of the seriousness of the plot rather than a break from it.
2. Michael Gambon as Dumbledore - granted, stepping into Richard Harris's shoes is a very tall order (no pun intended), and I have nothing against Michael as an actor, but I have come to think of Dumbledore as a warm, charming, kindly character, rather like Santa Claus with magical powers. Michael tried his best to pull it off, but some of the warmth was just missing.
3. The omittance of Maggie Smith's character - it was her matronly demeanor, so typical of schoolmarms the world over, that added such as sense of believability to the first two movies. In this movie, she was practically a non-entity. Let's get this straight; Maggie Smith is a classically-trained, experienced actress with an acting resume that stretches back decades, and I applaud whoever convinced here to play this role, and keep playing it. Again, maybe her diminished role in this movie was in keeping with the book, which I haven't read, but I was very disappointed in her absence.
4. The "Defense Against the Dark Arts" Teacher - three movies, three teachers, with yet another one coming in the fourth installment. It's almost become a running joke that whoever takes the position will not last the movie, rather like the drummers in Spinal Tap!
I don't know in what direction this series is headed; the fourth installment, "The Goblet of Fire", is being filmed as we speak and will probably be released next summer. I am glad that they handed the reins over to Mike Newell, a veteran director with a proved track record for hits. For those who don't know, he has directed such films as "Four Weddings and a Funeral," "Mona Lisa Smile", "Enchanted April", and going further back, the "Young Indiana Jones Chronicles" on TV. I think that this is an excellent choice - I am hoping that he can infuse some of the "fun" back into the series without taking away from the more serious overtones of it.
Just as we enjoy kids grow up on TV, I too enjoy watching these kids grow up on the screen. Next time out, I understand that for the first time there will be romantic interests for both Harry and Hermione. In Harry's case, it will be with an Asian character whose name I don't know; the actress playing her will be a complete unknown, which is just what the director wanted. As for Hermione, maybe she'll hook up with Ron - if she and Harry are not going to become involved, Ron would be the next best choice! The other supporting kids probably won't change their characters much; Neville will still be a bit of a weenie, Draco will be an arrogant prick, etc.
For those reading this who skipped over the body of this review and are only reading the final line, I'll just say this - if you are a stalwart Harry Potter fan, you must see this movie. If you enjoy fantasy movies where kids are the stars, you should see this movie. But if you go expecting the same kind of movie as the first two, you will be disappointed.
My score: 7 out of 10.