Harry Potter 3: The Prisoner Of Azkaban

Silje: "I'm sorry that you are so sick of hearing about it, and I'm sure you're not alone, but other people have their right to speak about whatever they want to speak about."

Silje!! I was in a very pissy mood also... I didn't say people couldn't discuss what they wanted to because then this wouldn't be a good message board now, would it? :) Don't get me wrong -- I think the books are fantastic but it's just so much Harry Potter Mania at once that it's driving me up the wall.

One day I'll see the movies. But I was running on a lack of sleep when I threw my two cents in, so forgive me!

I'm with Saturn I was a Potter-Sceptic saying for ages its a kids film and book and I don't need to waste my life watching the films. I saw the first one on pirate and thought it was ok, I took my nephew to watch the second one and was well impressed. But this third one is fantastic. A perfect way to waste 2 hours of your life.

I havn't read the books I don't have time to read.

[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Banquo wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I'm with Saturn I was a Potter-Sceptic saying for ages its a kids film and book and I don't need to waste my life watching the films. I saw the first one on pirate and thought it was ok, I took my nephew to watch the second one and was well impressed. But this third one is fantastic. A perfect way to waste 2 hours of your life.

I havn't read the books I don't have time to read.[/QUOTE]

You don't need time for the books. The longer ones take about 20 minutes to read, they move really fast.

some people need every minute they can get....

What I missed most was that there wasn't enough time spent in the classrooms. And the werewolf Lupin hardly looked like a werewolf. But then again, it was something original, just as the REAAAAAALLLLYY creepy Dementors.

Double post, la la la my computer hates me.

I saw WP, and again on Friday, and I dug it, even though there were gaping holes. But most people will have read the books first anyway.

I liked Thewlis, and Oldman. Did miss Isaacs, but he's not a big character. Alan Rickman is my hero.

I still dislike the books, and refuse to read them. Eeeeck, the style is horrible, and a ripoff of Dahl, Tolkien, Beale, etc.

While the first 2 movies were longer, why did Cuaron decide to cut this one shorter when the third book is longer than the first 2?
Aside from that Alfonso Cuaron did an excellent job by making the film more darker and intriguing than the first 2. Unlike Chris Columbus who wasted too much time introducing useless characters like Nearly headless Nick.

Still, 'Azkaban' caught pretty much the most essential parts of the movie for the 2 hours and 10 minutes of the film. It would have been better if the movie ran for 3 hours. Besides... if kids didn't mind reading a 700 pages book, it shouldn't be too hard for them to watch a movie for 3 hours.

Kudos also for the 3 main characters, who have really improved their acting skills compared to the first 2 films. Good thing that Dan Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint haven't done the same as the Olsen Twins, who seem to become worse actresses as they get older.

saw it saturday
quite enjoyed it

i have never read the books so i cant take it apart piece by piece as to what was missing etc.

it ,as many has mentioned already, has totally new feel to it, new look- the castle down to Hagrads home --

will see it again

This is the best of the Harry Potter movies, we too saw it for the 2nd time on Sunday (winks at Saturn).
I thought Oldman and Thewlis were excellent, and Timothy Spall as that rat was brilliant.

Having said that they have cut loads of out of film, the book are way better.

What are the main differences between the book and the film?

I don't think the film explains who Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs actually are, a few people I know who haven't read the books had no idea that the map writers were actually there in the film.
I was looking forward to the Quidditch Final as well - the film was sadly missing Sean Biggerstaff as Oliver Wood.
Another fault was the Firebolt broomstick only turning up at the end instead of at Christmas - the firebolt was a big issue in the book and hardly mentioned in the film, and all the animosity between Ron and Hermione isn't there either. And dementors don't fly they glide. (Did I say I liked this film ?)

Other than all that I enjoyed the film for what it was, just don't compare it to the book and you'll love it.

I reckoned that the cinematography was outstanding....

The repeating themes of dementors and water, and of circles were beautifully shot.

The scene in the forbidden forest was spine chilling.

Acting wise - yes the kids are better, I do beleive that Gambon is a MUCH better Dumbledore, but still not right. He is, in the book, a bumbling fool on the outside and a wizard to be reckoned with on the inside. This has not yet come across although the new one is better. David Thewlis as Lupin was perfect - he didn't go over the top to play a wizard or a werewolf, instead he played a teacher - really well done (reminded me of mr chips). Gary Oldman was a poor choice I feel...

But that's probably why I am a midwife and not a film director....

N

*Forgives Erica instantly and gives the Japanese Space Monkey a huge grin* Thanks for that comment on my hair! I was pondering about cutting it, but people seem to like it long, so it shall remain. :-)

aaah, the decision of whether to cut or not! I cut my hair last august becuase it was, erm, rather long and ugly (really really curly) and I had it long since I was 3... it was definately time for a change... though im sure if i had hair as gorgeous as yours i would have never cut it <3