Harry Potter & the Prisoner of Azkaban

[bulldogs_54]

I saw it twice today and I loved it I took my little sister and she got scared in some parts but the rest was good

 

[beckybiglands]

I'm seeing it for the fourth time tonight!
I love Pettigrew, He looks just like I imagined
The Map looks awesome
Buckbeak was just way too cool
And DAMN aren't all the people looking hotter as they get older!

I'm a little annoyed they left out the Quidditch Cup, with Gyriffindor winning and all and Oliver Wood at his best. Also they left of Pig! I guess they'll put him in Goblet...

I'm off to see the Wizard, the wonderful wizards of Hogs

 

[thehardaway]

The film left out a fair bit that IMO would have made it make more sense and tie it together for those who haven't read the book. Nothing an extra 20 minutes or so couldnt have fixed

 

[skylark18]

Just finished watching it on disk..The second half was GREAT , but found the first half a bit on the boring side , but overall it was good.
Glad this 3rd installment was a bit darker too.

 

[plugga7]

I recommend for those being who have not read the books or a keen fan, and are being dragged along, make sure you dont see a late session. The sleepy sharks were swimming after about an hour!!

Apologies to all HP fans...not my normal kind of movie. The end was kind of neat though.

 

[DIG]

Saw it on the weekend. Thought it was great. Hadn't read the book in a long time so didn't pick up on a lot of the things they changed/left out as much as others did.

Looking forward to the 4th one now - that was me favourite.

 

[TheBloods]

I saw it on Friday - thought it was fantastic. Only bad thing is now waiting another two years for the fourth one to come out.

Originally posted by thehardaway
The film left out a fair bit that IMO would have made it make more sense and tie it together for those who haven't read the book. Nothing an extra 20 minutes or so couldnt have fixed

Which bits did you think were confusing and twhat could have been added?

 

[Thrawn]

Did Scabbers do anything?

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Watched it for the first time since the cinema. Surprised how much of the movie I'd forgotten but 16 years is a long time. It was good.

They all feel like different films so far. That's a good sign.

 

[atlas1]

 

[Vader]

Watched it for the first time since the cinema. Surprised how much of the movie I'd forgotten but 16 years is a long time. It was good.

They all feel like different films so far. That's a good sign.

They're all pretty good up until the Goblet of Fire. Movies 5 & 6 are drawn out boring place fillers, as per their source material.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

They're all pretty good up until the Goblet of Fire.

Goblet of Fire was the last one I watched back in the day. Not that I recall it being bad but the books were completed by the next movie.

Movies 5 & 6 are drawn out boring place fillers, as per their source material.

5, 6 and 7 I only read once as they were published, so aside from a few big moments I don't remember anything

 

[Vader]

Goblet of Fire was the last one I watched back in the day. Not that I recall it being bad but the books were completed shortly after.

5, 6 and 7 I only read once as they were published, so aside from a few big moments I don't remember anything

I won't spoil them for you. #5 is 2 hours of boredom, finished by 10 minutes of action where one of the main characters dies. Nothing of note happens in #6, it really is just a stepping stone on the way to the finale. #7 and #8 should have been 1 movie (and a good one at that), but the production company got greedy and split it into two.

 

[Kram]

Watched it for the first time since the cinema. Surprised how much of the movie I'd forgotten but 16 years is a long time. It was good.

They all feel like different films so far. That's a good sign.

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

I won't spoil them for you. #5 is 2 hours of boredom, finished by 10 minutes of action where one of the main characters dies. Nothing of note happens in #6, it really is just a stepping stone on the way to the finale. #7 and #8 should have been 1 movie (and a good one at that), but the production company got greedy and split it into two.

I clicked on that hashtag and it led me nowhere interesting. Mildly disappointing.

 

[Vader]

I clicked on that hashtag and it led me nowhere interesting. Mildly disappointing.

Blame the BigFooty software for that one. I don't know why it interprets # as a hyperlink.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

I remember when 'nerd' meant niche interests and above average intelligence. Now it means watching mainstream entertainment.

 

[Richard Cranium]

Blame the BigFooty software for that one. I don't know why it interprets # as a hyperlink.

#okboomer

 

[Roobs321]

You see the series going wrong during the Goblet of Fire adaptation. Despite the evident cinematic potential since publication, too much material to cover there, too convoluted, too populated, to cohere adequately and draw upon one's emotional investment. Mike Newell for mine is the worst of the veteran Hollywood hacks in that he never elevates the material and has no visual sense. The first two were somewhat maligned for a long while for being too faithful (as well as the audience growing up and craving something more dark/matured), but in retrospect they stand up timelessly as children family classics, whereas the more teenage ones just aren't anywhere near as vital, as well as increasingly straying from the Hogwarts threesome mystery formula or exhausting it.

1. Prisoner of Azkaban 8.5/10
2. Philosopher's Stone 8/10
3. Chamber of Secrets 7.5/10
4. Deathly Hallows Part 2 7.5/10
5. Half Blood Prince 7/10
6. Goblet of Fire 7/10
7. Order of the Phoenix 6.5/10
8. Deathly Hallows Part 1 6.5/10

I still remember when I saw Prisoner of Azkaban. I did work experience with the local navy base that week, and then on the Friday afternoon went out to see this with my youngest brother (who would have been Year 4 at the time). The only other film we saw alone together before his death was The Social Network. I remember we had a Dominos Widowmaker pizza afterwards in Mum's workplace lunchroom. Prisoner of Azkaban in some sense required an adjustment viewing, as it was when cinematic freedom started to take hold of the franchise and it became less faithful. It had a slightly mixed reception anecdotally and in box office (albeit in the more packed American summer in a similar period to big hits like Shrek 2 & Spiderman 2), but after a viewing or two it was clearly the best and seemed to appeal more to those casual viewers who weren't readers necessarily, and Cuaron has always been a strong filmmaker (I'd previously seen A Little Princess at the time, so rated him in children's cinema).

 

[Vader]

You see the series going wrong during the Goblet of Fire adaptation. Despite the evident cinematic potential since publication, too much material to cover there, too convoluted, too populated, to cohere adequately and draw upon one's emotional investment. Mike Newell for mine is the worst of the veteran Hollywood hacks in that he never elevates the material and has no visual sense. The first two were somewhat maligned for a long while for being too faithful (as well as the audience growing up and craving something more dark/matured), but in retrospect they stand up timelessly as children family classics, whereas the more teenage ones just aren't anywhere near as vital.

1. Prisoner of Azkaban 8.5/10
2. Philosopher's Stone 8/10
3. Chamber of Secrets 7.5/10
4. Deathly Hallows Part 2 7.5/10
5. Half Blood Prince 7/10
6. Goblet of Fire 7/10
7. Order of the Phoenix 6.5/10
8. Deathly Hallows Part 1 6.5/10

I still remember when I saw Prisoner of Azkaban. I did work experience with the local navy base that week, and then on the Friday afternoon went out to see this with my youngest brother (who would have been Year 4 at the time). The only other film we saw alone together before his death was The Social Network. I remember we had a Dominos Widowmaker pizza afterwards in Mum's workplace lunchroom. Prisoner of Azkaban in some sense required an adjustment viewing, as it was when cinematic freedom started to take hold of the franchise and it became less faithful. It had a slightly mixed reception anecdotally and in box office, but after a viewing or two it was clearly the best and seemed to appeal more to those casual viewers who weren't readers necessarily, and Cuaron has always been a strong filmmaker (I'd previously seen A Little Princess at the time, so rated him in children's cinema).

6.5/10 for Order of the Phoenix? That's at least 4pts too many.

 

[Roobs321]

I remember when 'nerd' meant niche interests and above average intelligence. Now it means watching mainstream entertainment.

I've always used 'geek' for the latter. Geeks can be absolute morons. Nerds have to have some smartest-in-the-room type cred.

 

[Roobs321]

6.5/10 for Order of the Phoenix? That's at least 4pts too many.

I don't think the Potter films were ever truly terrible. A couple of the latter ones misfire, but they still deliver the baseline.

 

[Vader]

I don't think the Potter films were ever truly terrible. A couple of the latter ones misfire, but they still deliver the baseline.

OOTP was a bad book, and subsequently a bad movie. It's all filler, with nothing at all happening until the fight scene at the end. If Sirius Black didn't die at the end of that fight scene, nobody would ever remember anything that happened in the book/movie.

JK Rowling had settled on a plan for a 7 book series, and her editors had lost all control over her writing, which became bloated and full of filler. The book ended up being twice as long as it should have been, if her editors had maintained control. Books 5 & 6 are just awful, with nothing noteworthy happening. They are just place markers, between book 4 (the very good Goblet of Fire), and the culmination in book 7 (the very good Deathly Hallows).

 

[Roobs321]

Yeah that is fair enough. OOTP was the first adaptation I didn't see in cinemas (I saw Transformers, Simpsons & 28 Weeks Later instead around that time and then remember sleeping through my first watch of OOTP on an exhausted Friday night hotel pay-per-view), and If I had, I might have more dislike investment. Just coming across it randomly on television, it is a low-point, but still fairly watchable. All the films were somewhat acclaimed in their own right on release as well, none of them were received as bad films. And what you mention about the book, that lead to lower expectations among fans at the time. It seems like you already had your mind made up before viewing. It was also overshadowed somewhat by the then release of the final book.

But I love Imelda Staunton and her performance is enough to keep me intrigued, plus there are a few nice set-pieces. David Yates coming in also made the franchise feel a bit more anglo-cheapened like UK TV. You have to remember how these films compared to other teen fiction adaptation and childrens films. Order of the Phoenix might not be a great Potter film, but it was a solid genre film and does have its fans.

And regardless of the book or film's quality or not, the release of the 5th book and following fortnight as a Year 9 student is the most hyped book release I've ever experienced. We'll never see the like of it again. At least a third of the kids I knew were actively and visibly reading it at the same time. So thanks to OOTP for that fond memory. 2000 was a year when a lot of kids were suddenly working their way through the series, but this time around everyone tackled the same volume at the same time, and by the 6th and 7th volumes we were deep into our partying years and therefore it wasn't in our milieu much anymore.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

I've always used 'geek' for the latter. Geeks can be absolute morons. Nerds have to have some smartest-in-the-room type cred.

Have geeks been replaced by gatekeeping fanbois more interested in branding than substance?