Prisoner of Azkaban Spoiler Thread
 

Post all comments and spoilers about Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban movie here.

Well since I got to see PoA last night, here's my take on it:
Like I said in the other thead, I could definitely tell it was done by a different director. The style was simply...different. I saw all three in a row, so I could definitely tell the difference.

I thought it was a bit choppy, for one thing. Things just didn't seem to flow as well between scenes as they should have. Then again, that might be due to the fact that Harry kept blacking out and then a new scene would start with him waking up again. Other things just seemed to randomly happen without explanation, like the "Something Wicked This Way Comes" chorus singers. They sang at the opening feast but there was no explanation why they were there. It seemed to me like they just put that scene in, in order to have it in the previews.

It was interesting the way they changed around the locations of things from the first and second movies. In the first movie, Hagrid's hut seems to be located directly outside the main gates of the school, but in PoA it's off to the side, down a hill and a lot of steps. I'm pretty sure they changed the location of the Fat Lady painting/entrance to Gryffindor common room, too.

My first reaction on seeing the kids was "WOW, they've all grown up so much!" I mean, I knew that, since I had of course seen pictures, but even the supporting actors look much older, like Fred and George, and especially Neville.

The dementors were very well done, though! They were seriously creepy, especially during the Quidditch scene where they surroud the field. That whole scene was great: driving rain, Harry flying amongst the clouds, then the demontors coming up behind him looking all creepy. The way the Patronus charm was shown was also cool: I had never really been able to picture it correctly, and in the movie it looked really good.

I also liked the scenes in which Harry and Lupin talk alone together. Did they spend as much time talking together in the book? I can't remember.

I think I'm going to have to go see it in English before I decide how much I liked this one: it's just not the same in German.

IIRC, Harry and Lupin do get a lot of alone time in the book. There were the parts where he learned about how to create a patronus, the part after the boggart lesson, there was a part where they had tea together, and when he helped Harry get out of the whole Maurader's Map with Snape. Unless they added more, this appears to be enough. I haven't seen it yet. I am thinking about being ambitious and seeing it at midnight tonight. (Take a nap before and then go.) I just can't wait any longer.

I SAW IT! But I think I have to see it again. I went to the midnight showing where a lot of die hard fans showed up. Every time Daniel or Rupert (or hell, even the Weasley twins) showed up, a group of fan girls started SCREAMING! :rolleyes: And every time someone said something funny or did something cool, everyone started clapping/screaming/etc. So some of the movie I missed because people wouldn't shuuush! :mad:

But anyway... I LOVED IT! Well worth my lack of sleep.

But Tigerlilly, I agree about all the fading in fading out stuff. There was quite a bit of it... and it got a bit annoying after a while because you felt like you were missing something in between. And yeah, the choir... random!

What I did like: The dusty art house movie feel. Critics have been mentioning that the movie isn't the technicolor/Disneyland feel movie. The kids might not like it, but I did. I thought it gave it a more mature feel. And the scenery was awesome. I just don't remember Hogwarts being surrounded by that much water. I also enjoyed all the symbolism. I read a review that Curon (sp?) wanted to focus on "time" and I think he achieved that well. And the goofy little voodoo guys cracked me up. And all the little added humor that wasn't in the book had me rolling in the aisles. Even if it was subtle. Ron had a lot of funny lines that had me giggling. And Emma Thompson stole the show. The changes in the wardrobe were also refreshing. Even when the kids were in their uniforms/robes, they all looked like teens trying to mix in their own style at a Catholic High School.

What I didn't like: They left A LOT out. I mean every other movie was 3 hours, if they had the added an extra half an hour, the ending wouldn't have felt like something was missing. There was a lot more information about Sirius and James and whatnot in the book and the last half hour just seemed sorta rushed. BAH! I know that this was supposed to focus on Harry and the relationship between Black and everyone else, but very important stuff happened at the two Quidditch matches that were omitted. I wished they were included. And the Firebolt, which was huge in the book, seemed like an afterthought. I'm surprised that Crookshanks didn't have a bigger part in this either because he was pretty big in the book. I also noticed that tensions were bigger in the book between Hermione and Ron/Harry due to her studies. It all seemed like the movie wanted to focus on the activity outside of Hogwarts instead of what was going on in the school. Fine by me. It was still a cool movie. I just wish some of these things were included.

Lines of the movie that had me giggling (because I am just really immature): Ron - "You have to stroke it..." (the way that was placed in the movie was just kinda random and it just cracked me up.)
Lupin - "Yes, I knew her... *awkward silence*" (He was refering to Lily.)
And then the whole scene when Harry has the Map and Ron wakes up from a nightmare, I forget exactly what Harry said about spiders, but the look on Ron's face was priceless. Ron is good comic relief.

That is all!

Question - I have a 7 year old who love HP, but is skittish at the theater (got very nervous and had to go out during the spider scene of the last one, but again that was 1 1/2 years ago). What's the "scary" factor???

The dementors freaked me out a bit. And then Lupin turning into a werewolf might freak him out. And yes, there is a spider in this one... but it gets on roller skates. That's actually kinda funny.

But the dementors are described better in the books. They don't show their bare heads or anything but you do see a mouth and that was enough to make me squimish.

It is more of an adult movie and you can totally tell the difference between this one and the last... but there were a few kids at the midnight showing... so he might be okay.

I just saw it and it was tremendous fun! I also thought the Dementors were MUCH scarier in the book. I noticed the part about the Firebolt coming "that close" to being left out altogether.

Did anyone else notice that Dawn French (Vicar of Dibley) was the Fat Lady in the Picture and Lenny Henry (Chef and husband of Dawn French) was was the shrunken head in the Knight Bus? I thought that was really funny!

I just saw the movie and I have to say that overall that I LOVED THIS MOVIE.

There are a few bits that had me upset: they had Padma and Parvati IN THE SAME HOUSE!!!!!! they were standing next to each other and have Griffyndor patches.

Somehow they changed either Crabbe or Goyle, who was in an eariler scene with Draco and a third boy, then it was Crabbe/Goyle, Draco and the mysterious "third boy" who I assumed was supposed to be Goyle/Crabbe.

They did not use Crookshanks properly AT ALL, he stopped the wrompping willow damnit!

They DID NOT explain Messrs (sp?) Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs, it was very important to the Patronus and shows Harry that HE IS HIS FATHERS SON!!!

Other than that, I loved the overall feel and I can forgive the other oversights.

I kept thinking about 2nd task and where they would film it, during all the "waterfront" scenes. I have say that my favorite scene in the ENTIRE movie was Harry riding Buckbeek.

ms. gwyn

I noticed that too!!!! I was like... who in bloody hell???? (TM Ron...)

Read a review (cuz I am THAT bored at work) that Cuaron didn't like Quidditch... I am sure that was just the critic's way of saying that all Quidditch matches that meant anything were omitted. But if it really is the case, we are gonna have issues with book four and the World Cup. ;)

And I know that fans everywhere want Ron and Hermione to hook up. I didn't really get that impression in the book itself, but definitely got it in the movie. And there are people on msg boards also hinting that Lupin and Sirius are a gay couple. :confused: Where do people come up with this stuff???

ron dream was about Spiders making him tap dance. He said to Harry that he was going to tell them "no" and Harry said to do that.

Very good movie. I agree with every one about the choppy scence and leaving things out.

I still liked it.

I just saw it! I can't believe we went on opening day but my husband and I took our middle school-aged sons. I'm glad we didn't take the younger kids, as the dementors would've been a bit much. We'll let them see it at home when the DVD comes out--it'd be much better for kids on a smaller screen.

We liked it but y'all are right about the choppiness. Plus the stuff they left out from the book--Mr. Carnation, who hasn't read it, is seriously confused at this point.

I just saw it with two friends, one who has read the book and one who hasn't. The one who hasn't read the book loved the movie. My other friend and I felt pretty much the same as everyone else on this thread-- that they left too much out. I'll agree with everything that has already been said... I didn't feel that Crookshanks and Scabbers were focused on enough, especially considering that Scabbers is a vital part of the story! And there was NO explanation of the stag at all, which was just a horrible oversight, IMO. The choppiness didn't bother me too much... I just wish they hadn't left so much out. But overall I liked it, and will probably go see it with Mr. SSS this weekend.

I just thought of another thing....Quidditch....grrrrrrrrrrrrrr

THE ONLY THING THAT WE SAW OF CEDRIC WAS HIS ARM!!!!!.

Sorry for yelling, I'm re-reading OoTP, dont you think that introducing a very important character in GoF is a good thing? What about the Portkey scene???? His....I don't know....DEATH!!!!!!


Okay I think I'm better now.

ms. gwyn

I'm going to add a big fat DITTO to what has been said thus far. I can't believe so many important things were left out of the movie!! Crookshanks, Cedric, and what drove me crazy:


THEY DIDN'T SAY WHY HARRY'S PATRONUS IS A STANG!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

PS:The dementors reminded me of the scary black things from Ghost Ya know, those things that take the bad people to hell? Instead of Patrick Swaze??Those things freak me out.

The guy that plays Dumbledore is the guy from Lord of the Rings. The original person playing Dumbledore died right after they started shooting.

Harry told Ron to tell those spiders...it was quite funny!! *haha*

We saw Harry's patronus was a stag...

If I recall correctly Crabbe wasn't in the scene where Hermione punches Malfoy....in the book I don't believe he was there either, it was another student from Slytherin.


ETA: I did like how they started to play off Ron's and Hermione's 'romance' as it is supposed to be really played up in Books 6 and 7.

I think Chris Columbus would have made a better director....but the same person that has sat with JK Rowling and wrote the screenplays was the same person that wrote this screenplay from the book.....I guess...WHAT WAS HE THINKING?

Umm, you're right about Richard Harris (original Dumbledore) dying, but he was not replaced by Ian McKellen, who played Gandalf in LOTR. Dumbledore is now played by Michael Gambon.

chideltjen -- What you said about the director wanting to focus on time, I thought that was pretty cool, too. I liked the big clock they kept showing, except that that wasn't in the first movies! I don't like how they changed the look of Hogwarts all around...

With the time-turner, I don't think they showed enough of Hermione just randomly appearing and disappearing before classes. There needed to be more of a lead-up to the time turner than there was.

Yes, we did see that, but there was no explanation in the movie as to WHY his Patronus is a stag. And that is a pretty important piece of information. So those who haven't read the book wouldn't understand the link between the Patronus and James, and they might not even realize that it IS a stag. I wouldn't have known what the heck it was if I hadn't read the book.

So I went the theater at 8PM last night. Every showing up til 11:45 was sold out.

I want to see this movie, but I live nowhere near a decent theatre. Hate to spend the extra $ on an online ticket, that student ID still (surpisingly) works for a discount.

Movies are just too expensive.

re: Sir Ian McKellen....was not in PoA. I think he would make a wonderful Dumbledore, but new Dumbledore is played by Michael Gambon.

I do think that Sir Ian would make a wonderful Mad Eyed Moody, though.....I just want him in this series. I admire Sir Ian greatly.


The Stag thing....yes...it is highly important, they did show it, but not properly, because in the book the Stag runs around the dementors and then bows to Harry before he disappears, which is very significant.

Even with all these complaints, I do like this movie, MUCH BETTER than the previous two and look forward to buying the DVD.

ms. gwyn

I read a review of the movie Thursday night (while at my grandparents, since I went with my grandma yesterday morning), and the reviewer hadn't read any of the books, to come at the movies with a "clean" outlook (or something like that). I think that's why so many of us agree that TOO much was left out of the movie (even though everything that I kept saying was missing or mixed up, my grandma said was a good thing since the movie was already two and a half hours long...she's never seen the first two movies)

If I hadn't read the book (and actually, reread it before seeing the movie) I think I would've been very confused while watching the movie. I loved the connection between Lupin and Harry, the starting of the "romance" between Ron and Hermione (although some of the staging of the scenes with just Harry and Hermione at the end almost made it seem [to me] that there's also a "romance" starting between these two characters), and the scenery of Hogwarts (especially during Hagrid's Care of Magical Creatures class with Buckbeak).

If only there was more of the book in there (and a certain Gryffindor Quidditch Keeper :D), I think this would be my all time favorite of the movies so far (I still like the first one the best, but POA beats CoS by a mile!)

Also, did anyone else reconize a scene where Harry's scar was on the wrong side? (The only reason why I saw it (from what I remember from the movie, it's right when Harry's about to face the boggart in the DAtDA classroom with the rest of his schoolmates) was that the review I read mentioned it :p)

I went to see it today. I'm going to have to go again cause I went with someone who really didn't want to go and I didn't enjoy myself. I agree with what has been said about the omissions. I was so waiting for the Marauder map explanation. I liked the ticking sound in the background after Hermione had used the time turner. The whole movie had a darker feel and it is definetely my favorite out of the three. I like seeing how the kids have aged especially Fred and George.

Tee Hee... I started to wonder about the makeup artists and Daniel's scar during certain parts of the movie. In one scene, I think it was when he was searching for Pettigrew in the dark, it almost looked like there WASN'T a scar there. Like it was forgotten. I was like... someone fire the make up artists!

Oh well. Yes I think we all agree it was a bad adaptation. However it was a well done movie. And that's how I am going to look at it... just a MOVIE. Yeah I was mad that the last half hour was rushed, but the scenery, cinimentography, and art direction all made up for it.

I read a fan review. She thought that book for should be divided into two movies because so much happens. Like a Vol. 1 and Vol. 2. I think that would be a good idea because so much happens in that book. Unless of course they want to make it 5 hours long...

If people are starting to say this for Book 3 already, what in the world is the screenwriter going to do for the Order of the Phoenix movie? I can't see how they'll keep OotP to the length of a normal movie while including everything from that book that was important!

We'll either:

A1. Accept the fact that not EVERYTHING can be in the movie, and hope that the best (and most important) parts remain in the movie, or

B2. Start advocating for *two* movies for each book (the whole Volume 1/2(even 3???) sounds like a great idea....it'd almost be like watching a DVD of your favorite TV series!)

I still enjoyed the movie, and am not happy that we have to wait until November 2005 for # 4 :(

I still like the movie overall...but am upset that they did not include some stuff that is very integral to both GoF and OoTP, I think I was quite clear on some of my dislikes :rolleyes:

As for Vol 1 & 2...I wholeheartily agree that, that would need to happen with both GoF and OoTP, they would leave entirely to much out for a 2 1/2 movie.

With PoA, I didn't even notice the time, I really didn't even feel rushed or disconnected, I was just too excited, I will have to see it again in order to notice that.

Hell the 3rd task in itself should be at least 30 mins long and to much the World Cup Match and all the things that occur in to would be at least 30 min... so that would possibly leave 1 1/2 hours for the rest? Its a 500+ page book, I really hope they do it justice.

Went to 1:00 pm show today at Phipps, and it wasn't too crowded. Tried to go yesterday, but all shows were sold out. :eek:

I notice the Hogwart setting is different than the first two movies, and I like the third setting much better, with the big clock tower (awesome clock!) and the stonehenge area above Hagrid's hut, overlook huge opening water. (btw, I saw the filming session, when Harry flies over that lake on Buckbeak, it was in Glen Coe, Scotland. Our tour got delayed by that, but I didn't mind! :p )

I think it would be difficult to be as detail as the book people mention here to be in the movie. If they do, they would go for five hours! But I do agree some crucial details were left out, and I wish they were included. My friend hasn't read the book yet, and he gets confused by the scene explanation in the Shrieking place.

I like the way they start to introduce other houses than Griffindor and Slytherin into the movie, like the one with yellow Quidditch robes. In the first two movies, it seems that only two houses exist outside welcoming feast, where people are walking around, their ties always in green-lime or red-yellow colors. Well, it still does on PoA, but at least there is a hint of other houses exist.

And I really like the Maurender's Map! It has a really cool layout and labeling. I wish they revealed the big sand clock for houses points, I always have troble imagining how they would look like.

Where is Professor Flitwick, the charming prof? And where is Oliver Wood and Jordan Lee (the Quiditch commentator)? It seems odd not to see them in the movie. Oh, and good Hogsmeade setting! And I like the Whooping Willow always smacks that little blue birds :D

Anyway, overall, I like it. I would scale this movie 9/10.

I can't believe nobody has mentioned this. My favorite part of the entire movie is that Harry's hair is actually unkempt. In the first two it was always perfectly flat.









Is it really sad that I have a bit of a crush on Harry and Ron? I know their only fourteen. :(:o:(

LOL, that's OK. I think Hermione is hot.

I think it would be okay if they did it like the LOTR movies...where they came out with the extra dvd's and put the extra time into the movie...not just the deleted scenes. I haven't heard if they are doing a movie for the rest...i had heard they were only doing the 3


ETA: nevermind...I just saw Micheal Gambon's thing and it is in filming. That's great that they are going to do that one...I'm excited :)

I saw that too, but then I realized it was because we weren't seeing Harry, we were seeing his reflection in the mirrored cabinet the boggart was in.

I saw it last night, and was highly disappointed. Not only did they leave too much out of the movie, but they changed so much that was left in that it was awful. I spent most of the movie thinking "Wait! Thats not what happens!" I don't know if I'll go see the 4th movie when it comes out. I think I'll just stick to the books from now on.

I didn't like how they had Harry wandering around looking for Peter Pettigrew, because that didn't even happen in the book! And I hate it that Crookshanks didn't stop the Whomping Willow in the movie. The movie made it look like he had no association with Sirius at all, and I don't think it would have been time-consuming to leave that in. I mean, I realize that they couldn't leave everything in the movie... but I wish they hadn't left out important details. And I was disappointed that we didn't see Sir Cadogan... even though he's not important, it would have been funny.

Well, I will still see the 4th movie, I'll just have to go in expecting it to be really different from the book...

The movie left out A LOT. I guess because the main storyline was much more complex. I think the 4th book will have to be truer to the movie -- there's much less subplot.

Thinking it over with my sons...

Many professors are almost non-existent here (you would know I'd point that out)...we wanted more McGonagall! You would think that these kids hardly go to school...

The movie seemed to be almost Hermione-oriented at the expense of Ron and Harry. Ron's part was practically limited to expressions of fear.

I can see where they had to cut things out to save time (think of "Gone with the Wind") but for heaven's sake, don't go out and make things up that weren't in the book.

I liked it but noit as much as the 1st two. It was choppy and they did leave things out like who were Wormtail, etc.

When I first saw Dawn French, I was thinking I know her...: :confused: Glad I remembered while she was still talking I really like the Vicar shows..

I agree that they barely showed the other profs or students. It was like the Harry/Hermonie/Lupin movie.

I almost fell asleep in the middle of it! No joke! That was bad. :( I was so looking forward to it...maybe I'll have to watch it again when I'm not tired. I thought it seemed a little unfulfilling, though...not as satisfying as the first two. I'm not a big fan of this new director.

Man, I feel like I am the only person on the site who loved the movie. I have read all the books and enjoyed them, but books and movies have never been hand in hand(there were divergences in the first two films as well) and there is only so much they can fit in to the film. Maybe I just have a different take because I thought that the third book was so much different than the first two...much like the movies.

I was entertained for my 9.50. I would go again. I guess I just look at it as more of a wanting to be entertained and enjoying what was presented.

Something to remember I think...when we read a book, it can be whatever we want it to be on the movie screen in our minds, maybe that is why so many are disappointed...because they saw their representation much differently than Cuaron saw his.

No, disappointed because so much of the story (as compared to the other two books) was left out.

No no... no shame in it. I had lunch with a friend today who saw the movie the other night and we both agreed that Daniel Radcliff is growing up quite nicely. :D


I wasn't disappointed with the flick at all. I was a little at the omissions, but the movie was definitely worth the 10.50 I paid on Fandango. And I would totally see it again. However I just have to keep in mind that this is a movie and take it with a grain of salt. We all know this was based on a book, but what if we just went into the mindset that the movie and book are seperate. Or go in pretending we hadn't read the book.

The friend of mine that just saw it read POA SIX times... and still enjoyed it a lot.

I am looking forward to Nov. 2005 now. And I am hoping that POA will pull a LOTR and release an extended version.

Same here...I'd pay my $7.50 to see the movie again right now :D

Maybe if I hadn't just reread the book right before seeing the movie, I wouldn't have noticed as many of the omissions or the differences that I did. I can't wait until it comes out on DVD, so I can add it to my collection! :)