Harry Potter and the Priziner of Azkaband

Don'tLiveonMoon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2002
Messages
2,717
Reaction score
5
I have to say, the first two were all right but seemed kinda lacking to me. I think the third one looks intriguingly different. The fact they strayed from the book more may be a good thing; with the first two, I felt like they were just squeezing everything in and not ending up with as much substance as they could have had. I have plenty of quibbles with some of the filmmakers' choices in "Lord of the Rings," but for the most part I thought their departures from the book worked beautifully. They really knew how to create an adaptation that was true to the spirit of the book, if not exactly the letter.
Erin
 

Super Scooter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2002
Messages
6,255
Reaction score
109
Beth C said:
To me, the pacing seemed kind of rushed, like they were in a hurry to get into the end of the book where all the action is. The whole Dursley sequence took less than 15 minutes, total.

Then the whole scene before the train was rushed as well, it was like the whole movie was on fast forward.

I kept expecting it to slow down some but it wasn't until about 45 minutes in the film that they finally began to follow the book. I loved the Dementors.. wayyyy cool.. Quidditch in the rain rocked, and the whole werewolf scenes blew my socks off.

All the characters were good, Buckbeak was realistic, and you won't be too disappointed if you go see it.

I'm gonna go again.. yep I am. It's worth it, even with the small inconsistancies.

~Beth C
Okay, I have to explain, the reason it seemed so rushed is because they actually adapted the book to make a movie, rather than just filming the book. I personally felt the first two sucked. This one, however, was AMAZING! I felt the timing was just right (in my opinion, of course), but I think it's because I'm used to quick paced movies.
 

sarah_yzma

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
4,432
Reaction score
80
You can obviously tell that there was a new director....there were a few things that bugged me

1. They wore normal clothes almost through the whole movie
2. They NEVER mention that Harry's dad was an aniwhatever
3. The new dumbledore...he looked great, but his voice was SOOO boring!!!
 

BornBlue

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
JaniceFerSure said:
I read(on IMDB),that the whole Dursley sequence was cut(for time purposes).Very surprised to see it still in the movie,glad to though.
I read that, too. And I'm pretty sure that they meant that the Dursley sequence was to be cut from the 4th film.
 

Whatever

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2003
Messages
2,968
Reaction score
20
I agree, the pace seemed very rushed. I miss the old Dumbledore, this one didn't do much. Even though I think his eyes were just right for Dumbledore. I was surprised they changed the looks of Hogwarts so much, it threw me off a bit. I liked the visual effects, although I didn't see the Shrieking Shack shaking, like I heard it would.
 

Super Scooter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2002
Messages
6,255
Reaction score
109
Whatever said:
I agree, the pace seemed very rushed. I miss the old Dumbledore, this one didn't do much. Even though I think his eyes were just right for Dumbledore. I was surprised they changed the looks of Hogwarts so much, it threw me off a bit. I liked the visual effects, although I didn't see the Shrieking Shack shaking, like I heard it would.
Actually, they didn't change Hogwarts at all. It was just shot differently.

I thought the fact that they wore normal clothes was a good point. I mean, if you went to a Catholic school, would you really wear your uniform around ALL the time?

But I agree with you, Sarah, that they never mentioned his dad being one of those guys. That's why that group was all friends.
 

Whatever

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2003
Messages
2,968
Reaction score
20
Hogwarts looked different to me. Hagrid's hut looked like it was at a different location. The moving stairway was the same, but the courtyard was way different. They didn't have a courtyard with those griffith (?) fountain statues before. And neither was there a giant clock. I don't think the lake seemed to come up to the castle in this movie, and the castle is no longer the highest point in the area.
 

sarah_yzma

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
4,432
Reaction score
80
my dad also mentioned that they took a completely different route to Hagrid's, but that would be something my dad would notice....
 

fozziebearcub

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2003
Messages
19
Reaction score
1
Prisoner of Azkaban was fantastic, excluding two points that really bugged me :mad:

In the other movies you went to the courtyard ina nice flat green grass patch within the school to get to Hagrads Hut and the Whomping Willow

Anyone else notice that now the Willow is moved to the Hillside in the country, and its shrunk?
also Hagrads hut is not longer a nice stroll to the flat garden but up the tower, across the bridge, down the winding stairs on the hill past the Ancient stone aaarrgggg lol

But the werewolf was Fantastic and Quiddich, cant wait till Goblet , they started fulming alreadies woo-hoo, poor scabbers lol
 

Whatever

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2003
Messages
2,968
Reaction score
20
sarah_yzma said:
my dad also mentioned that they took a completely different route to Hagrid's, but that would be something my dad would notice....
Yep, like I said, it seemed to be at a different location...
 
Top