Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban!!!

[Helmet Head]

One of the top films on my must see list and one of the only films to get me excited recently has unfourtunately let me down.

I could be alone in my opinion but I thought that this most recent movie offering of HP was very poor indeed, The story being quite possibly the best of all of the HP books so far led me to think that this film would be quite excellent.

And even though it did look really nice and had the the odd moment it genrally failed to deliver what I thought it was capable of, the story seemed rushed and knowhere near enough info was given so that you could fully follow and appriciate what I think is one of the best books I've ever read.

Big thumbs down from me I'm afraid, but don't let this grumpy gus spoil it for you, go see it for yourself and let us know what you think...

[Canker]

I'm heading out Friday to give it a go! grin.gif
Hoping for the best ;)

[topol_sheap]

I saw this last night... I'm with you Helm (this agreement thing is happening too often now)... I actually enjoyed it until my GF (who hasn't read it) said it made no sense whatsoever. The whole thing was rushed, and there were characters in there, that just seemed to be there for the sake of them being there, they didn't help with the story..

Quidditch was pointless, and what happened to house points?

I would have liked this if it wasn't for the GF... maybe I should have gone alone!

On the plus side, oh, there isn't one..

The SFX was rubbish as you could tell the cgi stuff from the real stuff, and there is no excuse for that these days, hell the raptors in JP 3 were more believable.

Rant over, I think!

Canker, you might want to expect the worst from this so you're not disappointed.

[ June 03, 2004, 08:20 AM: Message edited by: Tops ]

[The Bloody Lady]

I haven't seen this yet but would like to, there is a new director on this film, i can't remember who or what he has previously done but they brought him in to make it *darker*


obviously he cut out prime bits that made harry potter....well Harry Potter!

[Helmet Head]

They've only skimmed the story really, so as a tale it doesn't do justice to the orginal book, and it comes accross very weak and doesn't have the same impact.

As for me and you agreeing Tops well I'm sure I can think of something contradictory to post so that we can have a good old ding dong over it soon enough...

[ June 04, 2004, 02:27 AM: Message edited by: The Helm ]

[Canker]

Ok....... Now you people have me wondering ;)
No House points???? They cut all that out???

The movie appears to be the shortest running movie to date as far as time length so I can imagine that something would be skipped over. :confused:
Sort of like the x-men movies I guess... where if you weren't a follower of the comics, you lost alot of the background story. :rolleyes:

Well... I'm going tonight with the kids. Since I have read the books and they have not..... sounds like I'll be explaining alot *L* grin.gif

[topol_sheap]

x-men was different - the GF understood it, and she wont read comics! ;)

I hope you enjoy the film grin.gif

[Canker]

Well..... This is what I can say.... It was an OK movie but I felt let down.
Seems to me that the Producers, directors or whomever the "powers to be" listen to certain groups that complained about the first two movies being 3 hours.
This one comes in around 2 1/2 hours and I can only say 1 word about it... RUSHED!!! :mad:
I think they should have left that extra 1/2 hour and explained more of what they were showing. I found myslef explaining for an hour after we left the movie house exactly what this meant and what that meant.
I mean.... never explained why Harry's Patronus (spelling) took the form of a stag... Never explained who created the map or the significants of the nicknames- Moony, Prongs, Padfoot and Wormtail... and the list goes on and on.
If you read the book like I... you could fill in the blanks but if you hadn't read it..... you'd be lost at times

[topol_sheap]

yeah... it didn't even mention why Pettigrew was an animagus... what's that all about.

I think an explanation of the patronus would have been a nice touch as the film is about harry and his love for his parents.

[Canker]

And the fact that Peter Pettigrew is "Wormtail".
I mean in book 4 and 5 he's referred to as Wormtail not Peter Pettigrew so how is anyone going to know whom they are speaking about? :confused:

[ June 07, 2004, 09:45 AM: Message edited by: Canker ]

[topol_sheap]

maybe they'll do a "LOTR" on it and release an extended less confusing version - I can hope smile.gif