Truly Dreadful Film

Memorable, crazy movie

All that we are seeing on the screen is happening with real people, real action sequences in the background, forcing the eye to watch as if we were there.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Best one of the series, I loved this one, This one took Harry Potter in a whole new direction

The third film about the young wizard is the most controversial, for it was he who split the fans of the novels about Potter into two warring parties: conservatives and innovators.The first group of fans absolutely condemned and condemned the actions of the director Cuaron, altered "Harry Potter" in his own way. Say, they did not like the strange werewolf, all sorts of jokes-jokes, interspersed by the director in addition to the script, and in addition to all the claims they discovered the disappearance of the atmosphere of magic, because of which the popular expression of "Quaron in the furnace" was born.The second group, on the contrary, furiously began to praise Cuaron, extolling him to the unprecedented pedestal of fame, thus creating almost a cult of personality. They liked everything that only they could like in the third film.Only now it became clear that both sides are not right in their convictions. So it should be, movies must be different in essence. The error crept in from the very beginning: Chris Columbus took the first two films, and this put the old debate on what kind of movies Harry Potter should be about. Columbus did not have to give the right to shoot two films, and one would suffice. Spectators are used to the atmosphere of the first two films, because most of the audience took the innovative approach of Quaron to the screen version of the third novel with bayonets. Now the producers make a mistake again - they give the right to shoot two films (The Order of the Phoenix and The Half-Blood Prince) to the new director David Yates. This should not be done in any case. It is necessary to preserve the diversity of director's visions. Hogwarts is not accidentally depicted in different ways in films, like Hogsmeade. Everything in novels is seen differently every time, because all the reader and viewer sees through the eyes of Harry Potter, and in films through the prism of the director's vision, the viewer must perceive the magical world through the eyes of a young wizard. Alfonso Cuaron still hit the spot with his timely vision of the plot of "The Prisoner of Azkaban."He created a sparkling tragicomedy for the growing up of a young wizard.In general, Cuaron's film reminds me of our old Soviet films. For the reason that the whole film can be easily taken away on the shots, quotes, fragments, heroes, soundtracks, etc., etc. Despite everything, this film is much kinder than the previous two, differing in their gloomy Gothic style. It's more fun, crazy, and it should be, because it's Sirius Black himself on the scene!For the whole of Rowling's novel, like the film of Quaron, is a tribute to the memory of the crazy, hooliganistic and such lonely Sirius Black ... Black, whose heart is beating violently, hot blood flows in his veins, and in the soul is truly dog devotion. The third film, as well as the film, is dedicated to the looters - James Potter (= Harry Potter), Peter Pettigrew, Rimus Lupine and Sirius Black - a group of friends who used to be friends a long time ago ...The film ruthlessly shows how easy it is to lose friendship and how difficult it is to acquire a friend ...Thanks to Alfonso Cuaron, who did a talented work, showing in one stroke all the huge gallery of the characters of the magical world and their essence: the Minister of Magic plunges into a puddle; the soothsayer with big glasses on her nose stumbles on her own table; The evil teacher Severus Snape closes the children from the werewolf; eccentric Dumbledore slams his hand over Ron's gnarled leg; Remus Lupine, at the lesson, takes a snack with an apple; portraits of Hogwarts, it turns out, also like to sleep; Stan Shanpike with his brave words is not very strong in dragging student suitcases; Hagrid and ties are incompatible things; Tom from the Leaky Cauldron has a nehyl auto; Ernie, wearing spectacles with large lenses, is led by the "Night Knight"; Sirius Black finally began to talk moral nonsense ... Also it is necessary to thank the new actors, so successfully merged into the old line-up:Emma Thompson (Sibyl Trelawney); Michael Gambon (Albus Dumbledore); David Thulis (Remus Lupine); Julie Christie (Madame Rosmerta); Gary Oldman (Sirius Black); Timothy Spall (Peter Pettigrew) and many others. By the way, if my memory does not change me, then the two actors from the third film (cleaning woman in the bar "Leaky Cauldron" and Aunt Marge) Quaron quietly consigned to his other project - "Child of Man", but that's another story ...Let me love the fourth film about Harry Potter (director - Mike Newell), but I always revise the Curaron part - it is the brightest of all existing.In a word, long live Rowling and Cuaron!"Potter, come back!" (Severus Snape, potions teacher).

A change of direction helps bolster the film's darker tone, lending a slightly 'odd' feel to the piece, and a time-travel element introduced later on provides a refreshingly unique third act, but 'Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban (2004)' feels perhaps the least connected to the overall franchise, with its plot having little lasting impact aside from introducing some interesting new characters and concepts. It is an entertaining movie with several exciting, and occasionally somewhat scary, sequences, but it does feel slightly underwhelming on the whole. Still, it is a unique picture and an enjoyable experience that keeps up the quality of the series and sits comfortably among its peers. It also serves as a perfect transition from the earlier and generally lighter films to the heavier ones later on, though the transition is much smoother than you might remember and even the first flick has moments of proper grittiness in it. This film is the first in the series to properly capture the wistful tone associated with the character, too. Wonderfully inventive stuff. 7/10

I have this film totally forgotten as I haven't seen it in years. Pretty much like the first 2 all the actors are back except for the actor who played Dumbledore as he passed away in 2002(Richard Harris) and was replaced by Micheal Gambon. I think this one had a dragon in it or was that the Goblet Of Fire? Overall the film was fairly good,Harry Potter is more stubborn now and even blows up his aunt in the beginning of the film. Harry of course is looking for Sirus Black(Gary Oldman) who maybe over Harry Potter's death.