Rating
-
Cast & Crew
info:
Daniel Radcliffe
Harry Potter
Rupert Grint
Ron Weasley
Emma Watson
Hermione Granger
David Thewlis
Professor Lupin
Michael Gambon
Albus Dumbledore
David Bradley
Argus Filch
Gary Oldman
Sirius Black
Emma Thompson
Professor Sybil Trelawney
Robbie Coltrane
Rubeus Hagrid
Produced by Michael Barnathan, Chris Carreras, Chris
Columbus, Paula DuPré Pesman, David Heyman, Callum
McDougall, Mark Radcliffe and Tanya Seghatchian; Directed
by Alfonso Cuarón; Written by Steve Kloves;
based on the book by J.K. Rowling
Adventure (US); 2004; Rated PG for frightening moments,
creature violence and mild language; Running Time: 142
Minutes
Official
Site
Domestic Release Date:
June 4, 2004
Review Date:
6/11/04 |
Written
by DAVID KEYES
Despite
consistent personal skepticism of the "Harry Potter"
franchise over the past two years, "Harry Potter and
the Prisoner of Azkaban," the third installment into
the series, opened on the screen with nothing less than
pure enthusiasm on part of yours truly. At a time when the
movie theater has seemingly been bombarded with endless
mediocrity, it is pointless to be finicky; and besides,
the concept of revisiting Hogwarts and all its magical corridors
promised a lot more upfront than most recent blockbusters
have been willing to provide for an entire two hours. It
didn't hurt matters, furthermore, that Chris Columbus, the
director of the deeply-flawed first two films in the series,
was only acting as a producer this time around; directing
credits instead went to the very talented Alfonso Cuaron,
whose highly-regarded Mexican drama "Y Tu Mama Tambien"
from a couple years back has given him more than enough
good reputation to ensure the "Harry Potter" legacy
some kind of fresh perspective here.
Once
the viewer considers this notion, then "The Prisoner
of Azkaban" begins to seem like a step in the right
direction. The differences between this and Columbus' films
are notable, too: the style is more gothic, the narrative
more direct, and the characters less curious and more fueled
by fear. Those who would like to tell us that the "Harry
Potter" novels get progressively dark did those of
us outside the hype a service; without such a warning, who
would believe that the colorful and vibrant world of young
wizards was much more dangerous than what the earlier endeavors
suggested? As you absorb the movie in all its murky exteriors,
it becomes apparent that whatever the intentions are of
any director involved with this franchise, they can't avoid
the one simple truth: that as time goes by, Hogwarts is
seeming less like Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory and more
like Camp Crystal Lake.
Although
this is by no means a flaw to the progression of the "Harry
Potter" stories, it becomes a separate issue entirely
when the style dictates the substance and subsequently detracts
from narrative detail. Unfortunately for both Cuaron and
his audience, "The Prisoner of Azkaban" falls
into this trap rather early on, dazzling the eyes so incessantly
with an ambitious foreground that the interiors never have
much of a chance to emerge. What exists following a promising
premise is basically just a series of dry and stagnant story
twists in which young wizards react, rebel, exchange witty
dialogue and occasionally get caught by a superior doing
something he or she shouldn't be doing in the first place.
This film is the least-satisfying in the ongoing series
thus far, and the fact that the established flaws can't
even be corrected by a completely new director only adds
fuel to the fire for those who have become cynics to this
whole plot.
The
movie takes place during the title hero's third year attending
Hogwarts Academy, that ever-so-fascinating school for young
wizards and witches that teaches them how to utilize and
manage their magic in ways that would allow them to live
normal lives in standard human society. That isn't much
of a comfort to Harry's (Daniel Radcliffe) guardians, though,
who for the past two years have tried to prevent him from
vacating his position as the family slave and going off
to learn about the art of magic. At the opening of "The
Prisoner of Azkaban," however, we are no longer seeing
the same innocent kid who tiptoes around his keepers seeking
approval; instead, we get a confident young lad on the verge
of puberty, who does as he is told but is no longer afraid
to have a voice that contradicts those above him. This approach
also results in one of the movie's biggest early jokes,
in which a distant relative aunt pays a visit to the family,
speaks negatively of Potter's deceased parents, and then
balloons up right before everyone's eyes before floating
off into the night sky. I guess if you're a teenage wizard
with an angry streak, you do things like that.
Unfortunately
for Harry, those kinds of foolish decisions are not exactly
something that will benefit him at Hogwarts in the new academic
year. Reason: the man who contributed to the slaying of
his parents, a seemingly vengeful lunatic named Sirius Black
(Gary Oldman), has escaped from Azkaban prison and appears
to be en route to the school itself, presumably to finish
the job of completely obliterating the Potter family name
(you will recall that Harry, as an infant, barely survived
an attack that caused the demise of his parents). As such,
the school goes on high alert just as it opens its doors
for a new year of classes, and the movie anchors the gravity
of this situation by practically turning Hogwarts into a
secluded prison, with silent dark shadows called "Dementors"
stationed at every entrance and exit to ensure Sirius Black
does not penetrate the school walls.
On
the inside, the looming threat of a villain making an appearance
does little to undermine the adventurous (and rigorous)
lessons offered by the academy's colorful array of professors.
Familiar faces like the foreboding Argus Filch (David Bradley)
continue to populate the adult sector of the movie, but
its most notable contributors are the newest additions to
the staff: Professor Lupin (David Thewlis),an expert on
weaving spells that combat childhood fears, and Sybil Trelawney
(Emma Thompson), a wacky tea leave reader who, if not for
the fact that her screen time is limited, might have provided
the film with an overabundance of comic relief.
The
conflicts, of course, are not as much problems for Harry
Potter exclusively as they are for him as well as his two
closest companions, Hermione Granger (Emma Watson) and Ron
Weasley (Rupert Grint). As this series evolves, it becomes
increasingly apparent that the main focus of heroism lies
not with one specific individual but more with the effort
of a group collaboration, and in "The Prisoner of Azkaban,"
our three main characters seem more engaged by their synergy
than before; the problems are faced collectively rather
than on individual terms. Consider a scene in which the
three teens are trying to save the life of a winged creature
before it falls victim to an executioner's blade, or a scene
in which the three finally come face-to-face with their
adversary and the true intentions of suspicious characters
are finally revealed. These are not personal triumphs for
Harry Potter anymore; he is only the spearhead of a troupe
of bright and energetic wand-wielders who each have much
to gain (or lose) in how dilemmas will play out.
But
compared to what Cuaron offers us in this generally tame
endeavor, both "The Sorcerer's Stone" and "The
Chamber of Secrets" actually seem like effective adventures
with thorough payoffs. Despite his overzealous desire to
see and do everything possible in two-and-a-half hours of
celluloid, director Chris Columbus at least understood the
plight of his heroes in the first two movies and worked
the narrative around them. His successor doesn't quite have
that stigma managed; the plot seems to move completely on
its own accord, dragging along its three protagonists like
mere little accessories, and Cuaron doesn't engage them
in very many plot twists until the climax starts to unfold
(although to be fair, his sense of resolution is a lot more
rich and balanced here than it was with either of the previous
films).
On
the visual scale, the movie has resonating touches, such
as a moving tree that swings back and forth in response
to nearby human activity (there is even a moment of brilliance
in which the tree shakes off the snow from its branches,
and the ice hits the camera lens as if there is no visual
effect in the scene), and a map of inside Hogwarts that,
when activated, allows others to see exactly where certain
people are and what directions they are headed in. The picture
also plays an interesting trick with the concept of time
travel, and the manner in which screenwriter Steve Kloves
approaches this is both skillful and believable in the way
it resolves crucial issues. But take away the various touches
of imagination, and "Harry Potter and the Prisoner
of Azkaban" is basically a routine vehicle that plods
its way through detail after detail without giving much
incentive to feel engaged by the specifics. It more or less
has the same payoff that its two predecessors did: the kind
that makes you wonder if there is still light at the end
of the tunnel for a movie franchise that remains as ambitious
(but problematic) as this one.
© 2004, David Keyes, Cinemaphile.org.
Please e-mail the author here
if the above review contains any spelling or grammar mistakes. |