|
My
(Tar's) PoA review
I was very happy with the 3rd Harry Potter film. I felt it was a lot more mature, both in its style and in its take on the books. There is no doubt that it left out plenty but since it was not attempting to be literal to the book, this does not count as a failiure but as a decision. Alfonso Cuaron always said he never intended to be faithful to the book literally but rather in spirit. Since that was his, aim I think he achieved in style. I felt the first two Potter films failed to capture the spirit of the books by trying to cram in too many bright, busy effects and too much detail. They felt like theme-park rides: you enjoy them in that they provide fun and thrills, but provide nothing deeper or more intellectual. The third film was very different. It had that depth that was lacking the previous films. By trying to remain literal to the books, the previous films were doomed to fail because they were trying to communicate something that was expressed perfectly in the books - it's impossible to beat 'perfect'. However, in film 3, Alfonso took the films in their own direction. Like JK said, this was not her 'baby', but Alfonso's. He translated the spirit of the books, I believe, truly into another medium. Aware that his target audience was growing older, and was beginning to outgrow the 'theme-park ride idea', Alfonso created a different mood for the 3rd film. The mood of the film is very similar to that of the 5th book. Harry's emotions are becoming more complicated, he's becoming edgier, more moody and his temper is shorter. He's not afraid to stand up to Snape, even verging of rudeness (like he did in Phoenix) and some of his lines are even from Phoenix. One criticism I had of Phoenix is that JK whisked Harry into a moody adolescence state too abruptly. He went from being patient and measured to being impulsive and very moody in the space of about two months. By starting this transition in film 3, Harry's change will be more gradual and realistic. I was dissapointed to see certain scenes not in the film, such as the Quidditch Final. It would have been nice to see more of a focus on Quidditch, particularly because there's not much of it in books 4 and 5 and it seems the trend is that as Harry's experiences become more serious and life-threatening, Quidditch is taking a back seat. I also would have liked more explanation about the Marauders (Lupin's relation to the Marauders' Map, James's patronus and elaboration on that fact that Snape was at school with Sirius, Lupin, James etc.) - someone who hadn't read the books would have been a little clueless about all the Marauder connections. I felt that the left-out scenes didn't necessarily detract from the film, but it just would have been interesting to see them on film. I loved the style of the film. The cinematography was beautiful - the camera was constantly moving in and out of spaces, creating a dynamic feel - drawing the viewer into the world. The sets were more complete, as well as slightly different. I didn't mind at all the changing of the Hogwarts castle and grounds in relation to the previous films. There was a richer sense of texture and colour, and a definite Mexican touch to things. The soundtrack was vastly improved. Like everything else, it was more grown up and fresher, with a choir in the background and different sounds. The special effects were incredible. I especially loved Buckbeak. I imagined the Dementors significantly different, although the 'soul-sucking' effect was well translated onto film. The story was a little haphazard but quite well told. The time-turner sequence was superbly executed. The characterisation in this film was excellent. Having good actors adds a whole other dimension to things. In the previous two films, the young actors were still getting to grips with things and seemed rather amateur. By this film, however, I was amazed at how they had developed as actors. They seemed natural and comfortable. Rupert Grint (Ron) had added a whole array of expressions to his repoitoir. Emma Watson (Hermione) was coming into her own a lot more, bringing out Hermione's independent, brave, slightly rebellious side. I was happy to see that Alfonso included a lot of Hermione/Ron relationship stuff earlier than JK did in the books - as their relationship seems enevitable later in the series (JK's been dropping constant hints). Dan Radcliffe (Harry) also made a vast improvement. I felt he had always underplayed Harry in the past, but he was beginning to become more confident and adventurous in this film, much closer to capturing Harry's spirit. I think he'll certainly embody Harry completely by film 4 or 5. The other teen actors also all pulled their weight admirably. The adult actors were excellent. David Thewlis played Lupin superbly in most parts. He found the perfect balance - calm, restrained yet cheerful, strong willed and competent as a wizard (as well as ... a little camp!) I thought he was particularly good during the Boggart class and during his transformation, where he was shuddering with pain beneath the light of the moon, evoking a feeling of tremendous pity. Gary Oldman was excellent as Sirius, although I felt he didn't quite capture Sirius at certain, specific instances - because he didn't have enough screen time to properly get into things. Sirius is a very difficult character to play because he's very complicated and layered, and I feel safe with him in Oldman's hands as Oldman is clearly very skilled. The interaction between Lupin and Sirius was pretty much spot-on - especially for anyone who's a Remus/Sirius shipper! Even if JK doesn't see it ... perhaps Alfonso does! Timothy Spall as Peter Pettigrew was suitably rattish, just right. I much preferred Michael Gamdon as Dumbledore to Richard Harris. I felt Harris was too subdued as Dumbledore, he lacked Dumbledore's sense of whacky humour and energy. Gamdon was much closer to capturing the balance - putting accross the feeling that Dumbledore carries both a great burden of power and responsibility but also that he is always good natured, fair, quirky ('Done what?') and cheerful. I felt Gamdon underplayed his sense of responsibility a bit, but otherwise was great. Emma Thompson as Trelawney was delightful. I loved Alfonso's little extra touches. Such as the rasta shrunken head in the Knight Bus, and the Whomping Willow chomping up birds. Magic was no longer the focus but provided a lovely background framework (such as the chairs lifting themselves onto the table top in The Leaky Cauldron) from which the characters could spring. Because of the skilled nature of the cast, Alfonso could now make the characters the main focus, meaning that the viewer really connects to Harry's world on a human level, as we do in the books. This is true escapsim because it provides us with aspects of real life combined with fantastical elements. The story and magic is weaved around the characters, keeping the viewer entralled and creating a rich sense of magical realism. In Prisoner, Alfonso and Steve Kloves, the screenwriter have really created something that is wonderful in its own right. Alfonso has created a film that is wonderful as film, not just as an adaption of a wonderful book. The third film is really something to be proud of - now I know how a true Lord of the Rings fan must have felt. Viva Alfonso! To
write a review please fill out the form below:
|
Reviews: Harry
Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban