Harry Potter & The Prisoner of Azkaban...

[Taz]

Anyone going to see the new Harry Potter movie??

Im going today (mrs T is a big fan)

Wish me luck

[spidermanalf]

saw it yesterday, thought it was great!

Although each scene was kind of rushed (Quidditch match!) but there was a alot of story to get through, and the 2 1/2 hours flew past! And IO loved the new setting!

[Stace]

Saw it last night thoroughly enjoyed it!!!

Well worth a watch!

Stace

[JonBlakeburn]

Well as I'm back home now, I thought I'd make a return to the forums (All be it under a different username) and post about HP3!

I thought it was really well put together - I really enjoyed Alfonso Cuarón's direction over Chris Columbus' previous two HP films. The CG effects looked really smooth too, again unlike the first two films. I'll agree with the above, the two and a half hours really did fly by - time seemed to pass much quicker in HP than in Troy or Day After Tomorrow that I went to see last week!

[BlueOrange25]

Definitely, should be the best one of the lot so far.

[Shady]

Also went to see this yesterday, but after having a large slap up Bank Holiday Breakfast, I lost 'concentration' for about 30 seconds - and missed the vital section in the 'Screaming Shack'. So can anyone fill me in on the question below...


Spoiler

- What was the deal with Sirius Black and Lupin ? How were these tied up with Peter Pettigrew and framed for the murder of the Potters ? Were they present at the time ? Where did Pettigrew come from and what is his connection ?
I thought from the initial film that it was Valdermort himself who despatched the Potters ?


Curse my good lady's fine breakfast...

[JimmytheSaint]

Although the story was good, I found the pacing a little off and felt that the story of the Dementors and Sirius Black was a little underused/rushed, making the peril Harry Potter was facing somewhat underwhelming. I thought the second one was better and darker in it's tone.

[JonBlakeburn]

Spoiler

You've got me thinking now. When I think back to the film I can't think why Sirius Black had been framed for the Potters' deaths. Peter Pettigrew actually killed them, and was turned into Scabbers; Ron Weasley's rat as a punishment. In the original film it was Voldemort that had done the killings, but it seems that in PoA Peter had been one of Voldemorts 'loyal followers'.

Hmm... you have indeed got me deep in thought over that now. I'm going to have to catch it again sometime, just to clarify it for myself...

[keiths]

SPOILER

Remus Lupin, Peter Pettigrew, Sirius Black and James Potter were best friends at Hogwarts. Because Lupin was a Werewolf (and was forced to transform each full moon, the others developed into Animagii - wizards who can voluntarily shape-shift to an animal form - in order to keep Lupin company and help him through his monthly ordeal. The four friends even adopted nicknames that reflected their animal forms; Lupin was 'Moony', because of the full moon that turned him to a Werewolf, Pettigrew was 'Wormtail' because he turned into a rat, Black was 'Padfoot' - a large black dog and James Potter was Prongs after the Stag with fine antlers that was his animagus form. This explains the "Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs" on the Marauder's Map and also the reason that Harry Potters Patronus Charm took the form of a Stag.

However, Pettigrew went over to the 'dark side' and secretly became a supporter of Voldemort and it was Pettigrew that led Voldemort to James and Lilly, however Black found out and tried to stop Pettigrew - but Pettigrew faked his own death by cutting his own finger off and casting a spell that killed dozens of innocent bystanders, before transforming into Scabbers - leaving Black to be arrested for the murders.

PS. Thought the film was far, far better than the previous 2, however the pacing was rushed.

Hope this helps,

[Taz]

Took Mrs Taz on Monday and her verdict is as follows:

I came out of the viewing knowing that I liked the film, but feeling kinda cheated somehow..... I was disappointed that Hogwarts had changed such a lot from the previous 2 films..... the whomping willow, hagrids hut, the fat lady - all in totally different places - and I thought they were spot on in films 1 & 2.


Slight SPOILER
I think the storyline was rushed and centred too much on the main three characters. You only saw Draco 3 or 4 times in the whole film - and can anyone tell me what happened to Crabbe?! He was there in the first scene, but then after that there was a skinny guy in his place - he was never referred to as Crabbe, but I presumed he was meant to be him, as he always appeared with Draco and Goyle (eg: when Hermione smacked him at the stone circle). And Draco's hair - please slick it back again in Goblet of Fire! - it adds to his "nastiness" perfectly!

But as a fan I enjoyed it overall..... I think Chris Columbus had a better idea of the whole Potter thing. He was a fan, and this director admitted to never having read a HP book until he was asked to direct Prisoner of Azkaban.

I'll be very interested to see what this 3rd director does with Goblet of Fire. I read that it will not be released as 2 films, as was previously thought, but I hope that doesnt mean they chop out too much of the story to make it a decent length for kids to sit through?

Long live Potter !

Slight Spoiler alert added at Taz’s request.

[Adrenochrome]

Just got back from "seeing" this and unfortunately can't comment on it as once i was seated i promptly fell asleep wakening up only to see the end credits rolling and an empty auditorium

Adrenochrome.

[Taz]

Originally Posted by adrenochrome

Just got back from "seeing" this and unfortunately can't comment on it as once i was seated i promptly fell asleep wakening up only to see the end credits rolling and an empty auditorium

Adrenochrome.

Fair play

[Taz]

One thing I did notice at UCI where I saw this, was they warned the audience that night vision cameras were in use to spot people videoing the movie...10 seconds in and I saw 2 IR cameras switch on

[JonBlakeburn]

Originally Posted by Taz

One thing I did notice at UCI where I saw this, was they warned the audience that night vision cameras were in use to spot people videoing the movie...10 seconds in and I saw 2 IR cameras switch on

I viewed the film at the Showcase Cinema in Teesside and they've actually got a couple of fixed (Or semi-fixed. I've only noticed them during HP) IR cameras either side of the screen. Odd thing was that they had a red LED and a green tinge to the lens so you can blatantly see them...

Watched it lastnight with the missus. We both hated it.
Why?
basically the characterisations was weak.
nothing is explained.
it felt rushed.
Why was everybody speaking so fast?