Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

A colossal fan of both the Harry Potter books and movies, it was a big disappointment to me when I could not grab the first day first shows tickets to IMAX. However, my one year s anticipation has well paid off. With a darker theme and a new director, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban has become an instant worldwide hit and my personal favorite of the franchise.

The Story:

J.K Rowling s third book revolves around a darker theme. It is Harry s third year at Hogwarts. Sirius Black, believed to be Voldemort s biggest follower and responsible for the death of Harry s parents, has escaped from Azkaban prison and is now coming after Harry. Pursuing him are the vicious guards of Azkaban, the Dementors, foul hooded creatures who suck happiness out of their victims. (I won t give a more detailed outline of the plot). The absence of the Dark Lord as the sole Bad Guy gives the movie its uniqueness. An aura of suspense envelopes the entire script. Its mature tone is what makes it so appealing. We watch Harry step into teenhood, and we sense his joy and we feel his loss and pain.


The Cast:

The three protagonists are as usual the vital characters. Radcliffe s performance in the first two was not very satisfying; but here he leaves little room for criticism. Playing the central character is a major part; everyone expects so much from him. Daniel has tried his best and has delivered a praiseworthy performance. His emotional scenes left me quite impressed. And boy, has he grown handsome!

Rupert s role is reduced to that of a comic sidekick in this movie, yet as in the previous two, he does it so well. The blank stare, the face he makes on seeing a spider, he has an excellent future prospect in the comedy genre. And as for Emma, only one sentence will suffice. Her flair for acting has grown as much as her beauty. Whatever critics might say, I did and shall keep saying that she had delivered a gem of a performance in the first and second movies. And here too she completely steals the show. She has the best part in the movie when she delivers a most admirable punch to the nose of Draco Malfoy.

Cuaron has assembled a very ambitious cast of talented British actors. The two I esteemed beyond measure are Michael Gambon as Professor Albus Dumbledore and Emma Thompson as the mysterious Professor of divination, Sybil Trelawney. I had a big doubt whether anyone would be able to replace the late Richard Harris. But Gambon blends into the role so well. He is the naughtier and wittier Dumbledore I had always imagined him to be. His eye twitches with old-age mischief just as it does in the book.

And Emma Thompson's performance was extremely hilarious. Some critics might think that she plays the part a bit too broadly, but I, having read the book atleast half a dozen times over, thought that Miss Thompson's expressions and throw of words gave just the right touch to the character.

The old favorites are back; Robbie Coltrane as the always lovable Hagrid; Alan Rickman as Professor Snape (he still has that permanent sneer frozen on his face) and the elegant Maggie Smith as the caring and ever lip-pursing Professor Mcgonagall. It upset me a bit that they had such minor parts. Maggie Smith barely had five minutes on-screen time. Nonetheless, I was happy that they were there.

David Thewlis (a new addition to the cast) plays the role of Lupin, the new Defence against the Dark Arts teacher, quite well. His is another performance I really liked. He brings a lot of depth into the scenes he has with Harry. The bond between them is evident from the start. And Gary Oldman is indeed exemplary as Sirius Black. Renowned for negative roles, he is the ideal portrayal of Black. The rage of an innocent man thrown into prison for twelve years, his pent-up hatred for the one who betrayed his best friends, and his great love for Harry, all these emotions are played to near perfection by Oldman.

Among the non- significant characters, viewers will be most pleased with the uproarious performance by Dawn French as the Fat Lady. Pam Ferris does the perfect enactment of Aunty Marge. Timothy Spall is excellent in his small role (I won t give away the suspense) and Julie Christie gives a special performance as Madame Rosemerta, the Hogsmeade innkeeper.

The Good:

The success of the movie owes itself to the brilliance of Mr. Cuaron s direction. Even the minutest details have been tethered to with exquisite magnificence. At night, the portraits object to a light in the hallways (hey, it disturbs their slumber). The Time Travel has also been depicted fantastically. Cuaron has deviated from the script a lot (take for example the ending of the movie with Harry riding the Firebolt). But he presents the movie in such a way that the audience remains totally captivated from start to finish.

No Harry Potter movie is complete without CGI. As in the first and second movie, CGI brings the imaginative world of Rowling to the dazzling bright of the silver screen. The Dementor sequences are frighteningly wonderful. The Hippogriff Buckbeak looks so real that not even for a second do you think that it is animated. Same holds true for the Werewolf and the Grim. I especially love that scene when the Monster Book of Monsters hides under Harry s bed. The backgrounds are simply breathtaking. The costumes too have undergone a change. This year, except classes, the students move around in casual clothes.

John Williams returns to give a spectacular score to accompany the stunning visuals. Save a little of Hedwig s theme heard in the Prologue, the Maestro has conjured a delightful plethora of new themes; the main highlight being a haunting flute tune "A Window to the Past". Another grand theme with the classic Williams'style is Buckbeak s Flight. He has also composed an excellent new theme song Double Trouble . With mirthful melody and Macbeth-inspired lyrics it adds to the usual Williams brilliance.


My Grievances:

In trying to make the movie shorter in length, some of the major aspects of the script have been omitted. For instance, in the film no elucidation is provided as to how Sirius escaped from Azkaban whereas no other convict had ever managed it.

Secondly, the film offers no explanation as to the origin of the Marauder s Map or who are Moony, Prongs, Padfoot and Wormtail? Actually (for those who haven t read the book) James Potter, Lupin, Sirius and Peter Pettigrew were best friends at Hogwarts. However, Lupin had been bitten by a werewolf when he was a boy and hence would turn into one himself every night there was a full moon. Inspite of knowing all this, Dumbledore had let him study at the school. As one of their friends was a werewolf, James, Sirius and Peter themselves became unregistered Animagi to keep him company; Sirius, a dog (Padfoot), Peter, a rat (Wormtail) and James, a stag (Prongs, Harry s Patronus). They had invented the Marauder s Map. Also, The Shrieking Shack was never haunted. Dumbledore had arranged for Lupin to be there during the nights, away from Hogwarts, for the safety of both him as well as the students.

The most important aspect which the movie fails to illuminate is that Sirius had been made James and Lily s Secret-Keeper; that only he was supposed to know where they were hiding. Based on Sirius suggestion, there was a last minute change of Keepers from Sirius to Wormtail (Pettigrew). Wormtail had immediately betrayed James and Lily and gone to Voldemort to reveal their whereabouts. No one knew about the swapping of keepers. So Sirius was blamed. Then Pettigrew went to find him. There was a face-to-face confrontation of the two, and in a clever blast of magic, Pettigrew killed twelve Muggles, turned into a rat and fled. To onlookers, it appeared as though Sirius had killed them and hence, he was sent to Azkaban.

All these details are left unexplained in the movie. Excellent though it is, I believe 15 minute more on-screen time would have made the movie the masterpiece I had hoped it would be. Viewers who are not much into reading and are yet big fans of Harry (and there is quite a majority) will leave the hall somewhat confused and dissatisfied.

Cuaron and Columbus:

The first two movies and the third look and sound so different that a comparison between the two directors becomes obvious. Both Sorcerer s Stone and the Chamber of Secrets were estimable movies, yet Columbus had adapted even the minutest details from the book. Hence many critics had complained regarding the slow pacing. Cuaron, on the other hand, has been more inventive and has modified the script, so the movie moves faster and at the same time keeps the audience glued to the chair till the end. Yet, in doing so, he overlooks certain critical details.

The third is indeed the best of the three so far, and yet it does not reach that Pure Perfection Mark, owing mainly to the excessive editing of the script. I can just hope that the future Harry Potter movies will touch that zenith of perfection, but not through rushing.