Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
1/2

Well, it's about time the Harry Potter movies came into their own as a respectable fantasy series. The third entry in the series, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, represents a huge step in the right direction for the young wizard. While the first two installments (The Sorcerer's Stone and The Chamber of Secrets) were enjoyable diversions, this darker, more magical sequel puts them both to shame.

Certainly the main reason for this is the change of director. Chris Columbus, the director of the first to films, has stepped aside and handed the reigns to Alfonso Cuaron, the director of 2002's critically lauded Y Tu Mama Tambien. Cuaron proves to be more-than-capable of handling the material, crafting a motion picture that seems constantly alive. It's the first time Harry's universe has felt real, rather than like the craftmanship of a large group of set designers. This may be because Cuaron actually moves the camera, something Columbus refrained from doing for the first two films. Actually, "move" may be a little unfair. Cuaron sends the camera soaring around characters and through Hogwarts. The sheer filmaking skill on display here is amazing.

For the first time, Harry's nemesis Voldemort is nowhere to be found. Instead, the villain here is Sirius Black (Gary Oldman), the wizard who sold Harry's parents out to He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named. Black has gone and escaped from Azkaban Prison, the only prisoner to ever do so, and is now out looking for Harry, who is starting his third year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Joining him are pals Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson), as well as kindly headmaster Dumbledore (Michael Gambon). New to the school are Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher Lupin (David Thewlis), who may be hiding a dark secret, and eccentric Sybil Trelawney (Emma Thompson), the divination teacher who predicts dark things in Harry's future.

One thing that jumps out immediately about Azkaban is how much darker it is than the first two films. Columbus's light-hearted fantasy adventure has been replaced with a sense of palpable dread. Darkness pervades the film, both in look and theme; this is probably as scary as Harry Potter could get. And what of the Dementors, creepy wraiths out on the prowl for Black? Simple CGI creations, they are easily more frightening than any huge computer-generated monster. Adding to the sense of dark reality, the young protagonists are dressed not in capes and cloaks but jeans and sneakers.

The trio of lead actors, Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson are all aging with their characters. They have also all noticably improved. Radcliffe is still the weakest of the three, but is far more convincing here than before. One hopes that all three will stay on through the end of the series. Michael Gambon replaces the late Richard Harris as Dumbledore, and does it so ably that many may not notice the change. All of the new additions are good. David Thewlis, a talented character actor, does wonders with a difficult role, and Emma Thompson makes an impression in just a few short scenes. The real standout, though, is Gary Oldman, who does terrific work in a complex part.

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is just a great fantasy film. Through liberal cuts from J.K. Rowling's source novel, Cuaron has crafted an involving work steps and bounds above Columbus's far-too-literal adaptations. If Mike Newell, the director of the next film, continues what Cuaron has started, we could have a timeless fantasy series on our hands.

© 2004 Matt Noller