Finally, a harry potter movie that starts childlike and ends with maturity! Bravo Alfonso Cuaron!

The best "Harry Potter" film, based on a book that's also the best in the book series. A very decent adapted screenplay. This film also has very good visual effects and the child actors are finally acting. But what I want too see in Potter films, is the set decorator's good job, because this is a fantasy series and I want too see a world that's more magical.

Nice.

This one just doesn't give me that feeling the first two gave me and it lacks the action of the 4th and 5th films. By far the worst so far.

A change happened. They made the third movie a good one. Who'd knew, that adding stuff into movie that wasn't in the book, would make this film better? I give it a high 8 out of 10.

With strong performances stand out Emma Watson, thrills, a great score, great emotional depth, and dazzling visuals make this one of the best of the potters. I give this film 90% of a good movie.

Man, this is like the last good movie and last good book in the Harry Potter series rolled into one. Mildly confusing if you didn't read the books though. It actually alludes to how lacking of logical emotion the series will become.

Dont u think emma watson (hermione) is sooooo fit... !!!????!!!! i do!!!

It was goood.

This one transcends fantasy and becomes a magical epic. it has an emotional resonance that the other two somewhat lacked. This time, you can actually relate to the characters and the difficulties they go through. The human side of Potter comes clear. None of the Potter movies were bad, but this one takes the cake, and sets a new standard.

An excellent interpretation by Mr. Cuaron. He should be applauded for making this film darker, than the "Willy Wonka-ish" first two misfires. The only thing that prevents my awarding it 10 points, is its far-too-short length. Mr. Cuaron should have filmed and cut a three hour version. Reading many of the other reviews, I notice one particular trait in common. Those giving this film a poor review, more than likely demonstrate poor grammar and spelling skills in their postings; whereas those giving the fim a positive review, tend to appear more educated. A coincidence? I would doubt it... (And I will be thoroughly impressed, if my above comment survives editing. I will be surprised if those that maintain this board, have the courage to let someone be offended.)… Expand

Harry Potter is the great filme i ever see!!!! I love it !!!

Well the books are no match to the books...but at least the movie compared to other harry potter movies.

The first two movies are great, but this is the best because of the distinct visual style (which surpasses Tim Burton's in my opinion) and the subtle brilliance in the performances. Sure I can gripe because it changes soooo much from the book and doesn't have very important scenes such as Gryffindor winning the house cup, but it is still a brilliant film that stands well on it's own as well as being part of the series.… Expand

The film in my opinion was (for a kids title) quite dark and brooding and the quidditch scene was very well done and incredibly dramatic. I didnt like the way the story was handed to us and everything was explained by someone making us feel like children (e.g. 'It wasnt my dad i saw! It was me!'.) Those small quips took away from the film but in my opinion it was top class pottery, and I hope GOF improves on the formula.… Expand

The third time around didn't charm me as well as the first two movies in the franchise. They changed the director, which had a big effect on the overall tone of the movie. It was dark and unrelenting to watch. The only thing that appealed to me was how it ended and the magical scenery around Hogwarts. The rest, I could forget about it. There never was a bright moment in the movie, and the only thing Harry has to hold onto is his two friends, Hermoine and Ron. Harry has enemies, he has friends. He still hasn't fully understood that he will in the end have an epic battle with Voldemort because he has an ultimate desire too. Lord Voldemort is very powerful, but his lurking presence around the halls of Hogwarts doesn't frighten him as much as it used to. The director gives us an uncomfortable viewing experience that I wan't happy with and wish this doesn't happen again in the next film.… Expand

Probably the least engaging of the series when it comes to the film adaptations; very uneventful -- missing the engaging parts of the book. Somehow though, even with its serious flaws -- Azkaban is worth watching.

Hands down, the best in the Potter series. The younger actors finally come into there own in this installment. The casting of Michael Gambon as Dumbledore was perfect, and he plays a better Dumbledore then the late Richard Harris (not to be offensive). Visually dark and emotionally satisfying, Azkaban works not only as a Potter movie, but as a movie in its own right.

Prisoner of Azkaban's cinematography itself blows you away, and the world of Hogwarts leaps from the screen almost as well as Pandora (and without the help of 3D). Several new great characters (and actors) enter at this point, stirring darker themes up for the first time. The storyline is also my favorite of the series, and this movie sticks to the source material incredibly well. Emotionally charged, incredible acted, and superbly directed, this is easily for me the best movie of the series.… Expand

A surprising improvement on the first and second installments in acting, artistic elements and emotional involvement in the story. It was darker and with this darkness came a more real movie, plus a pretty cool climactic battle

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is the sequel to Chamber of Secrets and the third film of the franchise. Well-shot, the acting the pretty good, and the script was superb. More action with some scariness this time, since Dementors are now introduced. Less movie mistakes than the previous two. Generally, a great film. Well done, Alfonso Cuaron.

Too episodic to be great, but visually sumptuous and with an actual director at helm, shows the world with far more creativity and authenticity, rather than a visualization of the novels, which aren't much good in the first place.

Now this movie has been praised for turning away from the book and creating something new and different. Personally, changing things is the weakest point of this movie. If you haven't read the book then you'll either find it very confusing or you'll love it, but if you've read the book then nothing will stop you from finding faults and flaws. The story... well If they just wouldn't have deleted some main plots, it would have been as good as its predecessors. Not including the plots from the book is understandable but introducing new things is unacceptable. Acting... the trio have matured very much and I'd still say they were born for these roles. All the adults are great as usual. The two new actors, David as Lupin was perfect but Michael Gambon as Dumbledore... oh boy! Erase what I said in the beginning about the alterations in the plot being its weakest point. No! Michael Gambon is the weakest point of the movie. He sucks big time!!! He has tarnished the Dumbledore portrayed by the versatile actor Richard Harris and the character created by the prolific writer J.K.Rowling. Michael Gambon - one of the major reasons why I disliked the movie, the other reason was the tiny whomping willow. Direction... I don't know why Warner bros removed Chris. It's not that Alfonso is not talented, but changing a director breaks a smooth flow which was found between movie 1 and 2. Sorceror's and chambers felt like it was from the same world but this movie feels like a whole new world, only the characters are same. Chris had improved upon chamber of secrets by making it dark and suspenseful and with prisoner he would have made a hell of a movie (mean it in a positive manner). Visuals... for a 2004 movie it's visuals are excellent. Even today they look fantastic! Overall I'd rate this movie a B+. I would have given it an A if the director hadn't changed the small details which makes it very different from the books and the predecessor movies.… Expand

Excellent film.as always the central trio undermine the fantastic story and characters with wooden performances and overall dislikability but theyre poor acting is not enough to overshadow awesome stints from Oldman,Rickman and Thewlis to name but a few. its hilarious to read the geeky fan-boys reviews stating how poorly the director adapted their beloved rowlings book to film when we all know theyre clearly in the wrong.cuaron did a masterful job with a difficult piece of childrens fiction and should have stayed on to direct the other films rather than allowing rank amateurs to toe the line as rowling had intended all along.… Expand

I am a huge fan of the harr potter series, i have only read the first 2 books but i have watched all the movies and i was more impressed with the 2nd film more than the rest of them, but im reviewing the 3rd one, i thought it was good, sometimes during the film i lost interest but the fact that harry wanted to avenge his parents when he finds out the guy responsible is on the loose and looking for him, he wants to kill him and i love it when harry is doing anything to find this man....the darkness of the film kept me interested and some didn't but overall this film was just Ok...i give it an 8 because im a fan of the harry potter series and although it didn't impress me as much as the 2nd film, it's still good.… Expand

By far the worst Harry Potter movie. The adaptation is horrible, and the story-telling is lousy. The director gives a lot of time to stupid details [the bus, the spider-book, the boggart class...] instead of telling important passages in the story. And, the worst of all: the ending. The ending SUCKS. Looks like they ran out of money. Fortunately this was the only movie directed by Cuaron.

I thought this was a very good movie. here's why i only gave it a five. i'd read the book expecting lots of quidditch but there was hardly any. besides the books are always better.

A massive improvement over the first two films in the franchise. The choice was made to streamline the book, leaving out scenes that many would undoubtedly have loved to see -- the payoff was a fast-moving, tightly focused story that never lost energy or lapsed into lameness. Combined with an excellent cast who put in top-rate work across the board (though I will confess I missed Richard Harris as Dumbledore), this is the first film in the series that left me feeling sorry it was over.… Expand

I'm a huge Harry Potter fan, and when I learned that they were making the movies I was excited, but somewhat wary. The books are fantastic and so complex that it is near impossible to capture the true feeling of J. K. Rowling's masterful series. The first two movies were excellent in a way that you can understand the plot but cannot understand why the books are so wonderful. The third movie, however, is a perfect image of the dark, angsty, exciting book,,,J. K. Rowling should be more pleased then ever.… Expand

Excellent adaptation. Cuaron expertly interpreted what the book intended and translated it well onto the screen albeit minor, and necessary plot changes. The other HP films were child's play in comparison.

The movie was nothing compared to the book, but brilliant nevertheless. I didnt really enjoy dark after dark scene, but it still kept me entertained, besides, emma watson (hermione) was smokin hot!

By far the best hp film ever!!! the trio brings delightful perfomances. Harry brings inspiration in his feelings about missing his parents and evil forces try to bring out those memories, and he dont let them, ron and hermione's romance brings more interest in the movie and they ignite in every scene that they have. its dazzling and well done!!! congrats mr.cuaron!! uve made mexico proud!!!

Terrible, a totally inaccurate visual representation of a great book. Being a fan of the books i could not help but notace the film SUCKED!!

This one is definitely the best out of the first three movies. It seems much darker than the others and no longer feels like a film just for the kids. The graphics have improved a lot and so has the quality of the acting. Definitely a thumbs up 10/10.

From what I've seen people either adore this film or loathe it.I personally adore it. I think the actors are great (spesh Dan Radcliffe!) even though Richard Whats-his-name was actually better than Michael Gambon. The special effects in the film are great as well and as I want to be an actress when I'm older I wish I could have acted in it. I can't wait for the 4th film to come out (Nov. 18) and I'm also waiting for the 7th book. As you can see I'm an avid Harry Potter fan. Apparently the 5th film is out in 2007.… Expand

I realy liked all the action in it, I recomend it to ages 9+

Absolutely fantastic!!

Great, but not as good as the fab book! Emma Watson and that are other guy(Cedric Diggory) are absolute gorgous (not together). I don't think Ron and Hermione should get together, Hermione is way to good for Ron.

The best Harry Potter movie in the series.

I just finished watching the first 3 Harry Potter films on DVD, in preparation for seeing the fourth film in the theatres tomorrow. Watching the films in this way really emphaszies how different the third film is from its predecessors. If I had not seen the first two films I would probabyl have rated this film a bit higher, but what bothered me was that this director chose to change both the scenery and Hogwarth's structure/routines. I liked that the first two films played up Hogwarth's similarities to traditional English boarding schools, and I was especialyl disappointed to see that this new director chose to "modernize" so many things (including the street clothing the characters wear for much of this film). Most significant is the castign change for the role of Professor Dumbledore. Another reviewere noted here that Dumbledore is the centre of the novels, and it's important to really feel that he's trustworthy as a leader. The late Richard Harris was wonderful; the new actor plays Dumbledore as a bit of a joke, and this bothered me. Dumbledore is portrayed in this film as a doddering old man, which is absolutely contrary to the books themselves and to the prior 2 films. All in all, this film will probably be most appreciated by people who haven't read the books or seen either of the previous films.… Expand

The best movie(and the goblet of fire) i've ever known! i live HARRY POTTER!

A great movie.Infact the best of the lot.This movie possesses a certain warmth and security that was absent in the earlier Harry Potter films.The visuals are spectacular, so is the casting and direction.Alfonso Cuaron deserves all the accolade he is getting for putting together a polpular yarn into the big screen without displeasing most fans and critics.I was rather amused to see this film as my expectations were very low after being treated to two dry affairs previously.I would have given the movie a rating of 10, if it had not been for the miscasting of Dumbledore and that screaming Sirius Black poster.Michael Gambon is a decent Dumbledore,but he doesn't meet the poignant expectations created by the late Sir Richard Harris.I still firmly believe that Sir Ian Mckellen would have made an excellent Dumbledore. Overall a great movie recommended for any Harry Potter fan.… Expand

It's not as magical as the first two films. The sounds were also very poor, it doesn't seem to compliment the mood of the scenes. The only thing I liked about the movie was the environments were more detailed. Over-all, it was a bit disappointing.

I did not like the cliffhanger at the very end otherwise I would've given Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban a 10.

Firstly if anyone else uses the phrase magical to decscribe the harry potter movies I will break their legs. It's so annoying. Also this has been the best film so far. The first two, Radcliffe couldn't act or make anything look at all natural. At least there was a slight increase in acting quality there. Also I thought the effects were well included and didn't look out of place. And also no need to keep comparing them to the books, as it is obviously very difficult to transpose an entire year into pictures and keep the pacing reasonable.… Expand

Really, not just an excellent Potter movie but a genuinely good movie on its own. I don't think it's as good as Order Of The Phoenix, but still, excellent job. Emma Watson was good in this movie, and it's a shame she hasn't delivered that same performance.

The most engaging and entertaining film of the series to date. This is Harry Potter, darker and more serious than before. Good adaptation from the book.

Cuaron did genius work ignoring the previous of Chris Columbus. The third film in series is matching the film in style, it's darker and deeper. The work that Elfonso Cuaron did changed the Harry Potter film forever, for good.

Fantastic, very close to the best in the series.

Seriously, it needs to be redone. Professional reviewers, most of whom have no idea what the book is about, give it a good review because of what? The special effects? The "dark"ness? Did they read the book? Did the !@^%$#!&! director even read the book!?!?! Or did someone just give him a 2 minute summary of it and he made the movie out of what he could remember from it? How did JKR agree to this? Did she even? I can only imagine her feelings of horror as she watched her book getting murdered. It seems these questions will go unanswered. Feels like scenes were mixed up and a lot of stuff has been horribly changed and a lot has been left out. Good thing the director didn't stick around for the fourth part. Good riddance.… Expand

Ho-hum. Worst of the three.

Great movie! Interesting! I liked it more than Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. It?s like a thriller. Daniel Redcliff, Emma Watson are great, also Rupert Grint. Really funny, can?t wait for the next movie- Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.!

Harry's scar was in a different places every 3 scenes. When Hermione punched Malfoy it didn't loook realistic at all. The dementors weren't scary at all..... and Sirius was ugly *cry cry*.

Best book of the first three, and best film thus far. Everyone in my group (ages ranging from 4 to 74, with me somewhere in the middle) loved it and could not find one negative thing to say, other than we missed Richard Harris.

Suprisingly interesting. The final 30 minutes was awesome!

I found myself asking "when is the actual main plot gonna start?" and the the credits started rolling.

This fil is just the best i m very fan of harry i just love himm n his film its the best film for tean agers n childrens.

A dark and visually stunning tale, but it had me scratching my head just a little as it wound on. (my kids had read the book, so they were shushing me).

This movie needs to be redone, it was horrible. I have waited so long for this movie and to my disgust I was totally let down. What a bust, dark scene after dark scene. Did the director even read the book? REDO THIS MOVIE!!!

One of the great masterpieces of film fantasy. Cuaron clearly remembers, with vivid clarity, what it was like to be 13 years old. And he has wedded that fundamental understanding of the confusion and fear and wonder of those formative years to Rowling's fantasy treatment of the theme of waning adolescence in the onslaught of coming adulthood. Rowling's merging of magic, mythology and realistic emotional renderings of social realities and growing pains has been brilliantly served by Cuaron's stunning filmaking. Magic exists as an everyday reality, organically integrated into the action, instead of as a special effect to be WOWed by, (as in the Columbus-directed installments). The kids act like real kids instead of kids on a Hollywood soundstage. The expert sense of widescreen framing and vertiginous camerawork, coupled with the muted, sparkling color scheme that bespeaks the story's emotional tenor, and the lush outdoor grounds, brings Hogwarts to life as it reads on the page. This is what I envisioned while reading the book. For the first time in this series of films, I was as moved by the film as I was by the book. Finally, a filmmaker has done Rowling proud. Bravo! … Expand

I thought this movie was way better than the first 2. the first 2 were stupid disney kiddie movies, while this one was much more cleverly done. and it isnt the book, its a movie, totally separate, it doesnt have to have every single little piece of dialogue.

Thank God for Cuaron! He breathed GREAT life into the franchise, drastically improving over 1 & 2, which were quite methodical.

One Of The Greatest Movies Ive Ever Seen Great Movie And The Actors R Great To Got To See It Great Movie.

This movie needs to be REDONE. I was so angry with what this director did with this movie. Did Alfonso even read the book? I'm angry and disappointed at looking at a gray dull boring screen.

The third movie was disappointing. Chris Columbus did such an outstanding job in the first two,it was disappointing to see the third one and how it was done. The costumes were not as good and the kids wore blue jeans way too much,which took away from the feel of Hogwarts. And Prof. Dumbledores robes were not near as nice as the first two movies.And the lighting was lacking as well. I loved the Harry Potter movies sooo much up till this one. I hope the fourth one is better than this one.… Expand

Have seen it three times and appreciate it more each time. Great atmospherics, storytelling and setting up for the next movie...

Fantastic! Much better than the first two.

I was appauled with the quality of this movie. 70% of the book was left out, and it doesnt even seem like the director read the book before he made the movie. the "climax" was ridiculous because character after character just kept walking in the room and started talking, and even before harry really knows who sirius black is, he is asked to come live with him. give me a break. Also, the actor who filled in for richard harris was awful. this movie blows. the plot made no sense.… Expand

It rocks.

It's a pity that the Harry Potter fans cannot see that their beloved franchise took a turn for the better. Still, they can't seem to understand that this is a FILM, not a regurgitation of the book. Columbus destroyed Harry Potter in a very pathetic way that it was such a complete surprise to see Cuaron have everything work from the first frame. Let's face it: The first two films were profitable but failures in every sense of the word. It did not FEEL like Harry Potter. It felt like "Lord of the Rings for Kids". This film is so much more mature, assured and entertaining. It was as if I were discovering the books all over again. To those who gave this movie a negative review because it "wasn't like the book", then watch more films or read the books again. It's absolutely apalling to read death threats for Cuaron because he didn't explain the Marauders. It's disgusting for little kids to make claims like this because stupid little omissions (that really aren't important to the story, believe it or not. Any educated fan of literature and film would know this). Rowling herself even stated that it was her favorite film. You children can by all means watch and love the butchered Harry Potter of the first two, but the adult fans of this series will surely love "Azkaban".… Expand

It is a brilliant movie. the charachters are played amazingly by the actors.

The third installment in the Harry Potter movie series, is by far the best one yet! It has all the excellent qualities of Sorcerer's Stone and Chamber of Secret's, only it takes a more mature approach to the subject matter. Instead of being kind of a family fluff picture like the other two, it blossoms into a much more thought-provoking romp, and overall just more of a better film. This one could be considered artistic filmmaking, then the other two which were more about franchise.… Expand

A movie expirience unlike any other, you can even feel the excitement of the last 30 minutes of the film in your vains. This movie will be on my "top ten movies of the year".This movie has enchanted me.

This is a great movie and i loved every second of it.

It was ok, didnt give justice to the book, but i didnt expect it to.

The worse ot the three original book os too good not to be followed religiously this did not need a director's creative input.

I first want to start out by saying that after this movie I don't think any more Harry Potter movies should be made. It is, in my opinion, impossible to take 742 pages and condense it into a three hour movie. I don't blame the director because writing a book and creating a movie are completly different projects. I didn't enjoy this movie because I thought that too many things were happening all at once. It felt as if Cuaron just took the main events from the book, changed a few things, and poorly jumbled them into a script. It felt as if the magic that the first two films had brought was missing. For example: Peter Jackson had made many changes with The Lord of the Rings but I enjoyed because it kept me interested. Also each movie has at least 30 minutes extra of the movie that cut strickly for time purposes. The movie made sense. In Harry Potter 3 I was bored and marveled at the fact that Cuaron attempted to save it with a few corney lines from Sirius. I think that this movie will spoiled it for those who have or have not read the book because it ruins what the books are built on. The reader's own imagination and creativity. I still believe that another Harry Potter movie should not be made because it is impossible to put that amount of literature into a three hour movie.… Expand

As an avid fan of the Harry Potter series of books and also the first 2 movies, I was at the theater on opening weekend. Prisoner of Azkaban has always been my favorite in the series and knowing that Gary Oldman was playing Sirius Black, made me even more excited and giddy to see the movie. I am disheartened by the direction the movie took. I understand that it is near impossible to create the movie word for word, but if your not even going to try - then you shouldn't be able to call it Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. I saw it for a second time with my brother who never read the novels, he enjoyed the movie... so obviously you made the non-supporters of the book happy. I am looking forward to the next novel in the series and can't wait to read it... however, I feel the next movie will just have to wait till it plays on HBO, I will not be paying a dime to see it in the theaters, especially if it has the same director. Let those who don't or can't read, enjoy your version.… Expand

Alas, I wanted to like this movie. I really, really did. I loved the first and second, and marveled at the true-to-the-story cinematography and scripting. This one looked more like J.K. Rowling Meets a Drunken John Woo. Character development was nil, screen time of the supporting cast was dismal, and I think the established characters were misused and scripted out of character. The worst offender was Dumbledore; Not to say the guy playing Dumbledore wasn't a decent actor, but someone directed him BADLY: He lacked the self-assured grace of Mr. Harris (the prior Dumbledore who unfortunately passed away last year). It really affects a movie to have a character as important as Dumbledore suddenly change from an incredibly wise, kindly old wizard and teacher of youngsters to a doddering old fool who cannot be trusted not to hurt his own students (Cited: Accidentally tapping Ron's injured leg - The REAL Dumbledore would NEVER have done that.) In contrast, the "Real" Dumbledore was a man who could portray a figure that inspired calm trust. The current version inspires a smirk. It's sad because Dumbledore IS Hogwart's, and, while Snape (Alan Rickman, one of my favorite Character Actors) delivers his nasty best, his screen time seems truncated. Worse, the whole womping-willow scene was far too short, with too little dialogue to understand WHY Snape went in after the others, and WHO Padfoot Et. Al. were in the realtime (I'm not going to spoil any more than that). All in all, I am saddened by this turn with the Harry Potter Movies, as what I wanted, and most of J.K. Rowling's other fans wanted, was a visualization of the wonderful books. Instead, we got another action-comedy in a familiar setting, making a mockery of our fond memories of favorite characters. I want to vomit.… Expand

This was horrible compared to the first two. The best book was completly ruined. I can only hope that something, anything is done so the fourth movie or any more movies turn out like this. Cuaron should be demoted from director at the very least.

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is by so far my favourite book and movie of all time! Even though the movie could have been a little longer and stuck to the same way that some of the new characters/"items" had shown up...It still amazes me every time i see it!

I have read every Harry Potter book thus far, and Prisoner of Azkaban was my favorite. It had all the makings of a magical world with hippogriffs, dementors, etc. The movie was highly anticipated, but unfortunately became the worst film yet in a long journey ahead. The opening scene seemed to set up the viewers for another great landmark film, but before I knew it I was tossed around thirty or so times in different scenes that had no build up, no complete dialogue of what was happening, parts that never existed in the book, and major parts left out. Where was the magical ladder, the knot in the tree, why was Hagrid's hut in the middle of no where instead of being by the forbidden forest, why did that bridge and water fountain keep showing up for scenes, why was the Quidittch match so short, why did Professor Lupin's werewolf self look like a cheap video game graphic, how come the castle changed, how come all the pivotal background scenes changed, where was the fantastical scenery of hogsmeade (my most anticipated scene), how come JK Rowling picked a porno director who never read her book, and on and on. I am upset and I hope that these dumb critics that I have read don't gloss over the crud this film created for Rowling. I hope she doesn't feel it was a success. I know from what I read from above that fans are mad and want a new director for the Goblet of Fire.… Expand

After reading a raving view in US Newsweek I found myself, as well as my friends, eagerly anticipating the time when we would see it. When we finally went to see it, we found ourselves stupefied with disbelief. How could this be the same movie which had earned such great reviews?! We were in shock at its lack of unity with the book and the liberties Curaron took with this film. If we hadn't read the book much of the plot would have gone have gone right over our heads, (as it did to many others in the audience apparent from the "but I thought's....." and the"what just happened's") so eagerly was the movie skipping from, scene to scene. It seemed jerky and fragmented and did the book a great dishonor. Many wonderfully drawn and colorful characters in the book, such as the magnanimous Albus Dumbledore and the haunted Sirius Black seemed pushed aside and blurred in the movie. The characters (all except for the main trio of Radcliffe, Watson, and Grint ) seemed to lack the depth which made them such a joy to love or hate in book as so inclined. Oh and for those of you who say to dispel the opinions anyone who gave it a low score, that's just because your too unimaginative to visualize the book as your reading it and most likely need a movie to do it for you. The only thing I can say good of Cuaron's directing is that the darker, icy, more seductive tones of the movie seemed to fit right in to reflect the setting, plot and feelings of the characters. Also to those of you who say this movie needs to be more "Disneyfied" and that it is a children's book need to sorely re-think that statement. The story focuses on Harry, a TEENAGER, NOT, a child...I can at least , if nothing else praise Cuaron's darker tones. Harry,Hermione and Ron are NOT children and have more complex feelings, and darker moods. It is not said the teenage years are the most trying only so some can try to portray it as happy and fun. As a teenager myself I know and appreciate this. Those of you want fuzzy warm feelings and happiness should go see The Cat in the Hat or some other movie. I, on the other hand will at least take solace in knowing that the director cannot affect J.K. Rowlings excellent writing abilities. … Expand

Either you liked the first two movies or you liked this one. I am one who liked the first two, but was very disappointed in this one. The first two movies presented stories, whereas this one presents one action scene after another. That would be fine if this were based on an action book, however, JK Rowling has spent many chapters developing a story. This movie seems to boil everything into two catagories, action and bit-part comedy. Character development? I guess it's not needed. And what were some of the extras thrown in for? Is the book not rich enough? It's only a widely popular book. Those who want to see the book protrayed on the screen should not go see this movie. If you want to see a teenage action movie (which means it is highly commercializable) should go see this movie. Ponder this--were those training wheels on Potter's firebolt at the end?… Expand

Finally, the Harry Potter we've all (those of us over 13) been waiting for and that we all (every age) deserve. While Chris Columbus gave us a unique vision of the Harry Potter series, by his second outing as director ("Chamber of Secrets") the series was beginning to feel a bit stale. With, "Azkaban" director Alfonso Cuaron gives us a darker, far more enjoyable Harry Potter. The films success is due in part to some very well-acted supporting roles. However, the main reason this film succeeds is that the lead characters (Harry, Ron, and Hermonie) finally deal with a topic that their real-life counterparts (Radcliffe, Watson, Grint) are very well-equipped to deal with: Puberty. Overall darker, with some intense moments (the Dementors and the Werewolf in particular), memorable images (the ride on the hippogriff and the stormy quidittch match) and great performances all around (David Thewlis and Gary Oldman are very convincing), make this the most exciting and inspiring Harry Potter film to date. May the "Goblet of Fire" (coming to theaters November 2005) continue what Cuaron has very successfully started.… Expand

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is a fantastic film. The sets were dark and gothic, perfectly representing the mood of the story, the actors have improved beyond my expectations, and the scenes flowed very well into one another. Now, I have read the book many, many, MANY times and I consider it to be the best and my favourite of the Harry Potter series. To those 'fans' who have been blasting this movie because it doesn't have every little detail or has changed some aspects from the first two, I must ask: what in god's name were you expecting? The book was longer than the first two and far more complex. To make an emotionally captivating film AND to include every last detail of the book would be very difficult to do, if not impossible. But Cuaron did a very good job of capturing the atmosphere of the book. And the story line is exactly the same, Scott who gave this 0. Is it neccessary to show the Firebolt scene at that time? Is it essential that the Boggart show every figure it transformed into in the novel? Hardly. If they did follow every detail, as in the first two, you get a very jarring and poorly put-together film that has way to many aspects and pointless scenes that really do nothing to further any aspects of the movie. See, in this movie, the scenes fit together with remarkable ease, and each scene had a dramatic purpose- without forgetting to be entertaining. And I believe that many of the sets were the same- just shown in different lighting conditions and at different camera angels (save the Whomping Willow and some outdoor locations, which I believe were all computer animated in the first two as opposed to live sets like this one). So, for being a captivating film that is entertaining, complex, and remains very faithful to the tone of the book yet still fitting nicely into the movie series, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban gets a perfect score. Good job!… Expand

Please don't listen to the nerds who are rating this film so abysamally. They obviously don't know the difference between a motion picture and a novel. I don't care how many times you read Prisoner of Azkaban, i read it and i also read all the other Potter books. Yes, Cuaron did change certain things and left certain things out. But would you rather this film be a trudgen borefest like the last two films were? What Cuaron has done here is made the first truly entertaining Potter film. The actors are twice as charming, the dialogue is twice as entertaining, the scenery is twice as beautiful, the pacing is twice as effective, even the music and computer special effects are much better this time around. So please see the movie for what it is and rate it farely, not rating it a 0 because it left out a few details from the book. I wish the first two films could have been more like this.… Expand

Didn't explain enough about the story.

The last two Harry Potter movies sucked big but this one was aaaaawesome. This was definitely the most grown up version. I just pray that Mike Newell keeps The Goblet of Fire in the same league as this one.

I saw this movie twice. I believe that it is the best out of the bunch. Those who say it sucked and it was not true to the book one bit I have something to ask you... DID YOU AT ALL READ THE BOOK AND MOVIE? One thing I think you should all know is that a movie can and never will be true to the book that it follows or past that it follows. They are based on getting all viewers to love it not just those who know it before they watch it. Hollywood movies are movies not copywrites of books put into picture and speaking. … Expand

From the very first scene, one could see the movie would lack creativity, continuity, and consistency with the previous movies and books. The film techniques were lacking. The director did a poor job in creating believable characters and believable acting. Scenes jumped from one part of the book to another, leaving out some of the most enjoyable parts and lacking in any sort of consistent flow. I have always "sat on the edge of my seat" while watching the Harry Potter movies. For the first time, I found myself bored. JK - the magic is gone. You had a good thing, why change it? A shame too, The Goblet of Fire is my favorite book and I'm afraid the movie will be awful.… Expand

It Was Just The scenes that were the more important 1s. It S U C K E D.

I love this movie and i think that they should keep making more books and movies to continue the sequels. I would like to become an actor someday but im only fourteen so im still working on it.

As a movie is was pretty good, but if you've read the book it was a huge letdown. The scenery was more accurate but some things just didn't fit. Like when Harry cast the Patronus and it was more of a shield rather than a Stag. My friend and I went and she didn't read the book and i had to explain half of the movie to her. Several friends have had the same comments. It really did skip around and left most in awe and wonder not of the movie but rather everything that went over there heads. I know it's hard to keep to the books but I can't believe JK Rowling let this movie turn to what it has. The other two movies had good details and were well developed and were a big leadup to this letdown. They were a bit boring but this movie just didn't flow with them. The looks and basically everything didn't fit with the other movies. I'm sorry but I hope the next book (which is very good) captures both excitement while leaving the audiance who haven't read the books with full understanding on what is going on.… Expand

This movie was very exciting probably more exciting than the first 2 movies very exicting and thrilling and it kept u on the edge of your seat.

I am a huge fan of the books and was really looking forward to seeing the latest movie. I was so disappointed. Gone was the magical Hogwarts replaced by a what looked like an old castle. Everyone looked shabby and the three stars dressed in grubby jeans, etc. really took away from the movie being at Hogwarts. Up till now the casting was superb. What happened?

By far the most thrilling of all the three.

It is a very good movie, however, also very disappointing compared to the book. But never-the-less, a great movie.