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.

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

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

It was goood.

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.

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

This is a new, equally entrancing look at the world of Harry Potter, a darker, haunting film that sticks with you.

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

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

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.

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

Definitely the best movie of the three. The new look and direction seems more grown up, just like Harry and his friends. From the first scenes, HP seems like something totally new and exciting. Everyone I saw this movie with was truly impressed.

Easily the best of the three films, Alfonso Cuaron has taken a childrens book and added mood, fear, and style in his own way and possibly set a metronome for the next couple films. The children really step up and give woundrous performances, espically Radcliffe. Also Gary Oldman is so FREAKIN good as Serius Black. This is one of this years best films, and if Cuaron does not return, could end up being the best film of the franchise. A BIG 10!… Expand

I'm not sure why one of the people who gave this movie a 1 (or was it a 0?) called the plot 'trite'. Yes, it is because of the book. And I don't understand either why some people felt that it did not stick to the book. In contrast, I thought that it stuck much better to the plot than the first two movies did, although it didn't stick to it 100%. Some things were put in different positions, some things were cut out, but all in all, it was as loyal to the book as most movies ever go. This third movie is directed beautifully and the effects much more convincing. It is darker and more mature than the first two, which annoyed me a bit in that they were very obviously children's movies. In PoA, the acting was stunning - Emma, Dan and Rupert have improved hundred-fold from even the last HP movie. PoA isn't perfect - a lot of the things they cut out which i would've liked to see irked me, but it also doesn't deserve all these negative comments either, some of which are unfounded. A quarter of the way through the movie, I told myself to stop comparing it to the book. Stop thinking about that the correct order of events would be or what they missed out. It could never compare to the book. No movie derived from a book ever could. … Expand

By FAR the best harry potter movie yet. THe kids are finally learning how to act, David Thewlis is amazing, and Cuaron has done an excellent job, improving substantially from 'A Little Princess' and 'Great Expectations' (REALLY, he's gotten a LOT better). if you want a simple, saccharined movie, rent the first two. If you want a movie that is concerned with acting, story, and atmosphere, go out and see it NOW.… Expand

By far the most thrilling of all the three.

All the people who say it's bad need to read the books and then watch the movies.

This was the first Harry Potter film I actually liked at all (and I even ended up loving it). I would rather slit my wrists than sit through the first one again, and the second one was far too long-winded. J.K. Rowling admitted to liking the third film the most, b/c she thought it did the best at conjuring up the atmosphere she so captured in her novels and it focused on the most important elements from the novel. I couldn't agree more! This was the first film that truly felt alive, and the plot points it sacrificed can easily be salvaged in the 4th film. Naysayers, stop spazzing out. This film is, to quote the WSJ, "full of wonders, big and small." Highly recommended.… Expand

This film is the best "Harry Potter" movie yet. It's actually a great piece of cinema as well.

GREAT MOVIE! I thought it was pretty close to the books. It captured the essence of the book. I thought the acting, visuals, music, direction and uniqueness were fabulous. GREAT MOVIE!

Totally awesome! I enjoyed it a lot! I loved the Dementors....could use one at work...err... Look folks, I've never read the books, but god damn these movies are making go out any buy all of them! Plus I'm a AD&D (Advanced Dungeons and Dragons) nut, so seeing a Hippogriff realistically portrayed was nice! Go see this film!

What discourages me about so many of the negative reviews here is how they rate it as low as a 1 or a 2. Come on, folks. That's just plain unreasonable. Being disappointed is one thing, but to rate it with the very worst is overreacting. I personally loved the movie because it's the first of the Potter series that seemed to live and breathe apart from the book. Some people criticize it for that; I praise it. I wish some fans would think a little harder and put things in perspective. Too many "true" fans want nothing more than a book on film. To me, that's unimaginative. A movie adaptation must do more than add light and sound to the pages, which is essentially what the first two movies did. The first movies were very entertaining, but this Azkaban is, I think, the first one that is truly magical. Yes, it does rush through some plot points, which hurts it a bit at the end, but the inventiveness and the performances more than make up for it. It's also worth noting that JK Rowling says this is her favorite of the films, and that she suggested many of the complained-about changes herself (see her official website and Entertainment Weekly). … Expand

I think this is the vest movie ever.

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 loved it! i thought it was the greatest movie! ive read the book and i thought the movie was better even knowing the book explained more. that was the best acting ive seen from teens!

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

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 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.

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

Fantastic! Nothing like the books, but brilliant in its own way. Who dares dismiss the brilliance of this film when scenes like 'Buckbeaks Flight' are before us?

Please judge HP as the film, not as the book put to screen. In case you haven't noticed, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban isn't the same as HPATPOA the movie.

Because hermoiney is stupid.

The best harry potter movie, the darkest, the scarriest , the funniest... I won't go on and i'll just say that I had become again a nine years old boy when I saw this magical movie. Besides I'm 16 and I found the answers to some teens' trouble in this movie. The main actors are great, especially Rupert Grint Emma Watson and Timothy Spall...just perfect!!! In one world: this is euphory!… Expand

Wow! This franchise just got interesting. Lovely to see my favorite book in the series get turned into an intelligent, visually arresting film. And the dialogue ain't bad either. No groans from here this time around. Really can't wait to see it again.

Amazing!

It was really good.

I'm a Huge fan of the Harry Potter series (books and movies). I enjoyed the first 2 movies very much and could definitely see their likeness to each other, but i could definitely tell there was something different about this film. It was exciting, visually stimulating, and (if i can say so) the best of the Harry Potter movies so far. Cuaron did a WONDERFUL job directing. This movie was almost perfect to me. The first hour and thirty minutes seems to flow quite well and keep you on the edge of your seat, but after the main climax(which isn't that much of a climax) it seems to drag a bit. You can definitely tell that the younger actors have matured some and are growing into their roles, creating better actors. The few things i didn't like however, were some things from the book that were left out: the origin of the marauder's map, and a very important part of the book when it flashes back to the origin of Snape's hatred towards Harry, Lupin, and Sirius, to name a few. However this movie was STILL stood on its own from the other films, and i would recommend it to EVERYONE.… Expand

GREATEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME! Stop bashing it people! It's a great movie! Who cares if its "too short" they will have deleted scenes!

While many younger Harry Potter fans may be disappointed because of Cuaron's unique cinematic style, a style that greatly surpasses Columbus's uninspired lackless style aimed for kids. The Prisoner of Azkaban novel is the darkest of the series which is reflected by Cauron's directorial vision. Thus, while the novel continues to provide many of the elements that made the series popular - ie Quidditch - the novel itself has a far greater sub-text by representing different elements in the formation of one's self; elements which Cauron focuses on; elements which make the Harry Potter series fresh and ultimately important to watch. The first two films are nothing more than an introductory exploration of the Hary Potter realm, while Cauron takes it to a new level (no more simplistic visionary elemnts which would stagnate the characters' development ); a truly great film that allows viewers a chance to truly identify with characters of a tolkienian style subcreation - what fantasy is ment to be.… Expand

It's a great movie, the best of the series, i really loved it.

To start off, it was very, very well done. The movie has more of a teenager feel to it. The way it was made felt as though director, Tim Burton, had been directing it, because how it felt to see the widespread from the camera, not an always close up shot of the actors and sets, like it was in the past two films. But, of course, there was some part(s) that should of been done certain ways, as it was to the novel. Nevertheless, to me, Alfonse C. (the film director) should continue on with directing the novels on into films. He has done an incredible job at this one.… Expand

This is the first "10" I've given on this site (go to Elle Enchanted to read my normal review). The third book is the slowest in the series - the third movie is the best. I truly can't say enough about this film except that the metascore of 79 speaks for itself. Also, it's the first one of the series that I would willingly enjoy watching again - at the movie theatre even.

[***SPOILERS***] Better than the first two films thanks to Cuaron's direction. Better because it's not as tortuously long as the first two films either. The plot makes the point of the nullification of a child's testmony in defense of a wrongly accused man in an interesting way. Faced with seeing a wrongly accused man reimprisoned, Harry and Hermione do the only thing they can, which is to go back in time to undo the chain of events that lead to Sirius Black's reimprisonment and help him escape. Of course, Harry and Hermione get some help from Professor Dumbledore, but in the end it is two children who set things straight. Professor Dumbledore's adult responsibilities make it impossible for him alone to do the right thing and help free Black from wrongful imprisonment. Now I can see why the Christian right hates the Harry Potter books. The Harry Potter books are parables of the different worlds adults and children live in and perhaps that's why they're so appealing. They're kind of like fantasy versions of E.T., another movie attack by the Christian right for promoting disobediance in children. … Expand

Finaly a Harry Potter film felt MAGICAL.

I've read this book possibly 15 times and I still love the movie (as opposed to the other ones). To the ones complaining about the things left out: It's better that way. If you've read the book, you know the backstory of the Marauder's Map. If you haven't, it doesn't matter to you! So Cuaron left out some Quidditch. So what? The central storyline was well preserved and the fact that there wasn't any Quidditch doesn't matter since Quidditch isn't important to the Central Storyline. The Director wanted to get to Sirius Black as quickly as possible, and that's good because Gary Oldman was amazing. Matt D. doesn't know that this is an adaptation, not the actual book put to screen. Stuff has been changed. The first two movies moved slow as molasses and this is much of an improvement. The sooner we get to the Werewolves and Dementors, the better. The movie stands very well on its own and it is miles better than the first two movies.… Expand

One wordd... Wow.

LOL, some of these user comments just make me laugh. This movie was amazing and this is coming from someone who has read all the books and book 3 is my favorite. As for those of you who prefer Columbus' bland, boring version, don't worry....you can enjoy them on DVD. Just don't forget your pacifier and blanky.

It was a good movie, slight details were left out it's true but I liked it all the same. The only thing that threw me off was the change of scenery.

It was excellent - i read all the books and they did a good job turning it into a movie the only problem was that it was too rushed yet still the best one in the series.

Harry Potter is finally done justice.

Yeah...bugger off you people who judge the movie by the cut scenes...this is totally ridiculous... The film was awesome it finally stands as a movie. I want to see it again and again and again...!!

Most viewers in the DC I've talked with area think it's great.

I loved this movie. Thewlis really did a wonderful job bringing a caring Prof. Lupin to life. Prof. Lupin and Harry's scenes were my favorite. Just needed about five more mins. to explain the mauranders.

Loved this. So much better than the Columbus-directed movies. Goodness, those were overly sappy with the music. This was overly-sappy with the Iris Effect (the fade in and out to or of a pinpoint), but otherwise, so, so much better and so, so worth seeing.

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.

To the detractors: "Based on the book" - that's what it says in the credits. It does not say it IS the book (and yes I have read the book). I have seen hundreds of films, having work in film distribution for many years, and this is one fantastic film. It can be viewed many times because it works on many levels and is very rich in detail. The first time I saw this film I enjoyed it but it was not until I saw it again (and again) that I began to appreciate just how wonderful it is. By the way to those who complain about Dan's lack of tears: if the director had wanted tears that could easily be done as Dan is sobbing under a cloak - I think it was a conscious decision to not have tears for whatever reason.… 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

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

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

Fantastic, very close to the best in the series.

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

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

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

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

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

It was a great movie. There was less of a fantasy atmosphere but none the less it was great. The Prisoner of Azkaban gives the Harry Potter series a whole new meaning.

Great cinema. And for all those griping about "critical omissions" from the book, don't forget that the author herself told the screenwriter what items are critical for future book plots and should be kept in the movie. Thus, if something was omitted from the movie, it's because the author deemed it uncritical.

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 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.

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

Finally a Harry Potter movie that comes close to the books. Bravo, Mr. Cuaron! Alfonso Cuaron has brought the soul back to this franchise. The 1st two films were HUGELY DISAPPOINTING, as Chris Columbus' lame directing sucked the soul and humor out of the books when he translated them to the screen. HP3 is gorgeous, funny, and finally the actors shine in their roles. Within the first 5 minutes of the movie, Daniel Radcliffe's acting was already 200% better than in HP1 and HP2.… Expand

Astounding! Alfonso Cuaron gets Harry Potter and the darkly humorous elements of the series. Chris Columbus had made Harry Potter into a Disneyland attraction, which I found nauseating and offensive, as a big fan of the books. Thank you, Mr. Cuaron, for bringing my favorite Harry Potter book to film in a gorgeous and funny form.

It was really good and it was really funny when harry blew up his aunt- person.

This movie was good, but the grounds changed, i did like how the kids wore street clothes, but what the heck was the point of the choir singing at the welcome feast at hogwarts?! and i dont think they explained why it was peter pettigrew's fault well enough. i have read the books, so i knew, but my dad has not, and he didnt get that part. i really loved the movie overall, but there were a few parts that could be changed.… Expand

Great movie, very entertaining, no complaints except that some parts were confusing because I have not read the books.

COLUMBUS was not repeatedly slammed for being too faithful to the books. He was repeatedly slammed for being BORING!!! Even I had to admit that. CUARON, on the other hand, knows how to adapt a book into an interesting movie.

Visually stunning. The actors- in particular the three primary children- have truly grown into their roles, and the new additions (i.e., Oldman as Sirius Black, Thewlis as Lupin) were spot on. Cuaron is a fantastic director, and the real tragedy here is that he won't be coming back to direct the fourth installment. I just hope Newell can play on the mood and narrative precedent set by his predecessor. … Expand

Having read the book, I think this movie was excellent. Great scenery. This movie has more emphasis on dialogue rather than special effects (although, nothing is lacking in the special effects department). Fantastic. Can't wait for the next one when they go to the Quiddich World Cup!!!

IT WAS FABULOUS! Stunning performance by Gary Oldman. Danniel, Rupert, and Emma were great! The movie was perfect! Cuaron did an ABSOLUTELY GREAT job on directing. Columbus was good too, but Curaon is great! Buckbeak was amazing, the dialouge was good, sometimes hilarious! The werewolf was great, all the CGI and special effects were beyond belief! Acting was great too, although I would have wanted to see the Quidditch Final, but still everything was great! I would reccomend this movie to anyone!… Expand

It was sooooooooo much better than the others, but the book was sooooooooo much better than the movie. Some scenes should have held mor info. The writers assume you read the book.

Excellent, Superb.

I am a huge fan of the Harry Potter books. I've read them all several times. On the other hand, I have not been a fan of the Harry potter movies. I felt that Columbus' films sucked all the (yes) magic out of the stories. Sure, he hit the plot points, but he didn't bring the world to life for me. What a difference Alfonso Cuarón's direction made! I felt that this was not only the best Harry Potter movie, it may have been the best fantasy movie I've seen all year - and I say that in praise of this movie and not to insult any of the other fantasy movies this year. I loved how magic infused every aspect of the world. For example, the waiter with the huge stack of dishes in diagon alley! Columbus would have given us a close up on the guy as if to say "Hey! Look! Magic! Look! Ain't it neat!" Cuarón allows this to be a background detail - a detail like the pictures of Sirius Black. I really believed this was a world where magic was an every day occurrence which - oddly enough - made it all the more special to me. I feel that there is a difference between a slavish adaptation of a book to film and an adaptation that captures the spirit of the book. Compare Kubrick's "Shining" with the recent mini-sieries. The mini-series follows the book a little more closely, but the Kubrick film is by far the better movie. A movie is not a book! Yes, Columbus' film hit more of the plot points, but this captured the spirit of the books. Lest we forget, Rowling approved the changes Cuarón made. A word about the acting. In the first two movies, I felt like Radcliffe, Watson and Grint looked like the characters. In this movie, I felt that they transformed themselves into the characters. Thewlis and Oldman were great additions to the cast - Thewlis in particular really made my personal favorite character in the Potter-verse come alive. The scenes with him and Radcliffe are among the best in the movie. Finally, I loved the clock tower - it became a wonderful symbol for the time related themes in the movie. Anyhow, as I said, I loved this film, much to my surprise. I think it is going to make the Potter series a bunch of new fans.… Expand

Breathtaking through both wonder and terror. I wish Cuaron had been willing to do the fourth movie as well. I am very afraid of the man who directed "Mona Lisa Smile," but he can probably do a better job than Chris Columbus.

Better than the first two films combined. this movie has a vision, and is more than just literal translation of the book.

WAY better than the first two films. Cuaron is ten times the director Columbus was. I can't believe how many reviews here are jumping all over it for being different from the book. Film Lesson: GOOD FILMS TAKE CHANCES! Good films reflect the UNIQUE visions of the filmmakers, not slavish obedience to source material. Do you really want nothing more than a meticulous rehash of a story you know already? I love the books, but my favorite parts of this movie were where it deviated from the canon plot, so I didn't know exactly what would happen next. That's called good filmmaking, people! Cuaron realizes, as Columbus never did, that the heart of the story is not the wizardry but the characters. This movie isn't about magic as much as it's about adolescence and coming of age, and in that respect I think it's far more "faithful" to the books than the first two. Also, Cuaron gets WAY better performances from the young actors, especially Radcliffe, who is light-years more convincing here than before.… Expand

Simply amazing.

Stupid people who say they did a bad movie. This is great, it's a great adaptation, not a translation. People get lost in translation, not in adaptation. Go and see this movie again, it's a canvas covered with magic.

You people who gave "0" to the movie...You are ridiculous! You don't know the diference between a BOOK and a MOVIE? To condense a book into 2:15 min you have to cut a lot of things... Things that are not important for the plot... THE MOVIE AS A MOVIE WAS GREAT! BRING MORE HP.

This is definitely the best one. Much funnier and fast-paced. Chris Columbus was a great storyteller, but Cuaron is a great artist to add onto the already magical platform.

Well, I have waited so long to see this movie, and I had so many expectations. In terms of how it compared with J.K. Rowlings books, it was a pile of rubbish, just like the first two movies-leaving out the humor, explanations, and most of the plot-but it did, however, keep the magic this time, which the first two movies didn't. In terms of a movie, it was absolutely brilliant, better than the first two by far, although I think the first two had to be made the way they were, for people who hadn't read the books to be able to understand. Harry Potter 3 is magical, suspenceful, mysterious, and has created its own humor; I could go on for months. The three main actors have developed fantastically, and really can pull off the emotions now. The special effects are also better, looking incredibly life-like, and the trio react to them well, instead of reacting like they are looking at a mechanical animal. The only annoying thing about this movie is the scene involving Lupins transformation into a werewolf. As descibed in the Harry Potter books, the only differences between a real wolf and a werewolf are very slight, things like a tufted tail and longer snout. However, the werewolf in the movie looked like a strange, thin, semi-crippled hunchback with a very thin layer of hair all over his body. Not scary at all, just really annoying. Sirius Black as a dog looked more like a werewolf. But that is my only gripe. An excellent piece of cinema.… Expand

Sure, it's too short. Sure, they left out the Quidditch match, the explanation of The Marauders, the Sneakoscope, and some other stuff...but it's funny, contains great performances, esp. by David Thewlis and Emma Watson, and the time-travel sequence is brilliantly done. Judge it as a MOVIE - not in relation to the book.

My favorite Harry Potter book is my favorite Harry Potter movie it was great and Sirius was cool as always. The only complaint I have is leaving out important info and added some new stuff I want tell what cuz' I want you to buy the book and read it.

Great Movie!! I'd highly recomend it to everyone who isn't waiting an exactly copy of every detail of the book and likes the JK's dark sense of humor. Besides if you (just like me) had a lot of complaints about the lack of depth of the first two movies (too much disney and cheerfulness!!!) you'll simply love it.

Director chris columbus steps aside and with a new director, allready good harry potter films gets even better. why do we care?...because it's harry potter, the rare case of a series of films that are better than the books they are based on. yes, i did read the book. the prizoner of azkaban is very well made. not only better shot and directed but way better acted by it's teenage actors and expert acting teachers such as the briliant david thewlis. i saw thewlis first on mike lee's "naked" in early 90's and was blown away by his acting and face. now a little older, he is the perfect humble teacher/wolfman and advisor to harry. the crew who is doing the casting in this film is down right briliant. harry also is getting better at acting and yelling made up spell names. when he screams "expecto patronum!!!" you shall expect a serious actor, and he is. hermione is becoming a cute lady and also carries her scenes in a classy fashion. her attitude is much needed in films like these to keep the child stuff out of the game, yet they are all children in most ways and its a fine balance. she carries herself amazingly well. ron, the red haired kid...is the weakest of all the kids right behind malfoy. instead of "acting" they are simply bouncing off looks and smirks between the other, better actors. somehow the ship sails on though and they dont do much damage. malfoy isn't as beliveable as a bad kid this time around, as he grows older, he will learn that playing a menace doesnt mean making faces and doing snarling sounds. john williams returns to make a great film score, if you want to own a harry potter film score cd...this one should be it. because it's filled with exciting and romantic tunes. too bad richard harris died, because his replacement is quite dull and tries not to be seen to much to the camera (thank god). so the old but child at heart dumbledore is gone and we have a stiff and serious old...fella..oh well. gary oldman is fine but nothing special, it looks like he just concentrated into being an angry fella (which he does very well) but he missed the boat on the fantasy aspect of the situation, so he seems dry and out of place. … Expand