|
| Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkaban [2004] | ![Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkaban [2004]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41PVN5DBGTL._SL160_.jpg)
 enlarge | Director: Alfonso Cuaron
Actors: Daniel Radcliffe, Julie Christie, David Bradley, Warwick Davis, Tom Felton
Studio: Warner Home Video
Category: DVD
List Price: £9.99
Buy Used: £5.00
You Save: £4.99 (50%)
New (27) from £5.04
Avg. Customer Rating:  22 reviews
Sales Rank: 2519
Format: Anamorphic, Pal
Languages: Arabic (Subtitled), English (Subtitled), English (Original Language)
Rating: Parental Guidance
Running Time: 136 minutes
Number Of Items: 1
Aspect Ratio: 2.40:1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.4 x 5.4 x 0.6
EAN: 7321900588171
ASIN: B000BO5U0K
Theatrical Release Date: 2004
Release Date: October 24, 2005
Availability: Usually dispatched within 1-2 business days
Condition: Quick dispatch.
|
| Customer Reviews:
 Ok, not great July 14, 2007
0 out of 3 found this review helpful
This is film was kind of disapointing. The book was by far the best in the Harry Potter saga, and the film lacks the excitement. The scenes in this movie are darker then the first two, which may be appealing to certain people. But if you are a BIG harry potter fan, i would suggest having this movie as part of your collection. Word of warning is that the film is not better then the book and can be improved.
 both the best and worst of the harry potter saga June 19, 2007
0 out of 3 found this review helpful
New director new visual style, alfonso cuaron is a good director, however I feel he tried to hard to make the story move along quick enough to keep the little ones attention. Too much is hacked away from the book, well too much that shouldn't have been. Hogwarts seems empty, where are all the kids? also back story is cut too short, so some bits don't make sense anymore. It is almost like an extended highlights sequence.
The cast are fine, except for Michael Gambons Dumbledore isn't a patch on richards harris. A poor decision. The werewolf comes off looking a bit silly, that said I heard somewhere that the original design was too scary for kids.
Good but sorely lacking considering it was the best of the books.
A sad disappointment. April 13, 2007
2 out of 4 found this review helpful
As this was my favourite (note the past tense) HP book I was v looking forward to the film as I like the other2 (and now 3!) films very much. This was a painful disaster.
There were plot holes large enough to drive a fleet of trucks through, random comments that were not followed up on or explained at all and what was with the bus? It seemed like they had a new toy (and a well known face) they wanted to play with and spent valuable plot time messing about with it. I could have done with that being significantly shorter.
On the whole, the design of the film is fine. They have changed to visual aspect to fit more with the mood and development with Harry, which is lovely.
Sadly, in post production, someone attacked it with a rusty hatchet.
This is poorly directed and criminally edited. JK herself seems to be being poked in the back to say something about the film on the DVD extras, but still comes across as unconvincing when she say's she's totally happy with it.
A sad disappointment.
Not impressive March 22, 2007
1 out of 3 found this review helpful
What can I say? The Harry Potter films are improving, but they're not good films. Infact the sort of films that you become very aware of how long you've been sitting down for whilst watching them. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Harry Potter, I am, infact a geek so I'm not in general bashing Potter.
The adaptation from book to film is poor. My friend has never read the books but came along to see the film. Needless to say he hardly understood it and this isn't because he's just thick.
I understand that they can't keep all of the material from the book but completely missing out vital chunks that are nescessary for the film to make sense...? For example... the mauraders. How did Lupin immediately know that it was a map??? BECAUSE HE MADE IT!
It is incredibly frustrating when you watch a series you love being completely butchered into something unrecognisable. The fact that the films seem to have a different director with every single film also gives the films a bumpy and inconsistant feel.
The child cast is poor. Emma Watson says every line as if she's out of breath and her eyebrows seem to be her only channel to show emotion. Daniel Radcliffe is wooden and not believable.
The adult cast are great and improving (Ralph Fiennes in the forth, Rickman in the rest) however I think if the Potter films don't improve, they could be in danger of completely wrecking the series' adaptation from book to film.
 traitorous February 3, 2007
2 out of 4 found this review helpful
This time there is nearly nothing wrong with the movie in itself: we have a neat, consistent, well crafted adventure, not a masterpiece but highly enjoyable, a movie to be watched again and again, which is good because I use DVDs to better my English and therefore appreciate movies that bear re-watching.
This time yet the film completely betrays not only the plot, altered everywhere, but the spirit of the book it comes from.
The third episode of Ms Rowling's saga is flawed (see my review of the book), packed with disorderly events and emotions, difficult to screenplay, but the movie not only simplify the plot, it disfigures the characters.
In the book many of them are given interesting depths and or looked upon with cutting sarcasm, among them Hermione, Snape and Professor Trelawney but the movie does not allow us to glimpse them: the actors are all good but they cannot play what is not on the script and this time the script has hatched roughly.
I find this a severe disappointment but the film in itself is quite good, therefore the four stars.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
