Survival In Space Is A Matter Of Fighting For Life Against Gravity!

The Good: Good acting, Visually spectacular
The Bad: Light on character development. Incredibly simple plot.
The Basics: Gravity deserves its accolades for the level of moviemaking it represents, though the story it tells is ridiculously simple.


Since before it was released, there was a great deal of anticipation for the film Gravity, the latest cinematic outing from Alfonso Cuaron. Hailed as a visual marvel and making quite the impression at the box office, I was late to the party for the film. Still, having now watched it, I found it to be worth the hype, even if it was not the most exciting movie of all time. To be sure, this is a starkly realistic survival film in space and it defies the traditional Hollywood science fiction epic while still delivering a sense of visual majesty viewers hope for – especially when shelling out big bucks for an Imax or 3-D ticket, but it is not a thematically complex movie and there are no real morals to the film. Instead, this is a simple survival film told with pretty amazing cinematography.

The starkness of tone for Gravity is reminiscent of Love (reviewed here!), but Gravity lacks the twist or spark Love had. There are no alien influences, no other realities, no mysteries we need to come to understand. Gravity is painfully simple and while it is an engaging ride, it is hard to recommend it as a film that will endure or is likely to hold up well over multiple viewings. In fact, like The Artist (reviewed here!), Gravity strikes me as a film where the novelty will wear off and in the absence of hype, viewers will start to wonder what they saw in the film. That said, Gravity is lightyears more engaging than The Artist!

After a week in space, the seasoned astronaut Matt Kowalski and green mission specialist Ryan Stone are out doing a space walk, working on attaching a prototype device Stone designed to the Hubble telescope. While they are installing the hardware, a Russian missile strike on their own satellite leads to a chain reaction that knocks out communications with Houston. The debris strikes the telescope and the shuttle and launches Stone out into space. Recovered by Kowalski, Stone is tethered to the astronaut and the two recover their dead compatriot.

With oxygen rapidly depleting and the explorer shuttle open and exposed (the rest of the crew dead), Kowalski and Stone decide to make the treacherous float across the upper atmosphere to the International Space Station. Despite having dwindling oxygen reserves, Kowalski tries to keep Stone focused by talking with her. Reaching the ISS, Stone gets caught on a rope and, in rescuing her, Kowalski makes the choice to jettison himself and save her, helping guide her onto the station while he drifts off. After getting the oxygen she needs, Stone must make the journey with the Soyuz to the Chinese space station to return to Earth in their capsule.

Gravity is enjoyable, but not enduring. The truth is, while it is exciting to watch, it is very hard to get emotionally invested in the characters of Stone and Kowalski (Kowalski, especially, considering how briefly he is in the film and how his abrupt return to the movie is predictably a Mcguffin). In other words, whether or not Stone lives or dies matters less to the viewer. Unlike most of the characters in, for example, The Walking Dead, the fate of Stone has no resonance; the film is about the physical journey as opposed to character growth.

That said, Sandra Bullock is good as Stone. She plays Stone as realistically frazzled, just as George Clooney nails Kowalski as a plausible and authoritative astronaut. Both actors deliver their lines with a realistic sense of urgency and authority for who they are supposed to be.

The triumph of Gravity is very much the direction and cinematography of Alfonso Cuaron. Cuaron has an attention to detail that is impressive and the film looks and feels like it is actually in outer space and at no moment does the movie feel artificial or forced for the vastness of space that surrounds Stone for many of the film’s big sequences. Cuaron is virtually guaranteed a Best Director nomination and even if Gravity is not (at all) the best picture of 2013, he might well deserve the nod for Best Director for all he accomplishes, visually, in this film.

For other experimental science fiction films, please check out my reviews of:
Blade Runner
Branded
The Fountain

6.5/10

For other film reviews, please visit my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2013 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Another Vision Of A Dark Future: Children Of Men Is Inspired And Unsettling!

The Good: Generally good acting, Interesting plot/concept execution, Moments of character, Lack of soundtrack
The Bad: Pacing, Lack of DVD extras
The Basics: Children Of Men is a dark, quiet and disturbing film that starkly explores the world decades after infertility becomes epidemic.


I think that encountering new actors is something like learning a new word. Until a few months ago, I do not believe I had ever seen anything with Clive Owen in it. Then, all of a sudden, he was in The International and Duplicity and when I popped in the DVD for Children Of Men, there he was staring back at me. Not exactly the most earthshattering actor of our times, Clive Owen is at least entertaining and fills his own niche well, he was not a selling point of Children Of Men for me, but he did a good job in it nonetheless.

Children Of Men is another in a recent series of near-apocalyptic visions of humanity that is designed to thrill viewers while presenting another possibility for the end of the human race. This is more cerebral than some other recent hits in the genre, like I Am Legend (reviewed here!) and the essential difference is that while I Am Legend establishes its premise before becoming an action adventure film, Children Of Men establishes its premise and remains entrenched in the results of the concept with tension and more psychological (as opposed to physical) horror.

Theo is a divorcee living in the aftermath of an unnamed contagion whereby humans have lost the ability to reproduce. With the sudden death of the youngest person on the planet - "Baby Diego," who was eighteen at the time of his death - the human race is feeling more desperate than ever about the declining condition of the human race. In Britain, where Theo, his aging hippie friend Jasper, and ex-wife Julian, live, strict immigration controls keep the population in check and the island nation intact while the rest of the world has collapsed. Theo's monotonous life is disrupted when Julian re-emerges in his life to ask Theo to use his connections to get travel papers for a friend. Julian, though, is part of a group the government deems terrorists and trying to procure the papers puts Theo in the crosshairs of both the government and the freedom fighters.

Amidst myths of the Human Project - a group committed to fertility experiments which will rejuvenate the human race - Theo is effectively conscripted to see humanity's last, best hope secured and delivered. In the process, his faith and personal history collide.

Children Of Men is a very political film set in a near-reality of 2027, years after the epidemic began and with humanity losing hope and purpose. Unable to reproduce, humanity is in a desperate place and the concept is a strong one. Moreover, the collapse of places like the United States - where freedom and self-determination are strong cultural values - illustrates an attention to detail that most movies lack. The five screenwriters who adapted Children Of Men from the P.D. James novel cleverly keep the action trapped on the isle and the sense of claustrophobia permeates the entire movie. There is a restricted feeling throughout, not just in the border scenes where cages of people are illustrated pressing to get onto the mainland.

Characters like Jasper, though, illustrate a strong anarchic sentiment that is not only necessary within the authoritarian Britain of Children Of Men, but clearly predates it. He is an old freedom fighter and he lives in isolation as a pot dealer in part because his wife is a vegetable from government torture years before. Theo's associations with people on the fringe - the pot dealer, the disenchanted ex-wife who pines for her lost child, the artist brother - makes him both a realistic and reasonable choice for exactly the type of smuggling mission he is set on. Moreover, Theo's own pain over the loss of his child, and the loss of others in the course of the film, make it realistic that he would continue with his mission.

Children Of Men is a thematically bleak film and director Alfonso Cuaron makes sure viewers get this right off the bat, by washing out the images. Everything in the film is muted gray and blue, so there is always the feeling that humanity it living in twilight. Humans in this movie are not so much brutal, as in crazed or twisted, as they are ruthless in their efficiency in their desperate attempts to change their circumstances. As a result, the resistance that Julian is a part of is not only desperate for humanity to survive, but for their politics to be empowered by humanity's survival. As a result, Julian - and her cohorts, especially Luke - see the population crisis as a way to advance a cause.

In this way, Children Of Men maintains a stark, if understated, sense of reality to the human animal. Unlike optimistic visions of the future, like Star Trek, humanity is not an essentially different animal with everyone suddenly working toward peace, love and the common good. Instead, humans have the same avarice, the same drive to overthrow the current institutions in power as they always have. They bear grudges, they remember the wounds of their past. Nowhere is this more true than in the character of Jasper. Jasper appears flighty and old school rebellious, but his mirror on his dresser is littered with newspaper clippings of past wrongs toward himself, his wife and his causes.

That element of basic human realism makes Theo's quest to deliver the hope for humanity to the rumored Human Project that much more desperate and, strangely, heartening. Humanity, if it does survive this plague, will not suddenly be something which is not human and there is some comfort in that idea. There is also desperation in every moment Theo is threatened, first by his own people, then the military. Theo's journey is hardly a safe ride around Britain and Children Of Men is gruesome in its process. As Theo tries desperately to keep safe humanity's best hope, he is surrounded by those who appear crazy, many who are dangerous, but several who rise up only for the purpose of sacrificing themselves.

One of the other elements that helps separate Children Of Men from other political and apocalyptic thrillers is the soundtrack. Long tracks of the movie go by with no soundtrack whatsoever, helping to repaint the world as a bleak, childless place. The lack of music is striking and the appearance of music - often covers of songs by The Beatles - is often shocking and obtrusive. This keeps the viewer even more unsettled, as does humor when the movie pops up with it - Jasper and Syd being the vehicles for both humor and a serious potential for dark and depressing turns.

Anyone who likes near-future apocalyptic scenarios or dramas that explore desperation within the human condition will find something to love in Children Of Men.

For other films featuring Chiwetel Ejiofor, be sure to see my reviews of:
Salt
2012
Serenity
Four Brothers
Love Actually

8/10

For other film reviews, be sure to check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2012, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Why The Harry Potter Collection Isn't All It Ought To Be.

The Good: Movies get better and better, Decent effects, Good overall story
The Bad: Glaring plot and character problems, Lack of consistent effects (especially retroactively)
The Basics: Despite what legions of fans of the Harry Potter franchise might want, the Harry Potter Ultimate Collection is not the greatest cinematic triumph of all time.


I never intended to get into or watch the Harry Potter movies. Then, like magic, I fell in love and the woman I fell in love with was a big fan of the franchise. She had read all of the Harry Potter books and when we got together, the franchise wasn't quite over, so I ended up going through the movies that were out and then the new movies as they came out. The movie franchise has grossed billions of dollars and has a hugely loyal following, so I'm not exactly expecting to light the world on fire with my considerations of the Harry Potter Collection, but for those with an open mind or coming late to the party - as I did - there are some very helpful notes I can provide on the franchise.

First, it is worth noting that I have considered each of the Harry Potter films on their own. Those reviews, which are the substantive content of The Harry Potter Collection, are at:
Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone
Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets
Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban
Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire
Harry Potter And The Order Of The Phoenix
Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince
Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows, Part 1
Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows, Part 2
Furthermore, it bears repeating that I have not read the books upon which this movie franchise is based and as such, this is a very pure review of the movie franchise. I've heard innumerable times in comments to my film reviews, "well, in the book . . .": This is NOT a review of the book series, it is the film series as it stands up on its own.

Harry Potter is deposited as an infant on the doorstep of his aunt and uncle, the Dursley's, where he is raised as the lesser child. Forced to live under the stairs, he is surprised on his eleventh birthday when he is invited to go study at Hogwart's School Of Witchcraft And Wizardry. Previously unaware of his family's magical talents, he is taken under the wing of Rubeus Hagrig who helps him get school supplies and sends him on his way to the private magical school. En route, he meets the poor, bumbling Ron Weasley and the brilliant, booksmart Hermione Granger. Together, the three are inducted into the same House in Hogwart's and they begin studying magic. Harry draws the attention of the school's headmaster, Albus Dumbledore, who was instrumental in saving Harry's life the night his parents were killed.

Harry begins to study magic with those around him convinced there is something special about him, more than just the scar on his forehead. Soon, it becomes clear to Harry that he is special; he is the only known survivor of an attack by the great evil, Lord Voldemort. Voldemort, it appears, was killed, but still has followers in our world. Throughout the years, clues emerge that the followers of Voldemort, the Death Eaters, are working to bring the dark lord back to Earth and that Harry Potter has a connection to him. As the forces of evil gather, Harry is tutored in magic to meet his destiny: to stop the dark lord from destroying the magical world and enslaving the human (Muggle) world.

The Harry Potter collection has all eight movies at they were originally released and the Blu-Ray version features so many bonus features, it makes the extended editions of The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy look anemic. Each of the movies, save the last two, has been released as three-disc ultimate collector's editions with additional bonus features and collectible materials and one suspects that there will be an Ultimate Collection which bundles the super-expensive, ultra-packed versions of all eight films together. But for most people, the Harry Potter Collection with the movies, deleted scenes, trailers and featurettes will be enough.

What is worth watching in the set? First, the movies do tend to get better and better, both with storytelling elements and the acting. The first film hinges more on the fact that there was a built-in audience than making a great movie, so it stands poorly on its own, even as an establishing work. Similarly, in the first sequel, were it not for the exceptionally important plot event that occurs within the Chamber Of Secrets, it would be hard to advise anyone sit through the movie. But, the Harry Potter Saga is largely a mystery wherein Harry learns more and more about his potential in each film and then has to confront the ultimate evil.

But therein lies the first strike against the cinematic franchise. The fundamental story is one of a boy being raised to take on the great evil of the age. That is a classic hero story and it could be epic. The problem with this particular epic is that how it is accomplished makes no real sense. Harry Potter is taught incrementally what he needs to know in order to fight the Dark Lord and those around him retain secrets as opposed to being as clear, direct and forthright as possible. In other words, the writer of the Harry Potter Saga was much more concerned with selling the next book than telling a story that makes sense.

What do I mean by this? Harry Potter is seen by Dumbledore, Hagrid, Serius Black, Minerva McGonagall and virtually everyone else in Hogwart's (and the adversaries fighting on the side of Lord Voldemort) as the one chance the magical world has to take down and destroy the evil of the age. Rather than groom the boy and have him prepared to confront the Deatheaters and Voldemort, the forces of good are scattered and only intimate to Harry what he needs to know. This would be most analogous to Obi-Wan and Yoda only telling Luke Skywalker about one or two aspects of the Force in the Star Wars Trilogy or only training him to use a lightsaber, without ever informing him of the Dark Side, the nature of the Force or that Darth Vader was someone he would have to confront. Or, from the fantasy realm, this would be like Gandalf discovering the nature of the One Ring, finding it with Bilbo and then having Frodo wander around with the ring without ever telling him where to go or what to do with it. Despite what fans of the Harry Potter franchise might want to believe, the mechanisms of the storytelling are ridiculous in that it is not until the sixth year and in the wake of the resurrection of Voldemort that the existence and nature of the Horcruxes are revealed. It's pretty shoddy storytelling to have a small army of people who claim to be good who refuse to tell their soldiers how they can actually take on the enemy. Even a "hey, if you ever see, hear about or encounter this thing, let us know," would be better than the ignorance with which Dumbledore keeps his followers. And while some might say that Dumbledore didn't want to insight a panic or scare Harry, I respectfully submit that the time to stop evil is before it materializes, has legions of followers and takes over the world.

Moreover, the Harry Potter Saga become muddied by time travel elements and interpersonal elements that do not flow organically in the films. So, while viewers can clearly see the arc by which Hermione and Ron Weasley overcome obstacles to develop an eventual romantic relationship, the development of a relationship between Harry Potter and Ron's sister is much less organic in the films.

The real strike against the ultimate Harry Potter Collection is the fidelity to the original as opposed to creating a unified Saga. The eight films were directed by four different directors and, truth be told, they didn't know exactly what they were doing all along. The technology exists now to fix up the technical issues in the making of the films and it would do a great service to the fans to do that. I'm not talking about rewriting the movies or even replacing Richard Harris, who unfortunately died between the second and third films, with Michael Gambon who played the part for the rest of the franchise. But, Griphook in the first film and the goblins look nothing at all like what they do near the end of the franchise and unlike the changes George Lucas made to the Star Wars Saga, changes like replacing characters who appear late in the movie series by inserting the refined look to the character types in the early films would lend a greater sense of continuity. When I was reviewing this year's Golden Snitch ornament (that's here!), I noticed even practical effects like the Golden Snitch were redesigned. How is this problematic? Well, Harry receives that magical object in the penultimate film and viewers are asked to recognize it as an identical object to the one in the first film when it is not.

Despite the storytelling problems - and it was only as I wrote this consideration of the entire story that it truly hit me how woefully unprepared Harry is for no good reason other than to drag the story out for more movies - and a few niggling character issues, the Harry Potter Saga tells an interesting story. And, despite the gripe, it is a more engaging story than it might have been had Harry simply been tutored at the very beginning with all he needed to know. The characters do get developed, though it takes several films.

What the Harry Potter Saga does exceptionally well is develop the acting talents of three young actors who grow into the iconic roles as their characters grow. Teamed up with established great actors like Richard Harris, Michael Gambon, Gary Oldman, Brendan Gleeson, Maggie Smith and Kenneth Brannagh, actors Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson hone their talents from painfully awkward children into powerhouse adult actors who can take on virtually any role that is given to them.

On DVD and Blu-Ray, the Harry Potter Collection includes all eight films, their trailers and limited bonus features. Warner Brothers, which produced the Harry Potter Saga, has shown a complete willingness to exploit its audience. With Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince, over half a dozen different exclusive packages were developed to get fans to rebuy the same source material for the exclusive bonus features. By that logic, there will come a time when Warner Brothers sees the point in investing to do refurbished editions of each film wherein the Saga is corrected for effects continuity. Will it be worth the buy? Not if you already have the current Saga. Will it be a better film series? Yes. I say hold out, at least, until all of the Ultimate Editions are bundled together in an exclusive, space-saving package!

For other epic fantasy or science fiction series', be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Star Wars Saga
The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy
The Indiana Jones Trilogy

6.5/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Up Until The Time Travel Comes In, Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban Had Me!

The Good: Generally decent acting, Good general plot, DVD bonus features
The Bad: HUGE plot hole, Light on character development, Mediocre/pointless effects
The Basics: In another disappointing cinematic effort, Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban has one huge plot hole which ruins the franchise for serious viewers.


For those who follow my many reviews, it might seem by this point that I am not a fan of the Harry Potter cinematic adventures. After all, I pretty much loathed Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone (click here for that review!) and I remained underwhelmed with Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets (click here for that review!), so it would make perfect sense to ask the question "Why is W.L. continuing to watch these movies?!" The answer is ridiculously simple; my wife is a huge fan and as she becomes more and more excited about the impending release of the film Harry Potter And The Deathly Hollows, Part 1 she wants me to be prepared by rewatching the six films that preceded it.

It might seem, then, that I came into Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban biased, but the truth is, from the beginning, this cinematic installment of the Harry Potter Saga engaged me more than either of its predecessors. Unfortunately, it annoyed me early on with a pointless bus-ride, which seems to be director Alfonso Curon's attempt to wow audiences right off the bat (he failed terribly with me) and very late in the film, there comes a critical flaw that utterly guts the film and - I'm told by my wife - the series. In fact, there is no way for me to discuss my fundamental problem with Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban without talking about something that happens in the last act, so those who want surprises need to quit now. The problem, I am told, is that the question I raised immediately when the plot turned sets off a string of events which motivate the subsequent four episodes, but it is so shockingly obvious in the problem it creates in the movie(s) that when I mentioned it, my partner simply frowned, said, "You should seriously rewrite the Harry Potter books" and walked away disgusted.

After a somewhat disastrous encounter with a snooty aunt wherein Harry Potter uses magic outside Hogwart's in strict violation of the laws, Harry Potter runs away from the Dursley's house. He is picked up by a magic bus and taken to the centers of magic where he is surprised to learn he is not being punished for violating the rules involving magic use. Instead, the Minister Of Magic reveals that one of Harry's parents' old friends, a convicted murderer, Sirius Black, has escaped from the magical prison, Azkaban. Harry's friends, teachers and headmaster Dumbledore are afraid for Harry's sake and en route to Hogwart's, Harry encounters a Dementor, one of the guards of Azkaban, which is hunting Sirius.

As his third year at Hogwart's begins, Harry and the other students feel boxed in by the Dementors, which take up position around Hogwart's to find Sirius Black on the assumption that he will come there to try to kill Harry. Harry encounters a magical pet of Hagrid's which then attacks Draco, earning it a death sentence. As Harry's new Defense Against The Black Arts teacher, another friend of his parents', Professor Lupin attempts to protect and guide Harry, the search for Sirius heats up. But secrets abound, even among Harry's friends, as Harry encounters Dementors, werewolves, a crazed killer and time travel!

After the initial special effects chase that has no bearing on the rest of the film and is disappointing for its lack of tension or excitement, Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban is very cool and quite engaging. The Dementors are wicked and each time they appear, there is a wonderful sense of mystery and tension that surrounds them. Moreover, the limited character development found in the film - like Harry actually confronting his fears in Professor Lupin's class - is decent. Harry's desire for a real family is explored as he hears about his parents from Lupin.

But beyond that, Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban is a frustrating collection of rehashed ideas and character stagnation. As a perfect example, neither Hermione nor Ron develop in any meaningful ways. Ron is still ridiculous comic relief and Hermione is still a great witch and the only real change in this film is that Hermione has a new magical toy to play with. The film trots out Harry's invisibility cloak as soon as the plot calls for some stealth and viewers are left feeling like they have seen much of the film before.

To be fair, the new magical artifact, the Marauder's Map is actually pretty cool. This device is a map which shows the current location of everyone within the walls of Hogwart's and it reveals to Harry the presence of a character who was thought long dead. When the map is confiscated by Snape and Lupin, Harry reveals its secret to Lupin and this sets off a chain of events which shake the foundation of Harry Potter's world. The problem is, it also sets off a chain of events whose resolution is so poorly executed only a child is likely to believe in the events or not be disappointed by them. And herein my review is unable to progress without revealing the fundamental problem brought out in the key scene in the movie.

The film comes to its head when Lupin is revealed to be a werewolf in a scene where there is a showdown between the main characters, Lupin and the villains of the film. Lupin turning into a werewolf occurs because Lupin has not been given his potion for the day - events earlier in the day distracted him - and the presence of the full moon forces the change upon him. This allows the principle villain of Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban to get away and leaves Harry seriously wounded and many of his hopes and dreams crushed. The villain escapes, though, because Lupin turns at an inopportune moment. All of this is fine.

The problem, though, is in the resolution. Hermione, seen appearing in places suddenly without her mode of transport being made obvious throughout the film, reveals late in the movie that she has a pendant that allows her to move back in time at controlled intervals. As a result, she is able to take Harry back earlier in the disastrous day to try to save at least two lives. Here is where I ruined the film and the rest of the series for my partner. The moment this happened, I shrugged and said, "Oh, so they go back in time, give Lupin his potion and save the day. Meh." At this, my partner stopped the DVD, looked at me in shock and said, "That would have been so much better!" Unfortunately, this witless use of time travel, which is clever for how Hermione deals with it and general continuity, is nowhere near as smart as all that. Instead, writers J.K. Rowling and Steve Kloves become obsessed with making what happened the first time around work out as opposed to illustrating any ability to change the future.

The reason this is utterly terrible is simple: 1. Harry and Hermione go back in time a few hours with the intent to change events and 2. They have plenty of time to get Lupin the potion he needs. Harry and Hermione wait in the forest for hours to stay out of sight after saving the magical animal they want to save. In that time, either or both of them could have easily gotten the potion they need for Lupin from Snape and/or simply reminded Lupin to go take the potion. This would have completely prevented the big showdown which leaves the villain on the run at the end of the movie.

The result is that engaged viewers will sit at the end of this movie and ask "What was the point?!" What is the point of going back in time if not to try to stop the big confrontation and all of the harm that comes from it? For sure, two lives are saved, but more could have been spared if the villain was simply apprehended as he was supposed to be. But this also begs the question that plagues other films that attempt temporal adjustments, like Heroes and Star Trek: First Contact: if the heroes or villains fail in their attempt to change the results of their actions the first time, why do they not simply go back and try something different? Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban is rather stupidly resolved without any of the main characters illustrating any care for the fact that the villain of the film is now on the run!

Moreover, Sirius Black claims he was framed for the death of Harry Potter's parents, an action he was convicted for and sentenced to prison. He endured twelve years in a magical prison and is shown in all of the "Wanted" posters screaming and crazed. Are we truly to believe that with access to a magical device like the one Hermione has, he would not grab it, a decent magical judge, and drag them both back in time to exonerate himself?! Come on! I don't know about you, but if I spent over a decade in Hell, knowing I was innocent and the tools needed to prove it were right in front of me, I'd take them and the people necessary to clear my name back with me!

These ideas, however, seem quite beyond all of the characters, writers and director of Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban and the result is a remarkably unfulfilling cinematic experience that is bound to disappoint adults.

That said, the acting in Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban is decent. While Rupert Grint is forced to continue doing his same old schtick (which he pretty well mastered in the first film), Emma Watson and Daniel Radcliffe are given great chances to add serious depth to their performances and they rise to those occasions. Watson gets her eyelines right for virtual characters and has an intelligence to her performance that sells the reality of moments like her character seeing a time-travelling version of herself without revealing it to her friends. Similarly, Radcliffe has moments where he is able to be softer and deeply human, especially in scenes opposite David Thewlis's Lupin and Gary Oldman's Sirius Black. Radcliffe is able to explore Harry simply being a needy teenager who wants his parents and it works perfectly for him.

Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban fleshes out the performances by great performances by Thewlis and Oldman. This is the cinematic episode where Michael Gambon takes over as Dumbledore and he makes a decent outing, though his performance has Dumbledore being more vocally assertive than his predecessor.

On DVD, there are a slew of DVD bonus features, spread over two discs. There is no commentary track, but there are preview trailers for the three Harry Potter films that existed when this was released. There are virtual tours of the new classrooms, interviews with Rowling and the full cast. There is a preview for the video game for the film and special effects featurettes.

None of this makes the source material any better and the result is ultimately another disappointing Harry Potter film, though this one is better than its predecessors.

For other fantasy films, please check out my reviews of:
The Twilight Saga: Eclipse
Clash Of The Titans
Wizards

5.5/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page for an organized list updated daily!

© 2010, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.



| | |