Harry Potter & the Prisoner Of Azkaban shows what movies can do that books can’t.

by MATT STOKES | JULY 12, 2017

<iframe style="border: none" src="//html5-player.libsyn.com/embed/episode/id/5532670/height/200/width/700/theme/custom/autonext/no/thumbnail/yes/autoplay/no/preload/no/no_addthis/no/direction/backward/render-playlist/no/custom-color/87A93A/" height="90" width="640" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen oallowfullscreen msallowfullscreen></iframe>

The discussion of Harry Potter & the Prisoner Of Azkaban starts at 02:13.

Listen: Apple Podcast | Stitcher | TuneIn | Google Play | Direct Download
Apple Podcast | Stitcher | TuneIn | Google Play

One of the best things about the Harry Potter books is that they are long. Long with several dozen o’s, as in looooooooooooooooooong. To read a Potter book is to go through a school year at Hogwarts, to live in the world of feasts and Quidditch matches and stressful exams, all of it a distraction both welcome and a little annoying from the central story of Harry versus Voldemort. That scope is often lost in the Potter movies, and by necessity—there just isn’t time in a 2.5-hour film to check all the passage-of-time boxes.

But what’s really great about the books’ length is that hundreds of pages per volume are dedicated to older wizards delivering history lessons to each other and exposition to the reader, each detail enriching and complicating the larger story. This works very well on the page, but it’s the opposite of cinematic, and every time the movies have Harry and co. slip on the invisibility cloak to overhear Professor McGonagal say the most stunning and revealing bit of information at just the right time, it’s… clunky.

The Harry Potter movies are fascinating because of how they evolved from whimsical and episodic Home Alone-esque adventures helmed by Chris Columbus (director of the first two) to the dark and propulsive entries by David Yates (director of the final four). Yates transformed the franchise into something more akin to a prestige television show, an efficient and sturdy vehicle long on entertainment but without a real stand-out individual entry. You could easily expand Yates’s Potter movies into an HBO series, where Professor Slughorn’s remarkable remarkable monologue about his pet fish wins Jim Broadbent an Emmy for Outstanding Guest Actor In a Drama.I)Seriously, Broadbent in Half-Blood Prince might be the single beset performance in the whole series, and I didn’t even notice him until watching that movie for the tenth time.

But sandwiched between the two eras of the Harry Potter films are Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, the most singular movie in the series, directed by the franchise’s one true auteur, Alfonso Cuarón; and Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, a more-poorly executed version of what Yates would do with the remainder of the series.

Prisoner of Azkaban is often cited as a movie fan favorite, and with good reason. It has some of the weirdest sequences of any of the movies, such as the students battling the boggart while listening to swing music, Alan Rickman leaning heavily into Snape’s over-enunciating, and everything involving the Knight Bus. It was also a dramatic departure from the first two, more kid-oriented films whose centerpieces were John Williams’s score insisting how magical it is to eat at a buffet.

Azkaban isn’t a perfect movie, and in chopping out so much background information it loses much of what makes the book one of the best in the series. The confrontation between Sirius Black, Remus Lupin, and Peter Pettigrew must be really confusing to viewers of this movie who haven’t read the book—they barely have time to explain what’s going on in a sequence that in the book occupies 100 or so pages. But books are a better vessel for delivering information, and movies are often better at things that can’t be said well with words.

The best scene in any of the Harry Potter movies or books is in the Prisoner of Azkaban movie when Harry and an unconscious Sirius are attacked by dementors. All seems lost until a silver deer emerges from the woods to help them. In the book, Harry explains that he thinks this is his dead father, returning to the world to save his son and best friend. He knows it’s a ridiculous thing to say, but he can’t otherwise explain it. He decides this in real time, in the book saying, “Prongs” (his father’s nickname). In the movie, however, something much more interesting happens.

Cuarón doesn’t have Harry awkwardly announce, “I think that that deer over there is the spectral reincarnation of my late father, here to rescue me!” He lets the music and visuals do the work, suggesting to the viewer what Harry intuits. Reading the books and knowing the history of Harry’s family and the larger world of magic only enhances the power of the moment. It’s impossible to put into words, which is why it’s the rare instance where a Harry Potter movie does something the books cannot.

Harry Potter & the Prisoner Of Azkaban

Director: Alfonso Cuarón

Harry Potter: Daniel Radcliffe
Hermione Granger: Emma Watson
Ron Weasley: Rupert Grint
Remus Lupin: David Thewlis
Sirius Black: Gary Oldman
Severus Snape: Alan Rickman
Peter Pettigrew: Timothy Spall
Albus Dumbledore: Michael Gambon
Prof. Trelawney: Emma Thompson
Hagrid: Robbie Coltrane
Draco Malfoy: Tom Felton

Released: June 4, 2004

Domestic Box Office: $249.5 million




Laci says…

Matt says…

The Other Movie

Harry Potter Movie Rankings

  1. The Prisoner Of Azkaban (2004)
  2. The Half-Blood Prince (2009)
  3. The Deathly Hallows, Part 1 (2010)
  4. The Order Of the Phoenix (2007)
  5. The Deathly Hallows, Part 2 (2011)
  6. The Goblet Of Fire (2005)
  7. The Chamber Of Secrets (2002)
  8. The Sorcerer’s Stone (2001)

Harry Potter Book Rankings

  1. The Goblet Of Fire (2000)
  2. The Prisoner Of Azkaban (1999)
  3. The Order Of the Phoenix (2003)
  4. The Half-Blood Prince (2005)
  5. The Deathly Hallows (2007)
  6. The Chamber Of Secrets (1999)
  7. The Sorcerer’s Stone (1998)

You might also enjoy…

SEPTEMBER 23, 2017

What other movies have we been reconsidering? 

Clint Eastwood’s Mystic River is a schlocky mess

Mystic River (2003) | Directed by Clint Eastwood | Starring Kevin Bacon, Sean Penn, Tim Robbins

Stir of Echoes is a lot like The Sixth Sense but also not at all

Stir Of Echoes (1999) | Directed by David Koepp | Starring Kevin Bacon, Kathryn Erbe, Illeana Douglas

Norman Bates? More like Charming Fellow.

Psycho (1960) | Directed by Alfred Hitchcock | Starring Anthony Perkins, Janet Leigh, Vera Miles

Hocus Pocus, Pile of Puke

Hocus Pocus (1993) | Directed by Kenny Ortega | Starring Bette Midler, Sarah Jessica Parker, Kathy Najimy

The War of the Roses is here to tell you to stay in a bad marriage until you die

The War Of The Roses (1989) | Directed by Danny DeVito | Starring Michael Douglas, Kathleen Turner, Danny DeVito

Spielberg gets The Color Purple wrong, but it’s still pretty good

The Color Purple (1985) | Directed by Steven Spielberg | Starring Whoopi Goldberg, Danny Glover, Margaret Avery

Close Encounters Of The Third Kind is just gaga for aliens… and you should be too!

Close Encounters Of The Third Kind (1977) | Directed by Steven Spielberg | Starring Richard Dreyfuss, Melinda Dillon, Teri Garr

Dude, Where’s My Car? is a mean movie about nice boys

Dude, Where’s My Car? (2000) | Directed by Danny Leiner | Starring Ashton Kutcher, Seann William Scott, Jennifer Garner

Synecdoche, New York? More like Jolly, Good Time!

Synecdoche, New York (2008) | Starring Philip Seymour Hoffman, Samantha Morton, Catherine Keener

Ron Howard’s Parenthood tries to show what parenting is really like, fails

Parenthood (1989) | Directed by Ron Howard | Starring Steve Martin, Mary Steenburgen, Dianne Wiest


I Seriously, Broadbent in Half-Blood Prince might be the single beset performance in the whole series, and I didn’t even notice him until watching that movie for the tenth time.