It really is a great little movie, isn't it? Even for a non-fan of the series like myself, Cuaron makes it enjoyable- he actually almost manages to salvage the train wrecks that were the last two films.

I thought the guy who played Lupin was fantastic, and Radcliffe is impressing in growing proportions per movie. Finally (finally FINALLY) there seems to be room to breathe in the movie, which I credit entirely to Cuaron and his European sensibilities. The cinematography has also been ratcheted up in quality, as do the environments now that they're not synesthetically overblown.

But the pacing is atrocious, worse than it was in the book (and it wasn't too great in the book, either). The climactic scene in the Shack and the scenes immediately following contain so many twists and loops that even the actors seem lost. Some kid behind me moaned, "I give up, this doesn't make any sense" during the dementor attack and the weird SFX with Sirius's soul (?). Cuaron tries to remedy some of the issues by making the Hermione plotline a little more blatant, and by staggering the biggest revelation by pulling a trick out of Book IV, but it really isn't enough, and the movie ends up significantly bottom-heavy. Due to this, he has to cut out the last chapter of the book, which was by far my favourite part and would make an excellent cliffhanger for the 4th movie.

Still a positive experience overall, though. What do the rest of you think?

I absolutely loved it. It not only was genuinely creep it was a helluva lot of fun, something the first and second were not. My favorite segment being the Knight Bus which was so kinetically energetic it just made me smile the entire way through it.

One problem-

This is a spoiler now and I can not seem to get the text to change color...



Before they reverse time certain events during the time reversal affected the first round of events (the smashed pot, the howling, Harry's spell). OK, but if the stuff they did when they reversed time affected the original set of events then why would Lupin be dead on the first and alive in the second. For----oh I dont know time travel has one too many contradictions, for my taste.



Overall, this movie was incredible. Cuaron single-handedly ressurected this franchise from dire cartoonishness that Chris Columbus so ignorantly set upon it.

An answer to your spoiler question follows.

Lupin isn't dead in the first time series, AFAIK. What made you think he was? In the book, he most definitely is not. If you mean Sirius, then his soul (the weird little light glinty thing) comes back inside him because of the future-Harry's Patronus Charm.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vykromond:
An answer to your spoiler question follows.

Lupin isn't dead in the first time series, AFAIK. What made you think he was? In the book, he most definitely is not. If you mean Sirius, then his soul (the weird little light glinty thing) comes back inside him because of the future-Harry's Patronus Charm.

---

Oh, yes, that is my fault. I meant to say Sirius. But, the elk glinty light thing came and saved Harry in the first go-around. That same glinty thing which Harry describes as is father was really him. So, if future-Harry's Patronous Charm is seen in the past wouldnt Sirius be alive???

I must be missing something for I did not feel this confused when I read the book!

This black text stuff is fun!

Sirius never really dies. His soul (the small glint) begins to be "sucked in" by the dementor (the movie's way of depicting the Kiss) when the future-Harry's Patronus makes everything all nice and happy again. Then, the past-Harry faints, and he is taken to the medical wing while the unconscious Sirius is taken to the tower to await his NEXT dementor-assisted execution. There, he is saved by future-Harry.

The movie portrays all this rather confusingly, yes.

First off, since time travel is impossible (as of yet), what you need to look at is does the ending play out perfectly according to its own rules. To me, I would have to say yes. This was a very clear and clever way to portray the events which were happening. The Back to the Future movies basically carry this premise over three entire films and also does a great job with it. I'm no expert (there are no experts), but just think of time as something you can move into and out of (sort of like the wormhole); in that case you could theoretically see yourself and act to help yourself. It's just an updated version of A Christmas Carol, except with the advantage of being hands-on. Oh, and remember that Dumbledore is the instigator and the stories are about wizards afterall. As far as the book being clearer, I'll have to check with my daughter.

First time "black text" user right here. Some exciting stuff huh?

Sirius was never dead in the first. Like "V" said, the glowing thing (his soul) went back into his body. And just in case you're referring to another scene which comes later, when Harry is in the medical wing, Sirius is not dead at that point either. He is in a cell yes, but dead no. He was in the cell awaiting his punishment of death by Dementor. I hope my explanation wasn't counter-productive.

I thought the movie was great. The look was great, the acting improved exponentially, and I had a lot of fun watching it. However, I must say, if I had not read the books prior to seeing the movie, I probably would have ended up cowering in confusion, embarrassed that all the little kids understood what was going on. There was a lot of stuff that needed to be explained a little clearer. I think this is a reason why the pacing may have seemed a bit off. A lot of stuff was ommitted, thus resulting in awkward gaps.

However, I won't bitch about a movie that improved astronomically. I couldn't be happier with the way it turned out.

K-Dog

Oh I agree! I loved the film. After I saw it I realized how bland Chris Columbus's adaptations were. I just became terribly confused towards the end.

~Eccentro

My daughter showed me the two chapters in the novel pertaining to this, so I read them. Although they did add some things to the movie which were not in the book (mostly "hands on" things by Hermione), the movie didn't seem more confusing than the book. In fact, not having read the book, the movie didn't seem confusing at all in its last section.

Now this is no biggie, but I've seen every film that Cuaron has directed, and I don't quite understand the concept that he has "European sensibilities." If you mean that he's not a mainstream Hollywood hack, I'll give you that, but, for example, the storytelling in "A Little Princess" is pure golden-age Hollywood. Also, the guy is a Mexican after all, so unless he's the love child of Bunuel and some European babe, I don't see how he can be anything but a filmmaker from the Americas. Later, gators.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mark f,

This is slightly off-topic, but thanks to all of you for reading the instructions about how to handle spoilers (i.e., putting them in black text)! We have tinkered with the settings a bit so now (a) you cannot read the spoilers even a little bit UNLESS you actively highlight them, and (b) it is a bit more obvious when there are spoilers (you should see big black lines).