"HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" (2004) Review

 

"HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" (2004) Review

I have a confession to make. I was not much of a fan of the HARRY POTTER franchise - both novels and movies - before the summer of 2004. Before that period, I had seen the first two movies, "HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE" and "HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS". But I had never read any of the novels written by J.K. Rowling. Then in June 2004, I saw the franchise's third movie, "HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" and my views changed.

Based upon Rowling's 1999 novel, "HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" follows the adventures of thirteen-year-old Harry Potter during his third year at the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. The story begins with Harry enduring a visit by his Aunt Petunia Durnsley's sister-in-law, Marge Durnsley, who proves to be just as boorish, narrow-minded and arrogant as the other members of the family. When "Aunt" Marge makes an insulting remark about Harry's late parents, the thirteen-year-old loses his temper and inadvertently causes the woman to inflate before she floats out of the house and into the sky. Still in a rage over her remarks and the rest of the family's reaction, Harry packs his belongings and leaves the Durnsley home. The Knight Bus - a magical transit bus for Britain's wizarding world - picks him up and transports Harry to London and Diagon Alley, where he is informed by the Cornelius Fudge, the Minister of Magic that a prisoner from Azkaban Prison named Sirius Black has escaped from prison. According to Fudge, Black was a former follower of Harry's arch-nemesis, Lord Voldemort, and vows to kill the thirteen-year-old in order to finish his master's task from years ago.

During Harry's third year at Hogwarts, he has to deal with a brewing conflict between his two best friends - Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger - over their respective pets. Hogwarts acquire a new Defense Against the Dark Arts instructor, an old friend of Harry's father called Remus Lupin. Harry and his friends also acquire two new instructors - Divination teacher Sybill Trelawney, and Rubeus Hagrid, the old gamekeeper who has begun teaching Care of Magical Creatures. Unfortunately, when a hippogriff named Buckbeak attacks Harry's nemesis Draco Malfoy during Hagrid's first class, the animal's life is hung in the balance by the Ministry that is under the influence of Draco's father, Lucius Malfoy. But Harry's biggest problems are the still missing Sirius Black, who has been spotted near the school; and the Dementors - soul sucking creatures from Azkaban, sent to Hogwarts by the Ministry to find Black. Due to Harry's bleak past, the Dementors are naturally attracted to his presence.

The movie's literary source, the 1999 novel, is highly regarded by the franchise's fans. The novel also won several literary awards and nearly came close to being nominated for the Hugo Award. And although I view the novel's main plot as one of the best created by Rowling, I must admit that I found it difficult to harbor such a high opinion of the novel. There were certain flaws that the 2004 movie managed to avoid, thanks to Steve Kloves' script. For me, I was relieved to discover that "THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" only featured one Quidditch match - the first one that featured Harry Potter's second encounter with the dementors. But the novel's subplot featuring Harry and his fellow Gryffindor players' efforts to win the Hogwarts Quidditch Cup was completely ignored in Kloves' screenplay. And I say . . . THANK GOD!. I have never been a fan of Quidditch to begin with. I also found the Quidditch Cup subplot unnecessary to the main narrative. Some fans have pointed out that Harry first met both Cedric Diggory and Cho Chang in the 1999 novel. But the introduction of the two characters were brief and played no real part in the saga's main narrative. Their roles in the narrative became a lot more important in the next two novels. So, Kloves' deletion of their characters struck me as the right thing to do. Aside from one or two matters, Kloves did a first-rate job in adapting Rowling's novel to the screen. This is not surprising, considering that "The Prisoner of Azkaban" was the last "short" novel in the series before the remaining four became "mega novels".

Looking back on the movie, it occurred to me that it possesses a very simple plot. More importantly, the story featured the next set of many mysteries surrounding Harry's parents and the part they played in his current connection to the still formless Lord Voldemort aka Tom Riddle Jr. And one of those mysteries featured their close friend, Sirius Black.

"THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" had a few flaws. Actually, there were two aspects of the story that did not sit well with me. One, I grew tired of Rowling coming up with an excuse for any of Harry's transgressions. In this particular movie, Sirius Black's escape from Azkaban allowed Minister of Magic Cornelius Fudge to dismiss Harry's temperamental use of magic against Madge Durnsley. And thanks to the Invisibility Cloak and the Maurader's Map given to him by Fred and George Weasley, Harry was able to sneak out of Hogwarts Castle and explore the nearby town of Hogsmeade without any trouble or parental permission. Speaking of the Maurader's Map, Remus Lupin revealed that the following was written on the map:

"Messrs Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot, and Prongs
Purveyors of Aids to Magical Mischief-Makers
are proud to present THE MARAUDER'S MAP"

Any fan of Rowling's novels knows that "Messrs Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot, and Prongs" are Harry's father James Potter, and the latter's friends - Lupin, Peter Pettigrew and Sirius Black. Why did Steve Kloves' screenplay failed to reveal their identities to moviegoers? Lupin could have told Harry in one of the movie's final scenes. And why was Kloves so determined to portray Ron Weasley as "comic relief"? I read somewhere that Hermione Granger was one of his favorite characters. I assume this is why he allowed her to speak one of Ron's more famous lines - erasing one of the latter's more positive traits and unnecessarily building up Hermione's traits even more. This final criticism is also directed at both the novel and the movie. According to Hermione Granger, time travel is considered dangerous by the wizarding world. So why did Minerva McGonagall allowed Hermione - third year a student - to use a time turner to attend more classes in the first place? And why did Albus Dumbledore task Harry and Hermione with the story's final rescue job . . . and not do the job himself? I have one more minor complaint - and it involved the verbal showdown between Potions professor Severus Snape and fugitive Sirius Black, both who were former classmates . . . and enemies at Hogwarts. Both Alan Rickman and Gary Oldman gave excellent performances in the film. But I must admit that I found their performances in this little showdown rather over-dramatic. Dare I say it? Hammy? There was more ham and cheese coming from the pair than a high school cafeteria.

When I first read Rowling's novel, I noticed that it did not have much action until the final sequence regarding the Shrieking Shack and Hermione's time turner. And yet, this did not diminish the story one bit. In fact, the story for "PRISONER OF AZKABAN" felt more like a character-driven mystery, with a heavy emphasis on the past. It is the first time Harry really learns about his parents' past through characters like Remus Lupin and Sirius Black. This is the first time Harry had discovered some of the details that led to his parents' deaths. This story marked the first time Harry learned about his parents' close friends - Remus, Sirius and Peter Pettigrew. "PRISONER OF AZKABAN" also marked the first time that one of the franchise's stories had ended on a bittersweet note. All of these aspects of the film's narrative, along with some very satisfying scenes and Alfonso Cuarón's superb and original direction had combined to make the 2004 film a big favorite of mine in the HARRY POTTER franchise.

As I had just stated earlier, there were scenes that struck me as crowd-pleasing or very memorable. I found Harry's ride on the Night Bus both exhilarating and hilarious. Another favorite sequence of mine featured the introduction of the Dementors, during the students' northbound journey on the Hogwarts Express. I thought Cuarón and the movie's special effects team did an excellent job in creating Harry's ominous introduction to the supernatural beings. Speaking of dementors, I also enjoyed the movie's Quidditch match between the Gryffindor and Hufflepuff teams during a thunderstorm. This match featured Harry's second encounter with the Dementors - one that nearly killed him. I also enjoyed the movie's Christmas sequence at the Hogsmeade village. What started as a playful sequence in which Harry used his Invisible Cloak to sneak out of Hogwarts (he lacked parental permission to join his fellow students' excursion into the village), ended on an emotional note after Harry vowed revenge after learning that one of his father's close friends had betrayed his parents to Lord Voldemort.

I also enjoyed those scenes that featured Remus Lupin's talent as a teacher, when he taught Harry and his classmates and later, Harry alone, about Boggarts and Dementors. Thanks to Emma Thompson's performance as the eccentric Divinity professor Sybil Trelawney, I really enjoyed the scenes featuring the students' lessons in that subject. More importantly, the movie featured one ominous scene in which Harry witnessed Trelawney unknowingly reveal a prediction regarding Voldemort and one of his minions. But I feel that without a doubt, the film's pièce de resistance proved to be the last third of the plot. I also enjoyed Professor Beginning with Harry, Ron and Hermione's visit to Rubeus Hagrid's hut in order to witness the execution of the hippogriff Buckbeak and ending with Harry and Hermione assisting in jailbreak; the entire sequence is brilliant example of fantasy, action and superb filmmaking from Alfonso Cuarón.

However, special effects and a first-rate narrative were not the only aspects that made "HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" memorable for me. The movie also benefited from excellent performances from a first-rate cast. Now, a cast filled with actors and actresses of sterling reputations is not a guarantee of good performances. I still have memories of this film's successor - 2005's "HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE". Aside from one particular scene, "THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" is blessed with first-rate performances. The movie had its share of solid performances - including from the likes of Richard Griffiths, Fiona Shaw and Harry Melling (who portrayed the Dursley family); a very entertaining Pam Ferris, who portrayed Vernon Dursley's sister, Marge Dursley; Timothy Spall in a brief, yet effective role as Peter Pettigrew and Julie Christie, who portrayed The Three Broomsticks owner Madam Rosmarta. More solid performances came from the likes of franchise regulars like Alan Rickman and his always entertaining performance as the surly Severus Snape, Robbie Coltrane (Rubeus Hagrid), Maggie Smith (Minerva McGonagall); James and Oliver Phelps as Fred and George Weasley, Tom Felton as Harry's nemesis Draco Malfoy, Mark Williams as Arthur Weasley, Julie Walters as Molly Weasley, and Robert Hardy as Minister of Magic Cornelius Fudge.

There were performances that I found memorable. The movie's three leads - Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson - gave excellent performances as Harry Potter, Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger respectively. In fact, I would say this film marked the first time they were able to ditch that heavy-handed style of acting that slightly tainted their performances in the first two films. Radcliffe did an excellent job of conveying Harry's struggles over his discovery that his parents had been betrayed. And I must admit that I found the interactions between Grint and Watson very entertaining as they portrayed Ron and Hermione's constant bickering and unwillingness to acknowledge their growing attraction to each other. I also enjoyed Robbie Coltrane's performance as Hogwarts gamekeeper-turned-Care of Magical Creatures professor, Rubeus Hagrid. I especially enjoyed Coltrane's scenes that featured Hagrid's awkward debut as a Hogwarts professor and his emotional attachment to the hippogriff Buckbeak.

"HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" marked the first appearances of four cast members. And all four gave excellent performances. One proved to be Gary Oldman as the chaotic and desperate Sirius Black, the wanted fugitive who unhappily proved to be Harry's godfather. Emma Thompson gave one of the funniest performances in the entire movie franchise as Divinity professor Sybill Trewlawney . . . who may or may not be a genuine seer. I was very impressed by David Thewlis' subtle, yet dynamic performance as Hogwarts' new Defense Against the Dark Arts professor Remus Lupin. Michael Gambon had a difficult act to follow when agreed to replace the late Richard Harris as Hogwarts' Headmaster Albus Dumbledore. And may I say that he did a superb job of capturing Dumbledore's enigmatic and commanding nature with his own style.

Granted, I had a few issues with "HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN""THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" proved to be one of the most unusual entries in the HARRY POTTER franchise and quite possibly my absolute favorite. In fact, my opinion of the film has not changed one whit in nearly twenty years.

"HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" (2004) Photo Gallery

 

Below are images from "HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN", the 2004 adaptation of J.K. Rowling's 1999 novel. Directed by Alfonso Cuarón, the movie starred Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson:

"HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN" (2004) Photo Gallery

"MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL" (2019) Review

"MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL" (2019) Review

Last year, Sony Pictures had announced its intentions to add a fourth entry to the MEN IN BLACK" movie franchise. I have to be honest. I did not receive the news with any real enthusiasm. And my feelings had failed to change when I learned the identities of the movie's two main stars.

"MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL" only shared a few similarities to the franchise's past three films. One of the co-stars proved to be Emma Thompson, who had returned for her second appearance in the franchise as Q, the MIB agency's director. The agency's Manhattan office also appeared in the film. And the MIB agents were up against another deadly alien trying to conquer Earth. Otherwise, there were major differences in this fourth film. Instead of Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones, "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL" starred Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson, who had been co-stars in the 2017 Marvel film, "THOR: RAGNAROK". Most of the "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL" locations were set outside of the U.S. in London, Marrakesh, Naples and Paris. The last difference featured the circumstances surrounding the recruitment of Tessa Thompson's character into the agency. Unlike Will Smith's Agent J, Thompson's character had become aware of the Men in Black agency years before she joined it. The biggest difference between this film and the previous three movies involved a potential threat within the internal affairs of the Men in Black.

In 1996 Brooklyn, a young girl named Molly Wright witnesses her parents being neuralysed by Men in Black agents, while she helps an alien escape. Twenty years later, Agents H and High T of the MiB London office travel to Paris to stop an invasion of the Hive – a parasitic race who invade planets by merging with the DNA of the conquered species – at the Eiffel Tower using a wormhole included in the original migration to Earth. After being rejected from the F.B.I. and the C.I.A., due to her "delusions" regarding alien life, Molly tracks down an alien landing and follows MiB agents to their New York City headquarters. Caught entering the agency, Molly makes an impression on the agency's director, Agent O and becomes probationary agent status as "Agent M". She is eventually assigned to the London branch.

Agent M's new supervisor is High T, who has become head of the London office. The latter assigns her to become Agent H's new partner, who has developed a God complex, unconcerned with his duties and only keeping his job due to High T covering for him. Both M and H are assigned to guard a royal alien named Vungus the Ugly, during the latter's visit to Earth. A pair of alien twins manage to fatally injure Vungus. The latter gives M a strange crystal before he dies. And the agents of the London office realizes that a MiB agent may have betrayed Vungus to the alien assassins. Due to his lackadaisical behavior, H has become the main suspect. However, this does not last long and M eventually becomes tagged as the agency's traitor. M and H take matters into their hands and decide to conduct their own investigation - an act that leads them to become fugitives from the Men in Black agency.

Following the release of "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL", many critics and fans of the franchise had rained criticism and scorn upon it. Needless to say, the movie proved to be a box office failure, despite making a small profit. It is considered to be the worst film in the franchise. While many blamed the movie's narrative; the majority of the film's negative press seemed to stem from the fact that the movie had not been directed by Barry Sonnenfeld, who was responsible for the franchise's first three films. And there were a handful of disgruntled fans who seemed to resent the presence of Tessa Thompson as one of the film's leads, due to her gender.

How do I feel about all of this? I do have a few problems with "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL". One, this movie is not funny. What I meant is . . . it lacked the twisted and sardonic humor of Barry Sonnenfeld. If I have to be more specific, the film's humor barely generated any real laughs from me. I merely found myself feeling amused by some of the more comic moments. My second problem with "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL" was Agent H's fate near the end of the movie. I did not like it. Considering his age and recent mental condition, I thought he was unnecessarily rewarded for his actions in stopping the main villain. My final problem with the film is basically minor. "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL" featured the character of Agent O from the 2012 film, "MEN IN BLACK 3". To me, this was an indication that "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL" was a continuation of the previous three films. If so, I thought screenwriters Art Marcum and Matt Holloway could have hinted on the fates of Agents J and K from the first three movies. What happened to them?

Despite my complaints about the film, I did not dislike "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL". In fact, I enjoyed it very much. And this was due to certain aspects of the film. One, I found some of the movie's special effects rather impressive, thanks to the visual effects team, Stuart Dryburgh's cinematography and Thomas Brown's art direction team. I was especially impressed by those scenes featuring Vungus' death in London, H, M and Pawny's escape from Marrakesh and especially their final showdown against the Big Bad at the Eiffel Tower in Paris.

Another aspect of "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL" that I enjoyed was its cast. Personally, I thought it was first-rate. The movie benefitted from a solid supporting cast that included Laurent and Larry Nicolas Bourgeois (aka Les Twins), who did an excellent job of conveying the silent, yet physical menace of the shape-shifting aliens known as "the Twins"; Tim Blaney, who returned to voice Frank the Pug; Kayvan Novak, who voiced the royal alien Vungus the Ugly; and Spencer Wilding. I found Rafe Spall's portrayal of Agent C of the UK branch rather sardonic, yet entertaining. Emma Thompson was excellent as usual as the Men in Black director, Agent O. Rebecca Ferguson gave an eccentric, yet funny performance as an alien intergalactic arms dealer and H's ex-girlfriend Riza Stavros. Liam Neeson's portrayal of High T, the head of the MIB UK branch, struck as equally off-beat and funny. And I felt that Kumail Nanjiani gave the best voice performance of all as Pawny, the small alien warrior that Agents M and H befriend.

And of course, we have the movie's two leads - Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson. Many crtics had been impressed by their screen dynamic in the Marvel film, "THOR: RAGNAROK". This led the producers of this film to cast them together as Agents H and M. And they did not fail. Thompson did a wonderful job as the uber observant and clever Molly Wright, who becomes the agency's newest recruit, Agent M. Hemsworth did an equally fantastic job in portraying Agent H, one of the agency's best agents who seemed to be suffering from some kind of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), following his and Agent High T's defeat of the Hive, three years earlier. Not only did the two leads gave great performances, they also proved that their on-screen dynamic had not dimmed one bit. If I must be brutally honest, I was more impressed by their screen chemistry in this film than I was in "THOR: RAGNAROK".

I realize that many people may not agree with me on this next topic. But if there is one thing that truly impressed me about "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL", it was the screenplay written by Art Marcum and Matt Holloway. I found it very original for a movie from the MEN IN BLACK movie franchise. The previous three movies usually introduced the Big Bad either in the opening scene or not long after the opening. I cannot say the same for this film. Both Marcum and Holloway had not only created a mystery surrounding the Big Bad, they also included a possible traitor or mole within the Men in Black agency that might be assisting the main villain. Now this might be normal in a MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE movie or some other spy thriller. But in a MEN IN BLACK film? For the first time, this franchise had created a combination of a science-fiction movie and an espionage flick. It is a pity that many critics and film goers could not appreciate this. Perhaps it would have been easier if the film had followed the franchise's usual formula.

In the end, I realized that I would not waste my time lamenting on the box office failure of "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL". It was not the first box office bomb that I ended up enjoying. And I doubt that it will be the last. Although I found the film's humor rather lukewarm - worthy more of a small chuckle instead of a belly laugh - I cannot deny that I truly enjoyed the film's narrative, along with the exciting action sequences and the talented cast led by Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson, thanks to director F. Gary Gray. Many others may have been disappointed by this film. But I was not.

-----------------------------------------------


Post-Script - I recently viewed the movie on DVD. I enjoyed it even more than I did the first time I saw it. And I realized it was funnier than I had originally believed.

"MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL" (2019) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL", the 2019 entry in the "MEN IN BLACK" movie franchise. Directed by F. Gary Gray, the movie starred Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson:




"MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL" (2019) Photo Gallery