Harry Potter. Interesting fella, with a wand. It’s sort of odd though, that another person with a wand, namely Paul Daniels, is hated, whereas Harry Potter is liked. What if Harry Potter was called Paul Daniels, and would it be as popular? Food for thought.

The third adventure in the film adaptations of ex-Welfare single mother J.K. Rowling’s books is The Prisoner of Azkaban, and helmed this time by Alfonso Cuarón, director of the excellent Y Tu Mamá También, under the guidance of the director of the first two films Chris Columbus, now over seeing the project in a producer role.

Whereas the first two films felt rather magical and romantic in the sense of safety for Harry Potter, the third film takes the safety net away and instead unveils a much darker and more seething adventure for the young protagonist and his pals. Aside from the fact the film itself is shot mostly in the dark, this feels like a much more mature direction for the film to take, no doubt thanks to Cuarón direction and experience in making films for adult audiences.

The child actors themselves seem to have grown more into their roles, but they are fast becoming teens, and this may not bode well for the future films (cast wise) as they hurry to complete the next film directed by the mostly competent Mike Newell. However, there still seems to be a very hesitant and unconvincing acting atmosphere, from the laughing, to the concern, it all seems rather artificial and unconvincing. The children have improved, but they have a fair way to go before being convincing.

Thankfully, it’s thanks to the other British stalwarts of film and acting that the film is saved. Gary Oldman doesn’t get much screen time, but plays his part expectedly with wit and sophistication, and the same is to be said of Alan Rickman, Maggie Smith and Robbie Coltrane. Michael Gambon takes over the role of Dumbledore after the death of Richard Harris, and does a decent job of it. Two new teacher’s are also introduced, in the form of Professor Lupin, who holds more than his fair share of secrets and is camped up a fair bit played by David Thewlis and Emma Thompson as Professor Sybil Trelawney, who really understands the term “hamming it up”.

The film does feel a lot more succinct, consistent and free-flowing as opposed to the rather abruptive nature of the first two films. Chris Columbus, in my opinion, wasn’t the best choice of director, as he hasn’t made a decent film in a fair old while, so it’s a wise choice to use a director that isn’t afraid to take chances, as well as providing a much better film than the first two. In some sense, however, it may disturb younger children, as at times it does verge on frightening of the young age group, with sinister hands clawing here and there, and therefore younger children should be accompanied adults, at least in my opinion.

That said, it is still overly long. Sometimes it feels as if you’re watching nothing at all, and it’s a pointless filler scene neither building the character nor developing the story. For the most part, however, it manages to succeed in developing the newly brooding Harry Potter, the discovery of his past, and the realities that make themselves known to him during the course of the film. It has to be said that Radcliffe is, of the three young main stars, the most grown up of three, providing some occasionally convincing performances.

Special effects wise, this film seems to use them more subtly, and sparingly. It has neither the glorious spectacular nature of the first two films, nor it’s fun. It’s a darker course of Harry Potter antics, with even the game of Griddich (?) taking place in terrible weather, dark and murky to watch and accentuating the tone of, almost, a chiller. This may very well put fans of the first two films off, however, I expect as they’ve grown their tastes have grown so this shouldn’t pose to much of a problem. The next film, I expect will take on a much less darker theme and lighten things up with a happier Potter.

Overall then, this film is a huge improvement over the first two films by a long way. The child cast is mostly a step up, but still unconvincing and rather poor, with the film saved by the adult cast. It’s perhaps longer than it should be, and less exciting, providing more of a character development than any real action or adventure. It’s still not a great series, no doubt fans of the book would disagree, but if the books are anywhere as dark as this film, then I may be tempted to take a peek (though I understand they’re a bit more fairy-like). The next film really needs to build on the Prisoner of Azkaban, as does the story (it still felt rather lecturing at times). It’s improving slowly, and there’s hope it can get better.

Verdict: Dark & better than previous efforts, but still lacking a soul, and far too long.