Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is the story within the hugely popular book series that discusses the way the need to seek revenge changes people. As the third in a series of books, it was considered to be more complex in scope than the first two (Sorcerer’s Stone and Chamber of Secrets) as it dealt deeply with the back story of the death of Harry’s parents and a betrayal amongst friends.
Due to the sheer number of pages and sub-plots involved in the book that had to be somehow edited and included in the final film version, certain edits and watering down of scenes had to be made. Under the direction of Alfonso Cuaron, the end product was that of a movie that, although immensely different in storytelling style than the book, produced the same storyline and effect upon the fans of the book series. Having said that, we have to acknowledge that certain plots which we as readers deemed important in the book became mere mentions or were glossed over in the film version.
For instance, the Marauder’s Map, which was introduced in the book and played a pivotal part in Harry discovering the truth about his parent’s past and their bloody end, was only a mere mention in the movie. There was no mention in the movie about how Remus Lupin and James Potter created the map for the purposes of mischief in the film. More importantly, the identity of Scabbers, Hermione’s cat, and the secret behind the Shrieking Shack were not delved into either. The personal history of Sirius Black and the Potters was also cut to mere mentions in the movie, so if a viewer had not read the book before seeing the film, questions might tend to be raised about that part. All in all, there was very little told in terms of Sirius Black’s character development in the film, so nobody can understand how he was able to change into an animal on demand (in the book, this ability of his was explained as being an Animagus).
Taking the technical aspects of the film into consideration, there were some differences made more for cinematic effect than anything else. Actions such as having Harry read using his wand in the film rather than by flashlight as originally portrayed in the book were used more for entertainment purposes that thankfully had no direct impact on the way the story was told.
The movie version took immense liberties, in my opinion, as they placed the important Firebolt gift that Harry received in the middle of the book at the end of the film instead. Thus changing the pace of the storytelling. In the book, the broom was received over the Christmas holidays and taken for testing by the Hogwarts professors to ensure that it was not a cursed broom meant to inflict harm upon Harry.
However, the movie makes sure, often at the insistence of book author J.K. Rowling herself, that certain dialog must be included in the film in one way or another. For instance, in the book, when Mr. Weasley makes Harry promise that he will not go after Sirius Black, Harry replies:
Why would I go looking for someone I know who wants to kill me? (Prisoner of Azkaban, p. 73)
This scene took place at the train station in the novel while it took place at the Leaky Cauldron in the film. Although said in two different places, the impact upon the viewer is the same. This was a question that Harry was asking more of himself than of Mr. Weasely. I believe he was asking himself, “Should I seek revenge for my parents now that I know who killed them? Even if it meant giving my own life?”
But later on in the film, just as in the book, Harry came to the realization of who the real bad guys were, and it wasn’t Sirius Black, so when he offered:
Once my name’s cleared… if you wanted a… a different home…(Prisoner of Azkaban, p. 379)
Harry then came to realize that he could be loved in a world where he always felt alone and different from both the muggles and magical people. He had a home with Sirius, and in both the book and film, this showed a relief on Harry’s part. The knowledge that someone actually wanted him gave him his existence in the world a point. So when circumstances forced this vision out of his reach, in reality, his pain could be felt coming across the page and the screen.
In all, the book told the story of Harry’s parents and the rise of Voldemort, teaches lessons about the betrayal of trust and why it is important not to betray a trust. It also shows that a person seeking revenge never ends up happy even after he has exacted it upon the person who caused him pain.
Alfonso Cuaron, being a highly artistic director, paid intricate detail to the photography of the film so that the whole movie has the aura of a painting that came to life. He literally brought the flat book descriptions to life on film. While Steve Kloves, on the other hand, concentrated more on telling the story for the young audiences by concentrating on that which interests their target audience age range more. So budding romances came to the front at the expense of character development and thus causing confusion about the story for those who had not read the book but instead watched the film immediately.
Having read the book and watched the film, I must say that both have their good points but that the book is still much better than the film due to the glossed over or missing plots that were pivotal and necessary for explanations in the story. So my advice would be to read the book before seeing the film.
Bibliography
Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban. Dir. Alfonso Cuaron. Perf. Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, and Gary Oldman. Warner Bros., 2004.
Ross, Shmuel. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban: Movie Review. 2007. Web.
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Prisoner Of Azkaban. New York: Scholastic, 2001.