New and improved 'Potter' flick sparkles

The first two "Harry Potter" movies were good … very good. Director Chris Columbus made two fun flicks that followed the best-selling books on which they were based closely. \nNow comes the much-anticipated third movie, "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban." But this time, there are going to be some changes -- most notably, the directing switch from Columbus to Alfonso Cuarón. Will the franchise survive? Will Cuarón deliver the same magic (no pun intended) that wove through the first two films?\nThe answer? Yes, and a little bit more.\nThe story follows our hero, Harry Potter, through his third year at Hogwarts School for Witchcraft and Wizardry. After fighting evil wizard Voldemort for the past two years, you'd think poor Harry would get a break to concentrate on magic or attempt to understand puberty (which has hit full-force for the young witches and wizards in Harry's class). This time, though, Harry has to deal with another complication in his already-insane life -- Sirius Black (Gary Oldman,) who lost everything the night Harry's parents died, has escaped from the maximum security wizarding prison, Azkaban. Now Black is apparently out to kill Harry. Just another day in the life of the world's most famous boy-wizard, I suppose. \nThis third film seems to signal a change in the Harry Potter universe. Harry is no longer the sad little orphan living with cruel relatives. When something makes him mad, Harry retaliates. He's darker and has a little more brooding angst than in the first two films. His friends, too, have changed -- Ron and Hermione, Harry's two best friends, have more longing glances and more of those awkward moments that happen between two young adolescents that are just feeling the first sparks of teenaged love. \nThe feel of the film has changed too -- it's darker and more real. Where Columbus used the castle and surrounding grounds as a mere backdrop to the story, Cuarón makes it a character in its own right. We see a lot more of the castle and grounds, from a giant clock with a pendulum swinging in the entrance hall to a beautiful courtyard complete with fountain. There are paintings that talk and staircases that move, which were present in the first two films, but they didn't bring the castle to life like they did here.\nThe actors were incredible as well. Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint as Harry, Hermione and Ron, respectively, were wonderful as usual, but the real joy of the "Harry Potter" movies is the plethora of British talent that surround the children in the form of Hogwarts' teachers. Michael Gambon should especially be commended for his superb job as Professor Dumbledore, a role that was played in the first two movies by the late Richard Harris. The best of the adults, however, was Alan Rickman as the brooding, mean Professor Severus Snape. Though Rickman was in tragically few scenes, he again stole the spotlight from the rest of the actors whenever he appeared on screen.\nThere were a few scenes in the film that could only be defined as "cheesy" (I especially had to laugh when I saw the scene where Harry was flying on a hippogriff, a creature that is half-horse, half-bird. As the animal flies close to a lake's surface, Harry throws out both of his hands and lets out a whoop, a la "Titanic"). However, for each of these kitschy moments there were many moments that excited, astounded and tugged at the audiences' heartstrings. Cuarón succeeded in improving upon the already-incredible world of "Harry Potter"