Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is the fourth chapter in the series based on J.K. Rowling's uber-popular books and in addition to a darker edge (one on par with last year's Prisoner of Azkaban), this Potter adventure arrives with a PG-13 rating (a surprising MPAA decision--a similar one the board made for Revenge of the Sith). As for the rating, don't let it scare you away. If you and your kids were able to handle the last outing, you'll be able to handle this.

The Goblet of Fire finds Harry, Hermione, and Ron attending Hogwarts for their fourth year, banding together once again, only this time there's a little contention (and romance) in the air. There's plenty of action, as Harry is chosen - to his dismay - as one of four Hogwarts students, to take part in the Triwizard Tournament , a dangerous series of competitive tests (that involve the likes of dragons and mermaids) where violent death might befall a contestant at any time.

This entry in the series was directed by gifted British film maker Mike Newell (Four Weddings and a Funeral, Donnie Brasco), a rather odd choice, although it should be noted that I thought the same thing when it was announced that Alfonso Cuaron (Y tu Mama Tambien) would direct Prisoner of Azkaban (my favorite of the series). As it turns out, Newell was the right man for the job. He brings a great sense of timing and an even better sense of character to this installment of the Potter franchise, an amazing feat given the scope and the high expectations. In fact, for a while there, Newell even considered breaking this film into two parts, but he and screenwriter Steven Kloves eventually found a way to scale things down a bit.

Let it be known yet again that I have never read the books. As films however, I believe that each chapter has progressively gotten better. Until now. Now before Potter maniacs jump down my throat, let me just say that I think Goblet of Fire is on par with Prisoner of Azkaban, but not better. Why? For a few reasons actually, but I'll start with the screenplay. Again, I haven't read the books, but as a movie, Goblet of Fire does seem to be lacking, and I've talked to friends who've read the books, and they regard this fllm as perhaps the most condensed version of the source material, and as I watched the film, I could feel that. There are plot elements introduced that are never truly explored (such as the much talked about romances), and there are so many characters and situations at work here that if you aren't familiar with the books, you might have a hard time keeping score.

Having said that, this entry is edgier than the others, and even though it does feel condensed, the strong sense of character makes this an extremely worthy picture. The challenges that Potter faces this time around, are much darker and quite intense - hense the PG-13 rating. Still, this isn't in your face, senseless violence by any means, and I wouldn't even go so far as to say this movie is as intense as other 2005 actioneers (i.e. Batman Begins, Revenge of the Sith, and War of the Worlds) but it does push the franchise into grittier terrain.

The visual flair on display in this entry is breathtaking albeit I think I was a little more impressed by the set design in Prisoner of Azkaban. Make no mistakes though, The Goblet of Fire is really big in terms of scope. It is, perhaps, the largest of the franchise in terms of scale ( landscapes and effects shots etc.), and you can see every dollar of the budget right up there on the screen.

The cast continues to get more comfortable with each passing adventure. Daniel Radcliffe is likable as the maturing Harry Potter, and the actor is even afforded the opportunity to show off a little more range this time around. Emma Watson has grown into a lovely young woman, but the film makers wisely opt to not overly glamorize her appearance. After all, like the rest of Hogwarts' students, she's your every day muggle teenager. Rupert Grint is amusing as the shy and awkward Ron Weasley, and once again, he provides the film with many of it's funniest moments. All three young leads generate real chemistry and play their moments of teen angst and approaching adulthood with subtlety.

New to the series are a hilarious Miranda Richardson who hits all the right notes as busy body reporter Rita Skeeter , a creepy but funny Brendan Gleeson who appears as the eccentric Alastor "MadEye" Moody, and a terrifying Ralph Fiennes who scorches up the screen as the villainous Lord Voldemort. Fiennes is an outstanding actor (check out his amazing turn in the recent Constant Gardener), but I'm particularly fond of his bad guy roles (i.e. Schindler's List, and Red Dragon). This is one of those.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is a tad long (as are the rest of the installments), and the ending is more of a set up for the next chapter rather than a true climax, but Warner Brothers has ultimately done well by this franchise. Each chapter evolves in it's own beautiful way, and while I still feel like Alfonso Cuaron did a better job balancing character and a grand sense of wonder, Newell has the good sense to know that character comes first, and that's what I thought was lacking in Chris Columbus' adaptations. The first two movies felt like they were just out to dazzle with visual style (which they did on occasion) but in the process, they sort of felt like movies about magic without the magic. Cuaron and Newell, however, have brought the magic to the franchise, and God bless them for that.

On a final note, Harry Potter and the Order of Phoenix has begun shooting, and in typical fashion, Warner Brothers is taking a bold chance with it's director selection. The next entry is being directed by relative unknown David Yates. It's due out next Thanksgiving.