Rating: 
Summary: Better on a small screen
Review: Okay, I admit it, I got the Harry Potter film. No kids in the family except me, my husband and a Great Dane, but that's kids enough. Although I was rather disappointed with the film when I saw it in the theater, I decided to purchase it anyway. For some reason, it's a better TV sized product than it was a large screen film. Chris Columbus has directed a number of kid type movies, including Home Alone, Mrs. Doubtfire, and Stepmom, but I think his concept of kids and family, although wacky enough, is not quite sinister enough to put the bite into the Harry Potter stories that exists in the books. Harry deals with some pretty heavy duty facts of life, including the death--which he later discovers was murder--of his parents, the active dislike and abuse of his caretakers, the dislocation of going away to a school where he knows no one and must discover for himself whom to trust, and so on. Although arrayed in the majesty and mystery of an ancient and occult world, Hogwarts becomes home and family to Harry. It is, however, not a home and family free of conflict and danger, as Harry soon discovers. Columbus follows the book closely, almost slavishly, but little of that sense of suspense and threat seems to exist despite a lavish set and wonderful performances by all of the cast. One almost has a feel of "holding back" on the part of the director, as though children can't handle the grit of a truly "scary" movie. I mean, get real. Like who went/goes to all those monster movies that have been shown at Saturday matinees for generations! I know a six year old whose favorite film is Jurassic Park. There were several episodes that could have scared the socks off of us, but although they were wonderful visually, they were a great disappointment as a scary experience. Maybe it's just that ones imagination can create scarier monsters than the screen can, but I doubt it. There's always Alien to disprove that theory! I had heard that Steven Spielberg had requested to make the film. I can't help but think that someone who gave us both Jaws and ET could have given us a better, more intense and more meaningful film. The movie as it is does better on a smaller screen, however. Maybe it's just that we've come to expect less from a made for TV movie. As it goes, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone has such a magnificent set, costuming and special effects, that it shines on the small screen which seems to be its natural home. Perhaps that's what was planned all along. Marketing is a powerful force.
Rating: 
Summary: Harry Soars...a real winner
Review: The movie fulfills almost all the possibilities and loses very little from the fantastic book...there is no way a movie could actually film EVERY scene in the book...but, it come s close. My children could not resist...we went 3 times to the theater while waiting for the movie release...and we NEVER go to the movies!! Since we bought this, we have watched it about 15 times, and the kids have watched it even more times without their mom...! A reader's dream...the Quiddich game was great, very exciting...!!!Just as my imagination had it 'painted' in my head.
Rating:
Summary: H.I.M. (Harry Is Magnificent)
Review: The title says it all boyos. This is an amazing movie. It was so thrilling that I was shocked to discover that I didn't remember half of the dialogue. Emma Watson was such a babe. I can't believe they're replacing her, Rupert Grint, and Daniel Radcliffe for Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Now I know how people felt when Sean Connery threw in the towel after he did You Only Live Twice. They should have mentioned that you had to find the Sorcerer's Stone to see the deleted scenes. All of these deleted scenes should have been kept in the movie except for the eggs scene. These scene could have made the movie more faithful. They could have had Harry and Hagrid talking about the dragon thing as they walking to the Leaky Cauldron. This movie definitely stays faithful to the book. It has some dialogue that wasn't in the book but it was worth it. In case you don't know who Warwick Davis is, he played Wicket, the Ewok, in Return of the Jedi, and Wald, one of Anakin's friends, in The Phantom Menace. In case you don't know what I'm talking about, I'm referring to two Star Wars films. Daniel Radcliffe is equally amazing. You can hardly tell he was lipsyncing in some scenes (his voice was changing). I'm almost certain that they shot the scene with the letters flying all over the place last because his voice sounds different. I am so mad that John Cleese (Nearly Headless Nick) had an almost cameo role in that movie. I pray that they'll use him in the next movies and I hope that they write some dialogue for him in The Prizoner of Azkaban. I don't think that Richard Harris (Dumbledore) is going to be used for all of the movies. Maggie Smith (Professor McGonagall) has become quite famous here in America. She recently finished the movie, Divine Secrets of the Ya Ya Sisterhood. I have two final complaints, one minor and one major, and the major one comes first. I can't believe that Harry Potter didn't get a nomination for Best Picture. The actors in the movie didn't get nominated for Best Leading Actor or Actress or Best Featured Actor or Actress. Emma Watson's performance deserved an Award for Best Actress. My final complaint is that the DVD has no audio commentary. Maybe, I'll find it. Maybe, it's an Easter Egg.
Rating: 
Summary: ...
Review: ...There should've been an option to play the game or to go directly to the deleted scenes. A lot of people do not have 10 minutes to click this and select that just to see 5 minutes of deleted scenes. what a horrendous job the movie company made. ... 3 stars for the movie, a ½ star for disc II. I can't imagine kids liking this either.
Rating: 
Summary: Not bad, but i expected more!
Review: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone was a mixture of the book and the director's thought. When i read J.K. Rowling's biography, she said about the movie being a bit child like and that she couldn't believe what had been on the screen. the graphic's were terrible and the lighting was simply dispicable, and the actors and actresses talents went to waste. I gave this movie 2 stars because it was horrible. If i were J.K. Rowling i would be insulted by this movie. It was almost the worst movie i have ever seen. The DVD which is full of extras (including the deleted scenes) were more childish than the movie and hopefully the cosmos read this so they can realize how much of a inconcivible movie this. If i were to rate this movie in a 1-10 scale, Harry Potter will get a -1. Just one more thing to say about this oblivious movie that the computer affects were incompetent. On the VHS the "Sorting Hat" doesn't sing like in the theatre. -- Talyn O'Donnell (Missy)
Rating:
Summary: Somewhat less than magical, especially on DVD
Review: The casting of this film is perfect. There is not a single character who does not look exactly as he or she ought, particularly Rupert Grint as the quintessential Ron Weasley. (Now, in the second movie, as much as I love Ken Branagh, I'd adore Hugh Grant as Gilderoy Lockhart ... but I digress.) Chris Columbus and company maintain overall a refreshingly reverent faithfulness to the book, which is, of course, a classic.So why did the film version leave me slightly flat? I've decided it's not the fault of anyone involved in the production but the inevitable result of condensing an entire school year into a 3-hour film. So much of what makes the book irresistible is in the details, details which must, sadly, be excised in the conversion to a film that you can watch without a lunch break. Hermione's application of "petrificus totalis" to Neville is far less poignant without the backstory of his struggles thus far in the school year. A Quidditch match without Lee Jordan's biased color commentary just isn't the same. And, oh, how I miss Fred and George Weasley's jokes! So I applaud the efforts of Columbus and crew, who have, I believe, delivered just about the best product possible. But let no one make the mistake of seeing the movie while omitting the read the book. In regard to the DVD version, I found the extras on the second disc disappointing, apart from a truly enjoyable interview with Columbus et al. on the making of the movie. But no outtakes? No deleted scenes? No early peek at the making of the sequel, already well underway by the time this DVD was issued? Color this fan disgruntled. The movie itself deserves 4 stars, but the DVD presentation downgrades my rating to 3.
Rating:
Summary: Good Movie...bad DVD
Review: I bought one copy of HP for my neice and one for a friend at work. I got to watch both and BOTH caused glitches on at least one of the machines they played on. The first copy ran great on my computer. On my home unit it jumps to the end of the scene on the part where Harry talks to the snake. My sister has similar difficulty with hers but it froze on the Troll scene. I don't have to add my disgust with the second CD to whats already been said...Its awful...BUT A WORD OF WARNING. After the second CD asks you for Net access on your computer...It can download its OWN DVD player and UNINSTALL YOUR DVD PLAYER SOFTWARE from your computer. This happened to my friend this morning. Not only that but the software it replaced it with failed to work. If you aren't fairly computer literate there is nothing on that second CD worth losing your DVD program for.
Rating:
Summary: Sorcery Lite
Review: Kids will enjoy this well-produced if derivative fantasy.
Rating:
Summary: Harry Potter
Review: I loved this movie! I would recommend it to anyone and everyone!
Rating:
Summary: Great movie -- stupidly designed DVD
Review: There is a scene in the movie Galaxy Quest where Sigourey Weaver and Tim Allen have to make their way through an overcomplicated deadly maze of moving traps. Weaver shouts out something along the lines of, "This is stupid. The writer of this should die." That's how I felt about the designer of the Harry Potter DVD as I stepped through the 18 steps required to get to the deleted scenes. Perhaps Warner Brothers thought it clever to have the kids have to play a game to get to the extra scenes. Maybe kids do enjoy this. But they should have had a fast path for adults who have no desire at all to play the silly game but just want to get to the deleted scenes. Don't let this detract from the movie though. It's a wonderful film, that does a superb job capturing the feel of the book and transfering it faithfully to the screen -- no easy task, given the millions of kids who would have complained about even minor differences in the ways they pictured the characters looking and acting. So, do watch the film. But if you buy the DVD, go to the Warner site and download the FAQ on how to get to the deleted scenes. (Or maybe just wait, in hopes that Warner will get the message and come out with a DVD without the stupid game.)
|
