Rating: 
Summary: Excellent
Review: Harry Potter is a very faitful adaptation to the book, this is a higly unusual thing that has happened, so far this film, "Stand By Me", and "LOTR", truly do keep up to the spirit of the book, the storyline is very good, but it could have been excellent if they shouldn'have cut the Norbert stuff, it felt that they butchered the book there, but is still acceptable, the special FX are really good, though in LOTR are better, this ones are still sharp, the acting is very good, but Daniel Radcliffe needs to express more his feelings,he did a better job on David Copperfield, but otherwise he will improve, but he still is a very good actor, the camerawork is excellent it truly does feel like magic, the music is really good, is almost as good as all the music by John Williams, but it dosen't become one of his top five, but it still works truly to the film, anyways this film ranked number 2 on my 2001 top ten list, if i hadn't seen LOTR it would have been number 1.
Rating: 
Summary: Just the Beginning
Review: This was a wonderful adaptation of Rowling's Harry Potter - the 1st in a series. Very faithful to the book - although I must admit the text was much more 'complete'. You don't have to read the book to enjoy the movie. While some may view the story line as lacking, this is just the 1st in the series and serves as the basis of all that is to come. It's your introduction to Harry and friends at Hogwarts. What follows is even more creative.
Rating:
Summary: What can you say?!
Review: What can you say about one of the best movies (if not THE best) ever made?! The movie makers obviously had the fans in mind, which all great movie makers do. Kudos to Chris Columbus and Co. for doing it the way the fans wanted it done. I've heard a lot of complaints about what they left out, the special effects, etc. and I have one thing to say to those people "Were you and I seeing the same movie?" Stop being nit-picky and enjoy it! The movie in no way replaces the book, but it came pretty darn close. The only way that it could've been better if the directors handed a copy of the book to each actor and told them that was the script. The acting was AWESOME, the special effects were dazzling and I cannot wait for Chamber of Secrets!
Rating:
Summary: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
Review: I have read all the books and then on opening night I saw the movie. A lot of the story was breezed through missing 2/3's of signifigance. For instance the loathing of the Dursley's that Harry feels, why the Dursley's hate magical people so much, how extensive Harrys fame is in the magical world. But the thing that great fantasy movies have which this film lacks is a narative at the begining. like the scrolling script at the start of Star Wars, or the spoken narative at the start of the Highlander. That's why I can't wait to get the DVD, so I can see all the cool extra stuff.
Rating:
Summary: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
Review: The movie "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" (better know in Britan as "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone) cast a spell on me as I sat on the edge of my seat on November 16th! I immediately fell in love with the Harry Potter books, and of course the hot, loveavle Daniel Radcliffe! I now have read each book about five times. The script was witty and exhillarating, and the acting was superb! Whether you are a Muggle or a wizard, "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" is the best movie ever made, since the "Wizard of Oz"!
Rating: 
Summary: two minute clips don't make a movie
Review: Columbus's adaptation of JK Rowling's Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone ultimately fails. Columbus wants to do the book justice by including as much as possible but he only ends up with a long series of two to three minute clips, each presenting an "important" event that never allows any of the characters to develop properly. At most, each character has maybe one or two lines per scene. Can Radcliffe act? We're not sure.
If anything, the film plays out like late nite sports highlights. Or, to use another analogy, it's like reading the coles notes for a good book --all the necessary information in the most concise manner. Most people, even if uninitiated to Rowlings wonderful books, will get the overall gist of the storyline, but is this anyway to introduce them to Rowling's work?
People that have read the book prior to seeing the film will find the movie a visual delight with an excellent cast, but for those that haven't read the book I highly recommend reading the book first. The film just isn't a good gateway to Rowling's rich world of wizards, quidditch and ignorant, bloated muggles. Which reminds me... did anyone else find that the Dursleys were not mean enough to poor Harry?
Rating: 
Summary: Let down by the animations
Review: The film is great, the actors fantastic but I feel given the budget of this movie that it was let down by the animations of the Quidditch game and the troll scene. Given the technology we have seen in the matrix, Star Wars and Lord of The Rings I think they could have done a lot better. Sticks close to the book, which is unusally good to screen Having said all that it is still well worth watching, and I will be getting a DVD for my HP mad girlfriend.
Rating:
Summary: More energy than a tub of dead fish
Review: I think this movie sucked. I'm a fan of the books, and I say Mr. Columbus worried too much about being too faithfull. It had no life of it's own. One example; John Hurt is normally a good character on screen, and he should have been in this, also, especially as the fun character that the wand-seller in the book was. He wasn't. It was one of the most boring scenes in the movie. I only give it two stars because of the Quidditch match.
Thanks Chris, for putting Harry Potter images into my head which are far less stimulating than my own imagination.
Rating:
Summary: The Best Movie of 2001!
Review: If I had to chose one reason for why this movie was so good, it would be because of the acting. The acting was excellent. All the actors and actresses played their roles exceptionally well. For the children, I especially liked Hermione, Harry, and Ron. Hermione's bossy personality led to a few laughs and the way that all three interacted together throughout the movie was simply brilliant. For the adults, Hagrid was among my favorites. He was funny because he would sometimes let important information slip so that the trio could solve the mystery of the Sorcerer's Stone. Snape was another favorite of mine. I definitely wouldn't want a teacher like him, but it was humerous how he treats Harry and is always taking points away from Gryffindor for any reason that he can think of. Finally, Mr. Filch was also great in this movie. His expressions and ideas on proper punishments, when talking to Hagrid in the dentention scene, are just excellent. I felt that the movie stuck pretty close to the book. If it included everything, the movie would be much longer (I wouldn't have mined myself though *hehe*). I will agree that there were a few parts that were wrong... such as the using light for Devil's Snare when its supposed to be fire... and the picture book of Harry and his family showing a boy much older than Harry was supposed to be... and James Potter (Harry's Dad) being a Seeker instead of a Chaser... but nonetheless I still think the movie deserves 5 stars! It was great, go see it and buy it on DVD :)
Rating:
Summary: Good v/s Evil
Review: There had been a lot of talk over this movie. My son has read the first 4 novels and we have seen the movie. It does have magic in it but it is good v/s evil. And good wins. I do not beleive this movie is "of the devil" as I had been told. We are a Christian family. This is a wonderful story in a make beleive world. Just like Peter Pan. It's a fairy tale. Think back to all the tale's told when we were kids, they all have magic in them. Why do people get so upset over this movie? It's just "modern day" fairy tale.
|
