Rating: 
Summary: Harry Potter and the Philosopher/Sorcerer's Stone
Review: Can a movie live up to the expectations all the media hype has put upon it? In a word yes. Harry Potter and the (sorcerer's) Stone, creates a lush environment in which the characters of Ms. Rowlings book come to life. While too imperfect to be called a master peice the 2 and a 1/2 hour movie will no doubt delight all of Harry's Fans. The movie IS rated PG Which means parents should rightfully consider before taking small children. There are a number of elements which WILL scare younger viewers. Not to mention I haven't met a three year old that can sit still for 2 and a half hours anyways. Entering the Enchanting world of Mr.H. Potter The cupboard under the stair case is a journey into what might be, and in Harry's world, what simply is. I would recommend this movie to ANY harry potter fan. If you haven't read the books you may not find the film as utterly enthralling as the next person whom has, however there is enough magical fun that everyone can find something to appreciate.
Rating:
Summary: Great Book, but how will the movie turn out?
Review: The Harry Potter books by J.K. Rowling were a great surprise in terms of their ability to make you laugh and their seemingly unlimited readability. Even so, they were slightly lacking in sophistication understandably since they were written for children. I think the movie will probably be fairly well done as it is being done by a talented director with the likes of Mrs. Doubtfire on his repertoire. I don't, however, think the movie will quite live up to its written roots as it can often be a daunting task to adapt such an original fun novel to the screen. While Chris Columbus has directed Mrs. Doubtfire, he has also directed such childish and uninteresting films as Home Alone. Even with these pessimistic anticipations, I hope the movie will exceed my expectations.
Rating:
Summary: A magical thrill ride - Fans of the book rejoice!
Review: I have to admit, I was ready to hate this movie. Having been a long-term fan of the Harry Potter books, a less-than-faithful adaptation could have spoiled it all for me. As it turns out, my fears were unfounded. Okay, some viewers will nitpick over discrepencies in characters' appearances, but all the IMPORTANT stuff is here. The relationships between the characters are spot-on. The film also successfully convinces us that the magical goings-on are part of the protagonists' everyday lives, whilst at the same time instilling a sense of wonder in the audience. This difficult balance is one of the main reasons the books are so successful. Some of the child actors are a little wooden at times, but generally the all-British cast is excellent. The rich characters of Rowling's books have translated perfectly. Robbie Coltrane IS Hagrid. Emma Watson (Hermione) and Rupert Grint (Ron) have immense fun delivering most of the film's best lines. Dan Radcliffe does well in the difficult task of communicating Harry's thoughts, when the audience is unable to see them written down. Deserved mention, too, for Maggie Smith's McGonagall, Alan Rickman's Snape and Tom Felton's nasty-yet-vulnerable Draco Malfoy. The quality of the production is excellent. The sets and costumes are fabulous, and the attention to detail is breathtaking. The effects are superb, obvious highlights being Harry's invisibility cloak, and the Quidditch match (an adrenaline-pumping spectacle right up there with anything Star Wars has to offer). In between the showpieces, director Chris Columbus remembers to let his audience take a breather with quieter moments. Harry staring out of his bedroom window, and he and Ron opening their presents on Christmas morning, are endearingly down-to-earth. And the scenes of Harry in front of the Mirror of Erised brought a tear to my eye (If you've read the book, you'll know why). That's not to say the movie is without its faults. In an attempt to please purists, ALL the subplots have been included (though pared down a great deal), when omitting a few entirely may have helped the pacing of the film. The opening half-hour may be difficult to grasp for those who are unfamiliar with the book. A few of the magical artefacts seem rather more mechanical than mystical. But these are all small niggles, really. The bottom line is that 152 minutes fly by as if it were half an hour. The only wish you have is that it were longer, and there can be no better sign of a good film than that.
Rating: 
Summary: Kids film
Review: I saw this film expecting it to be worse than the book as films generally are. Although the scenes were well done. They were exactly as I had pictured them I was still astounded at how much was left out. Although it is two and 1/2 hours long I felt the characters, especially Harry, and the story lacked depth. This is just a kids film. Nothing more, nothing less.
Rating: 
Summary: I cannot wait!
Review: OK, so I haven't read the books yet, but I'm still so excited about seeing the movie! I know I will have to read all four books once I finish seeing the movie, which I will be seeing with my family on my birthday - November 19th, a few days after the Harry Potter movie's release! All the actors, especially Daniel Radcliffe (British newcomer who plays the one-and-only Harry Potter), Maggie Smith, and Alan Rinkman, are going to be absolutely superb. The movie looks so magical and enchanting from the previews and trailers. It looks pretty dark and suspenful, too. The special effects look absolutely stunning, and the storyline and script will hopefully follow the book well. The one bad thing about this movie is that it is so long (about 2 1/2 hours!). But I guess it's all for the better 'cause if it weren't long, fans would be begging for it to be longer and complaining that they didn't fit all of the things that happened in the book. Chris Columbus is directing this movie, and he is a great director (just watch those Home Alone movies and you'll understand what I mean). I definitely recommend this movie come November 16th, 2001. Other movies I recommend if you like Harry Potter are The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring, Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones, Gangs of New York, and Men in Black 2! Go see Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone!
Rating:
Summary: Lovely Movie, however a bit long.
Review: I personally loved this movie, having read the frist 3 books it is very factual and fulfills every detail. The actors are VERY talented and have a true gift. Over all it was a very entertaining movie. It was a bit long though. I would recomend that you read some of the book first. It is very hard too understand if you don't know what's really going on.
Rating:
Summary: A magical thrill!
Review: This was a superb adaption from the great novels from J.K. Rowling and the magic sequences involved in the movie were remarkable. This is a fantastic magically made movie with great first time big screen acting from Daniel Radcliffe and great acting from legend Alan Rickman who gave the movie a little more scariness and reality. Overall this is a must see movie for all especially those who are big fans of J. K. Rowling and her work on her novels which were also a delight to read.
Rating:
Summary: Beautiful production, but overlong with underwhelming climax
Review: Let me start by saying that fans of Harry Potter will most likely not be disappointed in the new movie adaptation. It's VERY faithful to the book. In fact, it's a little TOO faithful. This movie tries to be so faithful, in fact, that it ends up feeling overstuffed and a bit underdone. Let's start with the acting. It's first rate for the most part (although some of the child actors overdo it a bit, but not Radcliffe, who is perfect in the lead role). The veteran British supporting actors, however, shine brightly. Alan Rickman and Robbie Coltraine, especially, have amusing and highly memorable takes on their characters. The production design is phenomenal, full of beautiful and sometimes startling images (even if a few of them seem like rehashes from Sleepy Hollow). John Seale's photography is beautiful, as is John Williams score (reminiscent of his work on Hook). The visual effects rely heavily on CGI (computer-generated imagery) and consequently FEEL like special effects. A few highlights, however, include a ballgame in which the participants fly around the stadium on brooms and a troll who invades the school. Beyond that, however, the effects are simply serviceable and never completely convince us that what we are watching is real in any way. Chris Columbus' direction is, as usual, rather unimaginative. He misses several opportunities to find awe in the story, which it needs in order to hook the audience. Too often, the magic in the movie (even the first time Harry uses his own powers) is treated matter-of-factly and unsurprisingly. My biggest complaint, however, comes from the sheer length of the film. At 2 1/2 hours, it is simply too long for its target audience (as well as for the adults who will be taking the kids). Part of the problem is in the structure of the story. It's extremely episodic, with several scenes really having little or nothing to do with the main plot (which involves the stone mentioned in the title). In fact, so much time is spent on these sidetrack episodes, the main plot is given short shrift. Another part of the problem related to the length of the movie has to do with the climax and what comes immediately before it. A live chess game (with life size pieces and real weapons) is a remarkable and imaginative set piece. But it's not the climax. Instead, the climax comes 20 minutes later and never lives up to the excitement level of the chess game (or the much early ball game). Following the rather rushed and underwhelming climax comes another 20 minutes of "wrapping up," which feels like an eternity. One can look at Columbus' past movies and see this is a typical problem with him (Home Alone is a perfect example). In addition, the last 20 minutes of the movie seems like a commercial for the movie's sequel (which, despite reports to the contrary, WILL include the same cast, according to an article released today). So all in all, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is sure to be a huge hit for its first few weeks, when the ardant fans will stand in line for hours to see it. But once that first rush is through, I suspect its box office will fall off rather sharply. This is not the kind of movie that kids will want to see more than once until it comes out on video, when they can pause it for necessary bathroom breaks.
Rating:
Summary: Hmm...I didn't plan on seeing this,but...
Review: ...looks like I'm having second thoughts. I was obsessive over the books when they came out,and the whole hype sort of settled down,but not for long,I guess. I was worried about the movie ruining my vision of Hogwarts,Harry & Co.,but I'm throwing caution to the winds to see it when it comes out!! And I'll probably end up buying it when it comes out on DVD...the trailer is very good,I'd advise you to READ THE BOOKS before seeing the movie!! Or at least the first one,because in my opinion the book should always come first. ; ) Daniel Radcliffe looks cute,but not as I imagined Harry,and Rupert Grint (Ron) & Emma Watson (Hermione) look exactly as I imagined them in the book. I expect to review this when the movie is actually released,but for now the trailer gets five fat gold stars!
Rating:
Summary: Can't Wait
Review: When I heard that the first Harry Potter book was being turned into a movie, I admit, my first thought was "omg they are going to butcher another great book into an awful movie" It happens all the time, but then I saw the previews, and watched the press releases where J.K Rowling herself says that she couldn't be more pleased with the movie, and if the author is pleased.. well I can't see how we wouldn't be. I for one will be in a theater on Nov. 16, if I have to hitchike my way to the nearest city. =)
| 
