Rating: 
Summary: Great Job!
Review: I absolutley loved the movie. Extremly good acting and Fabulous effects. It was soo exiting. I was at the edge of seat through out the movie. Can't wait to buy it on video. I also can't wait to see the second one....wonder what the second one will be like. Will it be as exciting as the first? I wonder. I soo can't wait.
Thank You For Making this Fabulous Movie,
...
Rating:
Summary: Harry Potter and the Sorcere's Stone
Review: This was one of the best movies I have ever seen. I saw it on the frist night it came out.I was lucky enough to get tickes! I would see it agin and agin!
Rating:
Summary: A must see movie
Review: They thought Titanic was good. I just have to say, the person that the movie melted on them, that had to (...).The end is the best part. They are right when they say that the movie is not as good as the books but it is really close. They cut out a lot of parts but they can't leave it all in or the movie would be a day long. The movie was really great and for the people who have read the book, they changed some things, so you don't know EXACTLY what's going to happen. I would definitely go see it. It's money well spent
Rating:
Summary: Harry Potter, the long awaited film!
Review: When seeing this film, it is obvious that J.K. Rowling was on the set, let alone given credit as an Exectutive Producer of the film. This film adaptaion of her flawless novel is truelly that true to the pages of the book. Yes, the movie does omit some scenes from the book. But hey, it's a movie, if it showed absolutly everything from the book, the film would be over five or six hours long!
Daniel Radcliffe is the perfect choice, not only does he have the same birthday as J.K. Rowling, and Harry (July 31), making him the exact same age as the boy wizard he plays, and that he looks like a mirror image of what we all see Harry as being, but he also gives a very notable performance. From the very start of the film, you belive he is Harry! Daniel Radcliffe had only had expirence in one BBC film prior to "Potter", and is extremelly well-done in his role as the boy-wizard, and carrys the whole film on his sholders!
Rupert Grint and Emma Watson also give extremelly well done performances as Ron and Hermionie, respectivly. This is made all the more suprising by the fact that neither youngster had had any acting experience prior to "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone"!
In this film, all of the actors that play the various roles in the film, seem to be the perfect choices for the film! Also, Americans, and those who view the film out of England, may notice slight differences in names from their version of the book, most obvious is that in Britan the name of the film is "Harry Potter and the Phillospiher's Stone", and in America it is "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone", although for the film, the names do corespond, most likely, with the book youv'e read, Professor Snape does become Professor Snake in the film. I noticed no other differences in names than what I've read, not to say their arn't any!
Still, it's a great movie! If you love the books, as most of us do,you'll love the movie, I garentee it!
Rating:
Summary: It IS The Book: Nothing More Can Be Said!
Review: Of the disputes I have heard of this movie, the only major negative fact seems to be that it follows the book too closely. And indeed, for those of us how have sought Harry's tale in Rowling's magnificent novels, our blessing has come in a nearly perfect interpretation of the books, down to the smallest minute detail--no doubt Rowling had an iron fist over production, and as well she should. What you'll see on screen is what millions of readers had fallen in love with in their imaginations. As an avid fan, there is nothing more that I can ask from the fantastic cast and filmmakers: it is, perhaps, the truest novel adaptation ever to grace the screen, and so I offer them my uncontainable thanks.Those who criticize this film for "following the book too closely," are nitpicking the fact that Rowling--in all of her inimitable genius--liberally plants the seeds for future novels in even the first of her series of works. For this reason, many fine some of the scenes and side stories rather arbitrary and unnecessary in the scheme of things. For an ordinary novel, I would undoubtedly concur, but much like the Star Wars prequels or the Matrix sequels, we cannot expect an explanation for everything when we are given but a first chapter, the later to be divulged after much anticipation. Moreover, some of those arbitrary moments might be so entertaining, the audience certainly won't care. Thus, what remains is a film that tells a superb story with magnificent attention to detail, while still capturing Rowling's foresight into future works. If I have one criticism, it is a small one at best, and even so provides little depletion of entertainment. Some special effects left something to be desired. Many of the human characters were recreated with CGI to a great extent, but observablly false nonetheless, not to mention the troll that passes and fails depending on the shot. If Firenze had been lit in delight, I know the audience would have received equal disappointment and amusement as during the conclusion of the Mummy Returns, where audiences were treated with the most blatantly computer generated villain ever to be witnessed. But, beyond the effects failures, one cannot deny that the whole film requires a suspension of disbelief that transfers itself to these faults, and thus does little to prevent the film from wowing audiences whenever it can. And it does wow; it wows quite frequently, constantly allaying all of the brilliance of the novel's vision without succumbing to the traditional Hollywood embellishment that would have done so much to reduce this film. Everything that appears on screen is a magical window into this new world, so creative in scope, so breathtaking in visualization that the viewer constantly returns to the same feeling of wonder. The film, in short, is a miraculous feat of filmmaking that will certainly impress even the most religious followers of the novels, as well as newcomers who are experiencing the magic for the very first time. This film is exactly as everyone was hoping it would be; nay, it has exceeded our expectations, by faithfully maintaining everything from the original book and every detail to be resurrected in the successive books. This film is a cultural icon that has enthused so many people, that it cannot be missed--and, as well, it cannot disappoint. It is too true, too perfect a book, a film, an execution to fail to inspire even the most solemn individual.
Rating:
Summary: Faithful to the book. Hoping the 4 hour version is on dvd!!
Review: Yes, I was not that thrilled with choice of director, but I loved the movie. The child actors were fantastic, and the movie remained quite true to the book. Actually, at 2 1/2 hours, it was STILL too short! (...) I am already anticipating the dvd, and hope they give us the full treatment!
Rating:
Summary: Incredible - for all ages
Review: Here's a review for those of you who have NOT read the book. I admit, I was a bit hesitant to see the new Harry Potter flick, having not read the book. But it was incredible. And yes, this film is rated PG, but there are some tense moments. One little girl had to be removed from the theater because she was screaming. From what I've read, and from what my wife tells me, this movie is true to the book. In that regard, (warning:) if you've recently finished reading the book, the movie may seem like a re-run. Since seeing the movie, I've started reading the book, and some things were in fact left out. But that's what happens when you transform a book into a movie. Here's the thing: I'm a 25-year-old married man with no children. I loved it! This is NOT just a kid-movie. As a (highly critical) movie lover (and not much of a reader), Harry Potter is nothing short of phenominal. Right from the start, I was impressed with the sincerety of the characters. Aside from being a special effects festival, this movie kept me on the edge of my seat through a roller coaster of feelings. I felt Harry's frustration in living with his pig of a cousin. I cheered at the quidditch game. I laughed, cried, jumped, cringed, and *insert many other descriptives here*. The SHORT of this review is... YOU SHOULD SEE THIS MOVIE IF YOU:
enjoy special effects,
read the book and enjoyed it,
like feel-good movies in general,
value friendship and teamwork,
have ever felt as if you had little control of your life, or
just like hearing British accents. If you cannot relate to any of these things, I would just wait and rent it sometime. I hope this review is helpful in making a decision whether to go out and see it, or stick to what you know. As for me, I'll be buying it as soon as it's available on DVD. P.S. Don't let religious zealots tell you that this movie promotes sorcery or paganism. It's about friendship, courage, utilizing knowledge, and, at the very least, doing well in school!
Rating: 
Summary: A pretty good movie -- my review has spoilers!
Review: In short: Harry Potter lived pretty well up to my expectations, and that's pretty good since my expectations were ridiculous. After waiting endless months for this movie to come out, the day finally came. I went to a theater with 25 other people to see this movie, and quite frankly the anticipation had to be half the fun. When we all saw the signpost for "Privet Drive" come up on the screen, everyone clapped furiously. I have to admit, I had spent so much time envisioning how the movie was going to be that it took some of the fun out of seeing the scenes; it was as if I had expected my vision to be on the screen. Fortunately, I have forgotten just about ALL of the Chamber of Secrets, so that should help a bit next year. The problem with the first book, if it really is a problem, was that there really isn't an intensive plot. Instead, things happen, and we are introduced to this world of witchcraft and wizardry. This kind of storyline somewhat reminds me of Lord of the Rings, where things basically happen to Frodo and his Fellowship as they search for a way to destroy the ring. Events just occur, and for some reason that bothered me when I read Lord of the Rings, but it didn't when I was reading Harry Potter. The only reason I can think why is because Harry Potter is so much more accessible than Lord of the Rings is in terms of literary style and depth. Anyway, the film is almost EXACTLY like the book - events occur through Harry's first year at Hogwarts, and we mostly experience what it's like going to a school for wizards. There is very little in terms of plot, but that doesn't make the film any less enjoyable for what it is. The acting of these actors was pretty decent; for kid actors they weren't bad at all. The supporting cast was quite excellent; Alan Rickman's role as Snape was ABSOTELY FANTASTIC. For such a devious guy, he was pretty funny. He loved having these weird, awkward moments of silence where he seems to be contemplating the weirdest things, then he just says something abrupt and turns away. What a great role for him! The three kids were pretty good too; Emma Watson was a pretty good Hermione, and she was definitely the class brown-noser. Rupert Grint was great as Ron, and Daniel Radcliffe was a decent Harry Potter. As the next several movies come out, I'm sure as Harry Potter's character is flushed out he'll be challenged with more facial expressions. Of course, all three main actors had their share of awkward moments (and not funny awkward like Snape, but just oh-my-goodness-that's-really-bad-acting awkward, but they're just kids, and two of them have only had several school plays under their belts, so what can I say?!). Overall, however, the acting was splendid. The music was really fantastic, in the classical John Williams style. I personally felt that he overused the Harry Potter xylophone theme, but it was still quite enjoyable nevertheless. I've seen the trailer SO many times that the theme became tired after a while, but he still managed to add some jest to it, either by utilizing funky vocals, different pitches, or different instruments. I hope that he will still retain this theme if he composes for Chamber of Secrets, but I hope that he doesn't overuse it like he did for Sorcerer's stone. The script was written quite faithfully to Rowling's novel, and I think people should be proud of Steve Kloves for containing his desire to express his own creativity and make Rowling blow up. If Steven Spielberg had taken the helm, I think we would have seen a very different movie; after all, I don't think the Academy-Award-winning director would be able to contain his own enthusiasm for his own creativity. He would have probably pushed Steve Kloves out of the way and said, "Let me write it!" Then, we would have had a Hogwarts set in somewhere like Maine with an all-American cast, and Harry Potter would have been a robot. E.T. would have probably paid a visit in the Dark Forest, and Norbert the dragon would probably have been a raptor instead. Ok, now for the special effects. Hogwarts was absolutely beautiful, and Quidditch was ABSOLUTELY AMAZING. I had so many problem envisioning Quidditch, and this movie really made the game real. Other computer-generated personas were either decent or pretty good. Norbert the dragon looked pretty decent, as did Fluffy. The centaur that they meet in the Dark Forest was pretty "eh!" -- I think I've seen better centaurs on Xena: Warrior Princess or Hercules. The special effects they used for the real animals, such as the boa constrictor and the owls, were really well done. Hedwig is SOOOOOOOOOO cute! I want an owl! People say that the kids were cute, but I say "bla." The more I think about this film the more I like it. Painstaking work went into preserving the book as much as possible, and even though I complain about lack of a plot, it's not like they had a drama to go on anyway. I just can't wait to see where Chris Columbus decides to take the rest of the series, and I want to see how the actors change over the course of several movies. Of course, none of the movies can possibly compare to the books, which I have found to be some of the most enjoyable books I've read in a long time. Fortunately, the movie was enjoyable, and nowhere as depressing as my other super-hyped movies, like Final Fantasy and Hannibal (big boo to both). And oh yes, the two-and-a-half hours go by quickly. I wish it was longer!
Rating: 
Summary: Magical its not...
Review: The books are wonderful, unfortunately the film is flat. Its a faithful adaptation with minor variations. However, the film is tediuos, it has no punch, no vigor its like having the story explained to you by someone who is not very good at story telling. Look closely at it and you can see the actors go off on cue, like they are bored out of there skulls waiting for someone to tell them what to do next. All the pieces are there and in faithful rendition, it just lack a life of its own.
Rating:
Summary: Its one of the best movies I have ever seen!
Review: The movie had nothing to dislike about it. Imagination was one of many strong points. The characters were outstanding. It made my friends and I feel like there really is another place, and another time.I think that this will make adults and children use their imagination with no boundaries.You've got to see this movie!!!
|
