Rating: 
Summary: see lord of the rings
Review: the lord of the rings is written for adults, so if you are a kid, then youmust see this harry potter movie. It tells the story of a young orphan who learns his destiny, and he is also an accomplished pilot. He has a girl, hermes, who is not his twin sister who helps him out.This movei also has alot of extra special special effects, which drive the movie along the path to sucess. They have a novelization of this movie whihc I have read, and I liked it.
Rating: 
Summary: awesome visuals for kids, and a great plot for parents
Review: This is a movie that the whole family can enjoy. Harry Potter has an enchanting feeling around the entire movie. I strongly suggest that anyone, no matter their race, age, etc, should go see this movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Great film!But the book is better.
Review: I'm a Harry Potter fan and when i first heard about the film i was so happy that i could finally watch Harry's first year on the big screen.This film stood up to my expectacions. It was great!The actors are talented,the special Fx are amazing and the movie is faithful to the book. What i didn't like and thought that was childish were a few scenes like Neville Longbottom's feather blowing up or when Harry,Hermione and Ron saw Fluffy their scream was synchronized.Also they didn't show the potions part that they had in the book and Harry's fight with Vol(sorry!) You-Know-Who wasn't nearly as scary as in the book.Personally i prefered the book because it had more of the dialogs and jokes going on and you felt the sense of time passing by better than in the movie.Anyway, the film was great but the book is even better.
Rating:
Summary: Sounds okay
Review: The movie was a good movie. I am listening to the book on tape and have relazed more mistakes for example when they take harry potter to oliver wood. In the book he was in flickricks room nots defence against the dark arts. So they're are tiny mistakes and major mistakes. But over all it was a good movie.
Rating:
Summary: Good... But not Great.
Review: The movie was good, with lots of the book included, however, a lot was left out. They missed two Quiddich scens, Norbert's life was horrably left out, and a few charecters were missing from the movie. However, the original movie was over four hours long, and it is being advertized as if that is being put back into the movie. With an extra two hours to put all the detail I mentioned into the movie, it should be exelent, hence, my 5 star rating.
Rating:
Summary: ...
Review: Um...yeah. That is all I can say about this movie. Really, if you have gone to see this movie, and haven't read the books, you'll think it's good. But if you've read the books, I say Don't see the movie! It's horrid! The Quidditch match was ok, but the special effects were so computer generated it's not funny! And to top it off, The Philosophers Stone is the worst book of them all! Those who think the movie is better I have one thing to say. Were we watching the same movie?! I doubt it. 2-3 minute scenes do NOT make a movie! The Dursleys weren't mean to Harry at all! Unless you count the 'throwing him in the closet' thing after the zoo! And what happened to Ms. Figg?! And Peeves?! And Neville going into the Forbidden Forest?! Ron didn't go! And what about the potions thing?! It shows the pure genius of Severus Snape and they just cut it out! Oh! And about people who are talking about the title 'The Sorcerers Stone' don't blame the Americans! JK Rowlings editor(I think) suggested the change in title! She changed it herself! She's said so! I give this movie one star for the simple fact that its Harry Potter, enough said.
Rating:
Summary: UK Harry Potter
Review: This is not really a review. It's just to tell Americans that Harry Potter and the Philosophers stone (which was changed to Sorcerers Stone for Americans to understand)is coming out 2 weeks before the US in the UK because JK Rowling wants it to and that Harry is British!
Rating: 
Summary: Has a film ever been this over-hyped and overrated?
Review: Maybe. But this is a somewhat pleasant and unimaginatively flat movie--not the enthralling adventure that some reviewers would have you believe. First, it lacks the dark humor which gave the book life--the Roald Dahl-style sensibility that made you actually indentify with Harry. This movie has little sense of humor at all--and what it has is canned, pure and simple. Second, this film evinces an attitude that all that you really need to be an actor is to be very British. I guess. To be sure, Robbie Coltrane is fine in his role as a feeble-minded giant with a heart of gold, but a better script could have catapolted his role even higher. The kid who plays Harry is entirely unengaging. He brings none of the sly vulnerability to the role that would have made him interesting. Instead, he is this rather bland kid with glasses who effortlessly glides through a plot which cannot produce a single moment of convincing danger. Harry, in other words, is coated in teflon and a bullet-proof suit in this movie--never once do we think any harm is even remotely on the horizon. And if there is no danger, can there be effective drama in a picture like this? No. Halfway through, I found myself looking at my watch. If you think I'm wrong, then you probably haven't seen the Lord of the Rings, which does everything right that Harry does wrong.
Rating:
Summary: GREAT ENTERTAINMENT FOR KIDS
Review: While this isn't the greatest movie ever made there's no need to pick on it as the fans of Lord of the Rings do. This is an excellent movie. Many people were just disappointed because it kept too close to the book. However, I think it's good they did.No one sleep during this movie which is more than I can say about Lord of the Rings (which is much too deep for kids)
Rating:
Summary: Pure Magic!
Review: HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER's STONE was just an incredible movie! I have NEVER (I repeat: NEVER) had my jaw on the floor throughout an entire movie... until now. I've never seen anything like it and I can't wait to get it on DVD!
| 
