Rating: 
Summary: Oh, Come on Harry
Review: Making the movie version of a famous novel is always tricky business. How do you take something that takes hours to read and reduce it to 2-3 hours of screen time? Most resort to eliminating subplots, or changing plotlines altogether. These aren't necessarily bad things, either. For example, the Two Towers diverges drastically from the Lord of the Rings, but tells a great story, nonetheless, that fans of the series are still satisified with in the cinema (for the most part).Harry Potter's first film is probably the best adaptation I've ever seen. Nearly everything is true to the book, even though some endearing plotlines have been written out. However, when you've got an audience of kids who are probably seeing their first film from a novel, there's bound to be some disappointment. This is a movie that gets a lot right, though. First off, the sets are what they should be. Hogwarts comes off as a place where aspiring witches and wizards could practice their arts without distraction (well, at least no distraction from muggles). Likewise the dialogue is crisp and advances the story at a good pace (especially for such a long movie). Plus, most of the characters are perfectly cast. Dumbledore (the late Richard Harris), Snape, McGonagall, Ron, Hermoine are all EXACTLY right. The characterizations are so well formed and believable, readers of the books are sure to be pleased. My only gripe is with Harry. Daniel Radcliffe certainly looks the part, but gives a very tentative portrayal of the most famous student at Hogwart's. I know, I know, Harry's supposed to be weak in the beginning, but sometimes it just seems that Radcliffe has forgotten his lines. To his credit, he's much better in the second movie, but the first still leaves a lesser impression. Still, this is a movie definitely worth watching. Let's face it, with the box office it did (and the video sales), you've probably already seen it and are either agreeing or wildly disagreeing with what I've said. Either way, this is a worthy accompaniment to the novels, and a welcomed addition to children's cinema.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't let yourself be tempted
Review: I've resisted seeing this film for a year. Having read and enjoyed the books, I thought the movie would pale next to my imagination, the view of Hogwarts I see when I read the book. But then I heard that the second movie had Kenneth Branaugh, etc, and I thought, "Maybe I should see the 1st film after all."
Bad decision. This is the most horrendous adaptation I have ever seen. The magic of the book is that you see the world unfold through Harry's eyes, you get to know characters in depth, you laugh at the witty dialogue, you see the characters living daily life at Hogwarts, and along the way, you solve a mystery (complete with suspense, clues, red herrings). The books work because we know what Harry is thinking, and these thoughts move and entertain us. The cinematic challenge is to accomplish this interior dialogue on film. This movie has none of this magic. Chris Columbus, the director, seems to think that Harry Potter is primarily an action movie. He gives us all of the plot elements that we need to get to the end of the story, but he misses the point. This is the story of Harry growing up. There is emotion here. There are moral lessons. There is kindness and generosity. And it's these qualities, not luck or talent, that allow Harry to prevail at every turn. To make matters worse, the script is just awful. I would have loved to see dialogue that really captured the characters -- Percy, Hermione, Nevil, Ron. The screenwriter wasn't even capable of creating a script that made sense. Among the things we don't ever learn: what the different houses represent, how the house competition works, who wins the Quidditch Cup in year 1, etc. Of course, I know these things from the book, but to eliminate them makes for a terribly stilted and nonsensical script. Look, I know that the Harry Potter series is popular, and I am glad that some people have enjoyed this movie. I don't begrudge them that. I'm just writing to warn those few people who loved the book but haven't yet seen the movie... Don't bother. In about twenty years, some talented director and screenwriter will come along and make a new Harry Potter film that does justice to the book. Someday, someone like Peter Jackson will make a film about Harry Potter that captures the real magic of a boy growing up in interesting surroundings, solving fascinating mysteries, and learning about himself in the process. Until then, don't bother with this film.
Rating:
Summary: Harry Potter & The Sorcerer's Stone
Review: The wonderous world of Harry Potter opens up through the enchanted pages of J.K. Rowling's books, as veritable grimoires masked in fictional charicatures, but demonstrating subtle magical principles. The books come to life in a veritable bibliomancy - the words vibrate, a Magical glow emminates therefrom, & the pictures come to brilliant life, jumping forth from the pages in dynamic enchanted exhuberance. And thus it has been for those who have enjoyed these wonderful works. These have served to stimulate, & sometimes even enhance the child-like Magic residing within - that charm personafied in animals & children, & preserved by The Magician. I have found this film a marvel to behold, although I feel it could have been twice the production had it been a tad darker, as the books have tended to be. Unfortunately, producers felt that the initial more gothicesque aesthetics would frighten children, to whom the film is primarily directed towards. But I question the excessive over-sheltering of children would only raise a populace of mollycoddles. Speaking for Myself on the left hand, I have always been attracted to the darkest subject matter since I was a very young child. The pervasive fascination for blood & gore in western society is due to the lack of real-life bloodletting spectacles, practices, & traditions in modern culture. In many societies, a boy was not considered a man until until he had killed his first prey in the hunt, or slain an enemy. Western Society compensates for this natural bloodlust with horror movies & documentaries, to stimulate that latently essential primal part of the psyche which remains far too under-stimulated. The first half of the movie seemed aesthetically darker, whereas the second half was a bit 'lighter', probably as a result of the puscillanimousness of Chris Columbus {who also directed "Home Alone" as an indication}. I believe a film of this callibre would have been better directed by the likes of Tim Burton, who has consistently brought forth the dark sides of the characters he has worked with, & created films of magnificent & gloriously gothic proportions, as Batman would be a major example; with a musickal score conducted instead by Danny Elfman, considering the current score unfortunately sounds rather tired & redundant - not one of John William's better works. It just seemed that he did not place too much effort into it, yet it still remains memorable, but so much more could have been done with it. I found the effects to be quite well done, concurrent with the descriptions in the book. There were several scnes which were curtailed for time, but I have a feeling the release of the video / DVD wil divulge many deleted scenes. A most poignant scene was towards the end, whcen Potter comes face to face with Voldemort, in which he states, "There is no good or evil, only Power & those who seek it. Those who do not, are weak." Quite a Satanic statement! The release of this movie will probably inspire some children to gain an interest in The Occult, & will create A.C.I.'s in many, & just may serve to open the door to self-realization in true infernal progeny yet unknown. A movie of this type I feel is timely, & necessitates "popularity" in this select case, to help contribute to that societal shift in the Satanic direction. Besides that one moment of the stating of Satanic fact, there is no weakan sactimony, no xian drivel, just plain fun "witchcraft" for the whole family. The idea of a "School of Witchcraft and Wizardry" does sound rather appealing {notice the distinction between the genders} - the closest thing we have to that is the homeschooling initiative which is espoused by most Satanists. Speaking for Myself, I have schooled Myself in The Dark Arts, incorperating & experimenting with what I will to determine My own personal philosophies & rites {Draconian Satanism}, & I do consider Dr. LaVey My Daemon-Mentor. And now, as "grownup" Witches & Warlocks, Our Infernal Progeny may have the benefit of Our tutoring. Overall, I found the film to be visually stunning, relevant to the book, & it displayed a higher class of diction & politeness, serving as a good example to the more bereft & vulgar infesting the current populace. Recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: Wonderful for kids & adults
Review: This movie is a very entertaining movie no matter what your age. It is not too spooky for small children & not to childish for adults. It keeps up a good pace and holds your interest.
Rating:
Summary: Harry Potter and The Sorcerer's Stone
Review: Harry Potter has always been my favorite, ever since I read the first line of the first book. This movie lives up to the book, and even a little more. Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) lives with the Dursleys, mean spirited people who hate having Harry around. After much plot development, Harry finaly gets his letter to Hogwarts. There he meets his two best friends, Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson). These little actors (and actress) are spectacular, Radcliffe and Grint are two very cute little boys, and Watson shines as the book smart Hermione. Ron and Hermione help Harry solve the mystery surrounding the ledgendary Sorcerer's Stone. I would give this movie ten stars, if I could, and I have both soundtracks, to the first and second films, and they are wonderful. The actors and actresses in this movie are to be aplauded. They took an already spectacular book, and made it into an extraordinary movie. Great job Daniel, Rupert, Emma, and everyone else who helped make this movie a croud pleaser. I know it sure pleased me!
Rating:
Summary: Enjoyable Escapist Fantasy
Review: Harry Potter is a guilty pleasure. When I read the books and when I watched the movie, I had to suspend my normal criticism of implausibilities and read the books and watch the movie as an entertaining fantasy; and the movie is ever so entertaining! Even having read the book, I was still in suspense with the movie, because certain things were given more life in the movie than the book (and vice versa). I found myself fascinated with each detail, and was readily able to consider the movie as a different version of the book. The actors were perfectly chosen for their roles. Alan Rickman as Snape was so dislikable and the perfect character to mislead the audience. Richard Harris was a lovable Dumbledore, and will be sorely missed in the future movies, which there will undoubtedly be. Warwick Davis of "Willow", "Return of the Jedi", "The 10th Kingdom" and many more played two roles in this movie, and played them very well. There are many other actors that did so very well, but I would be remiss if I didn't point out the selection of Rupert Grint as Ron Weasley, the terminally cute Emma Watson as Hermione Granger, and super-nice (at least he comes across that way on the screen, regardless of how many practical jokes and other mischief he performed on the set while making the movie) Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter. These three were able to make the adults wish they were their children, and the children wish they were their friends. A good deal of the success of this movie is due to the charm of these three young actors. The score completely enhanced the sets and the plot, and brought another dimension to an already multi-dimensional movie. The special effects were state of the art, evidenced time and again throughout the course of the movie. The troll and Fluffy I particularly found impressive in their detail and quality. However, the special effects and their quality are found throughout this movie, and to list all my favorites would take much more than this review. There are a lot, and they are all very good to excellent. The movie had to deviate from the book due to the length and detail of the book. However, I believe that the movie caught the essence of Harry's life and attendance at Hogwart's. The deviations were regrettable, but the movie was already well past 2 hours in length, and the producer was faced with difficult decisions regarding what to keep and what to cut. The deleted scenes shown in the second CD will show how some of the decisions were made, and I concur with nearly all the choices. Harry Potter is a pure fantasy, creating a world that is based on many worlds, and yet is none of them. The rules of Harry's world will seem familiar, yet as a set are different from previous rules. Once you realized that J.K. Rowling was not basing Harry on any known set of rules, but was instead creating her own "Oz", the movie and story become enjoyable as a voyage of discovery that parallels Harry's own. Watch this movie with the eyes of a child and enjoy a unique film experience and achievement.
Rating: 
Summary: A good movie... But not always..!
Review: This is a good movie with a little less of action than i hoped... Its not a movie who take you out of the chear and just tearing tou apart! Thats a clear thing... I have seen it a few times, and i got sick of it about the 3. time i watched it... Its no action, and that stuff..! But a still have a feeling abaout that this movie gonna be a classic..! :) But its not a movie i by my self will have in my head all my life..! That is my review... I think i will give it 3 stars..! But i suddently know that this is a good movie for other persons who like adventures in magic...
Rating:
Summary: A new classic for a new generation
Review: My 11-year old daughter and I have been reading the series of Harry Potter books and we saw "...the Sorcerer's Stone" in the theater. We both loved it! We couldn't stop talking about it long after the movie was over. And, of course, once the DVD came out, we had to have it! It is, in my opinion, one of the very few movies that is true to it's book. The cast, the movie direction, it's look and feel were all right on... just as I imagined it while reading the book. Truly magic! An excellent, imaginative movie for both kids and adults.
Rating:
Summary: Classic for a new generation
Review: My 11-year old daughter and I both have been reading the series of Harry Potter books. We saw this movie in the theaters and we both loved it. It was one of those movies that we just had to keep talking about long after it was over. Of course, as soon as the DVD came out, we had to have it! It is, in my opinion, one of the very few movies that actually holds true to the book. The cast and movie direction - it's look and feel - are right on! Everything in the movie is how we imagined it while reading the book. An excellent movie for kids and adults alike.
Rating: 
Summary: nothing special
Review: nothing special, a normal child's movie, the only reason it got nominated for the oscars is because the book is famous. badly edited. the cast was mostly pretty good, but emma watson as hermione? the girl cannot act. she emphasizes ever word she says so that it is more like a naughty laugh track show than a real movie. disappointment galore.
|
