Rating: 
Summary: Okay...But Could Have Better 3.5
Review: enjoyed this movie, but for different reasons from most people. I am a loyal fan of the books and wanted to see how well J. K. Rowling's story translated to screen. The answer? Not very well. Fans of the books will complain that the movie wasn't true to them. Critics of the movie will complain that the movie was too true to the books. There is a reason, however: J. K. Rowling is still writing her series, and many aspects of the first book foreshadow those proceeding it, therefore many of the scenes in the movie which seem irrelevant to the plot of "The Philosopher's Stone" are in fact necessary for the plot of upcoming movies in the series to make full sense. A couple of the book-movie changes did irk me, in particular Neville's absence from the Forbidden Forest and Hermione's potions/logic task at the end being left out. I also felt the movie ended too abruptly. However, I especially enjoyed the changes made to the broomstick/key scene, the beginning zoo scene and the chocolate frogs. Quidditch was done remarkably well, and if you're undecided on seeing this movie, do so for that. On the whole, I'd say the acting in this movie was quite poor. Rupert Grint (Ron Weasley), absolutely hilarious, was a good pick, Neville and Seamus were far too stereotypically comically dumb. They hardly said a word. Emma Watson was a good choice but, for some reason, she had some flaws. The sorting hat sounded like a pervert, and Richard Harris (Dumbledore) said all his lines in a really grave way, untrue to the book's (mostly) light-hearted Headmaster. Daniel Radcliffe, as Harry Potter, was the wrong choice for the role. He was unprepared and didn't show us good acting. It was little things like him laughing at Ron getting smacked in the face with a broomstick, and scowling at Dudley and the Dursleys that put a smile on my face. Overall, 5.5/10. It's worth seeing - the special effects are marvellous, but fans of the books are liable to be disappointed, including me. Maybe..."Chamber" will be better
Rating: 
Summary: Could have used a better DVD
Review: I absolutely adore the Harry Potter books...this movie had a lot going for it -- a brilliant cast (Richard Harris, Alan Rickman, Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrain, John Cleese), the greatest composer of our time (John Williams) and a script given the thumbs-up by J.K. Rowling herself. Columbus, thankfully, proved me wrong. He delivered a great film that was faithful to the book and found three enormously talented young actors to guide this project. I only wish Warner Bros. had put as much effort into this DVD set as the filmmakers obviously did into their movie. Don't get me wrong, it's an okay DVD, and certainly worth getting if you're a fan of the film, but as far as extras go, there's not much to recommend it for the grown-up audience. There are some nice deleted scenes and a few games that the kids will enjoy, but that's about it...I still recommend the DVD, because the movie is absolutely fantastic, but don't expect much else to hold your attention if you're over the age of 11.
Rating: 
Summary: great movie
Review: this was an excellant movie. the 1st time we watched it there was 2 adults and two 7 year olds. we all loved the movie. but the two 7 year olds being rambunctious and antsy refused to sit still thru the movie. but this happens with all movies , and they did say they enjoyed it , along with appearing to enjoy it.
Rating:
Summary: very cool!!!
Review: this was a excellent movie,the special effects were awesome,
the acting was great,and the cast fit there parts perfectly
(i wanted to try out for hermoine!).i only wish that they cou-
ld of left in the part of the potion riddle.i've read all
the books at least twelve times each,so i was majorly excited
when the movie came out, now i'm eagerly awaiting the next book
and movie!!!
Rating:
Summary: Thumbs up for Harry!
Review: As a single adult with no children I had no idea what the Harry Potter craze was. Having bought the DVD I now know what the ballyhoo is all about. I enjoyed it immensely. A good story, good acting by all (especially the three kids!), and terrific special effects. The Quidditch game was way cool! It's a wonderful fantasy film that doesn't make any pretense toward anything else. It's just fun, and I eagerly await the next installment.
Rating:
Summary: A Keeper!
Review: I admit, I had a very difficult time reading the J.K. Rowling books, for some odd reason. I attempted to read the first Harry Potter book several times, but each time it seemed to serve better as a dose of valium than as an interesting read. That's a first for me, esp. with a book of this genre. However, while I still struggle to get through the reading, I must give the movie version 5 stars, as I'm completely fascinated and impressed with the amount of work put into its making. From what I hear (from those who've finished the books), the movie has it's differences in certain plot parts, or has omitted parts that die-hard fans are up-in-arms about...but isn't the usually the case when a book goes to film? That difference aside, if you want a magical, fast-moving film that's suitable for children and adults alike, get this one. I own it and have watched it at least 4 times (and it's a long movie!). Can't wait for Part 2 of the movie!
Rating:
Summary: A good Movie
Review: This was a very good movie. It does an excellent job of putting the book on screen. But there were a couple of things wrong. First of all, I don't think the movie portrayed the mood of the book exactly. It tried to make it mistereous, but that didn't work accept when the actors did a good job taking an obvious line and making it sound deep and mysterious. And the music. All of it was very offbeat, and did not portray the mood well at all. I like classical music and other kinds of orcestrial music, so don't think that it is a personal dislike of everything with out an electric guitar. The wacky movie always annoys me.The other problem was it was blown away by Lord of the Rings. Harry Potter didn't even come close to being as good as LOTR was. Harry Potter was good, but not great.
Rating:
Summary: much better than the book
Review: When it comes to Harry Potter, I have mixed feelings. The books are very entertaining, but they are also pretty silly, and can't hold a candle to the brilliant works of such writers as Tolkien, CS Lewis, E Nesbit, and such others. Harry Potter deserves five stars for entertainment value, but one star for innovation and sophistication. So why is the movie so much better? Well, movies don't always have to be taken as seriously as books do. Not only that, but it is extremely entertaining without having to deal with childish narrative or the fact that there are a billion fantasy stories like this. Harry Potter is just a fun movie, and while I only recommend the books for those who need a break from Dostoyevsky and Victor Hugo (and certainly, we all need a break from serious books now and then), this movie has something for everybody, and can be watched anytime. I would have given this 4.5 stars, but i can't, and it definitely doesn't deserve the five stars i would give a more serious movie, so four will have to do. Peace!
Rating:
Summary: Loved it! ^_^
Review: A great match for the books (although I'd still take the books over the movies any day) and a fun watch. Even got a few non-Potter friends to sit down and see some of it. Always nice to make converts. ^_~ Now if I could only get my books back...
Rating:
Summary: Cool-umbus did a good job with what he had...
Review: Yes! This is a great movie. I have been a big fan of Harry Potter for three years now, and I must say that the books are wonderful. The movie... The movie is good. Christopher Columbus is awesome, because he turned the book into almost exactly what I had imagined it would be. And he most definitely has good taste in actors. Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson did commendable jobs, but by far the one who stole the show was Rupert Grint, the red-headed kid who does an excellent job portraying Ron Weasley. He's definitely the primo kid. Hasta la vista!
|
