Rating: 
Summary: Excellent fantasy movie
Review: I thought the movie was quite good, though it broght to mind Star Wars, The dark side, and James and the Giant Peach, the evil "parents." I think Rowling could have been more orginal. However, it made me feel lie I wanted to be a wizard, much like Star Wars made me want to be a Jedi. The story captivating, the effects excellent. Worth purchasing.
Rating:
Summary: a great addition to the phenomenon
Review: This is a wonderful must-have for any Harry Potter fan. I enjoyed the extras on the DVD-ROM very much. Most DVDs extras are worthless, but this one's enhance the experience.
Rating:
Summary: The DVD you have to own!!!
Review: First off, if you have a DVD player, then you *must* get this movie. This is by far the best DVD I've ever, and will ever, see. Hands down. This is loaded, I mean, loaded with extras. You can have a 3D tour of Hogwards, Hagrid's home, and you get to cast spells, and much, much more. One of the best things about this disk is that if you want to see the 7 deleted scenes, you have to work for them. You have to find some keys, get your money, get your wand, go to school, and do spells. If you do all of this correctly, you get the honor of seeing the extra scenes.Besdies this being a outstanding DVD, this is a wonderful movie! Join Harry as he learns on his 11th birthday that he's a wizard. "Yer a wizard Harry". Harry's life is changed for the better when he goes to Hogwarts to learn magic. The Special effects are impressive. The Quidditch match is worth the pice of the DVD. I highly suggest you get this movie. I'm a big fan of this books. I have just 3 small complaints. And I mean these are small. I'd like to have seen the Weasley twins used more. They were so funny in the book. I also thought that Snape should have been a bit meaner, like he was in the book. In the book, Herimonie used logic in one scene, not magic. I highly suggest that you get this moive. If you do, I promise you won't be sorry.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent.
Review: A wonderful adaptation from the book to the movie by Chris Columbus. If you have read the books this is a most see movies and if you haven't read any of the books this will be a wonderful start for your collection. Wonderfull use of cgi and never seen before images in a two disc set. You have and interactive disc with games. And a perfect gift for your son or niece if they are into the whole Harry Potter books.
Rating:
Summary: Magical...and not just for the kids!
Review: I'm an 18-year-old fan of the Harry Potter books and I absolutely loved this movie! I know the movies will never be able to compare to the books, but they are good for what they are. Some people will say that The Lord of the Rings films are more for the mature, older audience but I'd say teenagers and adults can enjoy both movies! I know I did. Some people said that the child actors in the Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone movie did not do a good acting job, but I think they did very well. In fact, I believe that the casting was done perfectly...and I hope they don't replace any of these actors for the future films like I heard one rumor claim on the internet. The special effects were superb...I already bought the dvd, and it's great. Even though it looks confusing to get to all the special bonus footage and deleted scenes, you can go to the harrypotter.com website and you will find the instructions on how to make your way to the deleted scenes and bonus footage. The film is pretty faithful to the novel, though of course they had to cut out some parts of the book, mostly due to timing. Did I mention how great the child actors were? Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, and Tom Felton were all wonderful and kept the film alive and had great chemistry. They're young and this is the first feature film for most of them, so be nice. Chris Columbus did a great job with the directing and I'm sad to learn that he is only going to be directing Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and then he's not going to direct anymore. Oh well, at least he'll still be producing the others. I'm glad Columbus decided to direct the Sorcerer's Stone because he was the one who wanted to be as faithful as possible to the novel. Some directors who wanted to direct these movies wanted to change the story completely...Harry Potter as an American wizard and going to Hollywood High! Now THAT would've totally [messed] up the story. And some directors wanted to cast Haley Joel Osment as Harry Potter. Now as much as I like Osment, he is no Harry Potter. Daniel Radcliffe was a MUCH better choice. I feel sorry for all those people who decided that they hated this movie and are not going to see the others. I know you have your own opinions but this is only the first one. If you've read all the books then you already know the more interesting, more exciting stuff happens in the rest of the books. So you can't really judge the movies until you've seen all of them! The movie did not ruin the books...it made them better. I hope all the movies will make the books better and take you deeper into the story of Harry Potter. Job well done, and I'm highly anticipating the await of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets...can't wait to see Ron and Harry get to Hogwarts in that flying car!:-)
Rating:
Summary: Delightful!
Review: Okay, so some of the reviews are really bad. I don't care. I loved it. I found it delightful and very entertaining. When the movie came out, there was such an uproar about it corrupting children and that its real purpose was to bring them over to the dark side. Yeah, right. I found it to be none of that. I think it was more about magic than witchcraft and that it had some good lessons in it. Lessons such as knowing how to choose one's friends instead of being told, whether that friend is part of the popular crowd or not, how to be true to oneself, that love really does conquer all if you have goodness in your heart and that good is always better than evil. I think for those children who don't like to read, and let's face it, there are plenty, this is a really good movie. They can still experience the Harry Potter mystic and didn't have to crack a book. However, it may also make them want to go back and read the book in addition to the subsequent books, and whatever encourages children to read is a good thing. They may even learn a lesson or two. I'm thinking of picking up the other books myself now! ... If you want to be entertained and want a movie you can enjoy as much as your kids, then get it. I think you may find that you really like it.
Rating: 
Summary: Only Ok
Review: The Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is only ok because it fails to capture the magic of the book. In addition important elements were left out while some casting decisions are terrible.
For example: Hermione (Emma Watson): They chose cuteness over accuracy so she isn't as bossy or intimidating as she should be. She does not look the part..too cutesy. DumbleDore (Richard Harris): Harris didn't want to do this part but his grandaughter made him and it shows. He is too subdued and there is no twinkle in his eye. Very bad compared to his performance in Gladiator. Ron (Rupert Grint): Only makes weird expressions throughout the movie..you call this acting? As for leaving out important stuff..wasn't it important for Harry to know why Snape hates him? Leaving out the Snape's poision obstacle was very wrong too. The DVD should have given us the full 4 hour version. Anyways I have high hopes for the next installment..I heard it is Chris Columbus' last. Yay!
Rating: 
Summary: Banal source material, cynical movie
Review: It became unbearable to endure all the wholesale lifts from other material, including The Chronicles of Narnia, the Oz series, The Lord of the Rings, The Worst Witch series (especially), boiled down into a tasteless hodgepodge. There's not a single fresh idea in there, in concept or execution. However, the movie should have been somewhat redeemed by the supporting cast, behind-the-scenes talent and the production values; it wasn't. This series opener is a cynical, bland and charmless attempt at a family film. Where The Fellowship of the Ring film adaptation trancended the traditional limitations of the fantasy genre with its heartfelt performances and its themes of loyalty and sacrifice, Harry Potter seems a one-dimensional power fantasy with some flimsy moral lessons tacked on as an afterthought, like the public service messages you used to see at the end of children's cartoon shows in the 1980s. There are a few excellent family films that have been virtually ignored the past few years, such as Kiki's Delivery Service, The Indian in the Cupboard and The Iron Giant. Buy one of those for your kids instead. The director's own Young Sherlock Holmes is far superior to the watered-down Grimm's Fairy Tale that is Harry Potter. I have to admit, though, I did like Fluffy; I always was a [softy] for a three-headed hell hound. However, it's a shame the filmmakers felt they had to tone down the scary stuff like this to placate queasy parents; Monsters, Inc. was geared to an even younger audiences and had more genuine thrills, dealing with some of childhood's most primal fears in an truly entertaining and, for children, empowering way.
Rating:
Summary: Didn't read the books
Review: I would love to read the books but haven't had time, so we got the movie instead. I love it and my infant daughter seems to love it too (I think she likes the music and the children's voices) My 10 year old niece tells me there are some differences, but as a 38-old "kid at heart", I loved the movie!
Rating: 
Summary: It's Ok....
Review: I saw "Harry Potter" the first day it was out. Yes, I thought it was good, mm-hmm, everything was good, yadda yadda...
That is, until I saw Lord of the Rings. (LOTR)
With the fantastic job that Peter Jackson did on LOTR, I began to realize just how disappointed I was with Harry Potter. I thought there were lovely little touches and some good acting in HP, but the scene with Quirrel and Voldemort, the climax, was slightly disapointing. Wasn't Quirrel supposed to be burning, and not crumbling? Yeah, I know; "the burning would scare the little kids." I would know as well as anybody: after all, I have a friend in second grade who would be scared by it. But still... Well, that wasn't the main problem ( I s'pose I'm just complaining). The troll DID NOT FIT. He was just a bit too unreaistic (but, hey, I guess that would be too scary for the little kids too! But don't get me wrong: I woulda been scared by somethin' like that if I was little.) Well it's OK: entertaining, but not entralling.
|
