Rating: 
Summary: would have gotten 5 stars if it werent for daneil radcliffe.
Review: He is such a horrible actor. i cant even stand it. but despite danny-boys attemps this wasnt a bad show. Its bnot that daneil was a ba actor. i belived mr radcliffe to be harry potter but it was like harry potter knew there was a camera on him.
Rating:
Summary: harry potter and the philosopher's stone
Review: i think that this movie is a very good movie,but anit that good but good.i like it when hermione comes out at the first time,she was well rude but i like it.in this movie theres some sad,happy,scary bits that make me like this film.its very good indeed.the first time i saw this movie,i thought it will be very boring,but when i've finished watching it,i think it was quite good.
(i really want this to be 4 and a half star,but i dont know how to do it)
Rating: 
Summary: Review
Review: I likd this movie. It was a little morbid for little children, but nonetheless. I think it JUST hit the point of the book. It's nice to put a face to a name, but thats really all this film did. Aside from the nice settings, this movie wasn't that great. I also have all the books and the other movie. I'm not like this avid fan of Harry Potter but I just have this thing where if I have a part of a collection, I have to have it all, for my life to be complete.
Rating: 
Summary: GREAT ALMOST AS GOOD AS THE CHAMBER OF SECETS SEE IT NOOOOWW
Review: I love this show. This is a great show. Heres the main idea. Harry Potter is an abused boy and one day he goes to a school to learn how todefy the laws of hysics dubbedf "magic". Now I know what your thinking but its not evil magic. UIts just fun like if you tell a little kid that the tv or you can wiggle your ears with magioc. Not like evil. anyway its great. Its fun and awesome. poop.
Rating:
Summary: Let me put it this way
Review: When I walked into the theatre I expected
to see anthor boring poitntless sci-fi or fantasy shows that they would over rate and hold conventions for. But I was dearly wrong. The only thing I didn't like about it is that people just sick up for daneil radcliffe because he plays harry potter. he cant act. other than that it was great.Good for: boring nights
Rating: 
Summary: Great book+ Bad movie=Franchise in trouble!
Review: When I heard there was going to be a Harry Potter movie I was torn between whether it would be good or bad. I had read all four books four times at least and fell in love with the works of J.K.R. The movie, meanwhile, turned out downright horrible Columbus, Kloves, and Heyman seemed to want to cover all the books wacky action moments, instead of the emotional ones. There is no strength put into the characters and plot, but more into the magic. Lord of the Rings is a much better adaptation from a great novel. I thought of Hogwarts while I read as a safe, warm, sentimental place. The movie approaches it more like what Azkaban would look like. The sets have now and forever will compete with the ones in my head. The Great Hall is lit like a cafeteria while it should be cozier. The corridors need to be warmer. The sets need to be more open and bigger(Gryffindor Common Room for one). For some random complaints:
The visual effects are the worst in recent cinema. The set lighting is pathetic. The characters are one-dimensional (or even the newest category, zero-dimensional.
The "obstacles" at the end are directed in a cheesy way so it feels like they are touring the Chocolate factory. The script is horrible in it's own right. The dialouge is cheesy. Columbus seems to be going for an action movie rather than a coming-of-age story (which would easily make the films more professional), a grave mistake. He selected bad child actors. I hope in twenty years or so a good screenwriter and director come along, and make a good Harry Potter film. How could J.K. Rowling approve of this rubbish? The extra features are geared toward five-year-olds (too young to read the books but WB's target audience. Look at the merchandise out there). Waste fifty minutes on trying to get seven minutes worth of deleted scenes! Columbus needs to watch Shrek and Lord of the Rings to see how to make a good film. I also think the movies should have been animated in the artistic style of Mary Grandpre with voice- overs by Jim Dale. Anyone out there that agrees with me?
Rating:
Summary: Okay at first but after that...
Review: When i first saw this movie, i thought it was great. I am a harry potter fan so i was really excited. But then i saw it again...and again...and again. Finally i got to the point where i hated it.I realized all that was missing from the book from Peeves(i love peeves) to the potions challenge on the way to the stone. It really disapoints me now. I think it was a good idea to make a movie but what has happend just makes me mad. I would suggest renting this for a two time viewing. If you dont read the books, then dont see the movies. The books were so much better.
Rating:
Summary: You're a wizard Harry!!
Review: Refusing to get hauled into the Harry Potter mania, but succumbing to the movie when it was shown on HBO, I must say I can definately see why children and adults alike all over the world are going cuckoo over the books. Who won't like waking up one day from your mundane everyday life, or if your life is bad as in Harry's case, to find out that your actually a wizard. And a famous one too! Living a horrid life under his cruel uncle and aunt who forces him to live in the cupboard under the stairs all changed one day when Harry's received a letter inviting him to study at the prestigious Hogwarts school of magic. There the movie takes you to a journey of Harry's magical adventuers with magic, mystical creatures, resident ghosts, pictures that have moving characters, staircases that shift every now an then, dining rooms with candles floating and everything that can boggle your mind and fill you with awe. He even gets to play quidditch, a game played on a broomstick.
The movie was lovely, the special effects very convincing indeed, not at all forced or fake looking. The acting of the main characters left a little to be desired however. Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson were abit stiff in the first hour or so of the movie and looked like they were just reading of a script page. As the movie progressed on, they got better, but kudos must go to Rupert Grint as I felt he was the most at ease and natural of the three.
I would definately recommend watching this one.
Rating:
Summary: Fun for adults and kids
Review: What a fun trip this movie takes you on. For adults it's all about the fantasies we all had while growing up of being able to fly or be magical.
Rating:
Summary: Magic Realized
Review: This movie was a nearly perfect adaptation of the book. Everything and everyone looked and sounded just right. The people who have problems with the book will have similar problems with the movie, so faithfulness was definitely the right choice. But some of the things that work well in print, i.e. Dumbledore's exposition, tend to drag on screen. Simply talking faster would have helped - even children can hear faster than people can talk. Daniel Radcliffe is a very talented young actor. Rupert Grint and Emma Watson still make some typical "child actor" mistakes, but they are relatively few, and hopefully the director won't include so many "gulps" from Ron in the next movies. And all the adults are perfectly cast, especially Alan Rickman as Snape.
Jumping through hops to find the deleted scenes in the DVD was very annoying. The game itself might have been fun, but for an adult, being required to play was ludicrous.
| 
