Film Decent Adaptation
I already reviewed the book and that review was quite positive so to avoid simply parroting what I said then I’ll look at the differences between the book and the film.
I think that despite a few nitpicks, this movie is actually quite respectful of its source material.
So which parts of it would I criticise. Editing out Quirrel’s troll might have been necessary considering that in that case Harry and Hermione don’t do anything to defeat it. So I’m fine with that.
That said, I am annoyed by them omitting Snape’s potions riddle for Hermione to solve. The fact that they solve this by giving the Devilsnare solution however annoys me inasmuch as it idealizes her to an extent that she wasn’t in the books. Though thankfully they prevent her from becoming the Mary Sue her critics claim she is by having Ron lampshade her skewed priorities in an entertaining and humorous way.
Also for record, Ron isn’t an Adaptational Dumbass. Smart People Play Chess and he is established as a Chessmaster with his Chekhov's Hobby coming in handy when he masterminds their chess victory. Not Hermione him, so people who claim his role was given to Hermione are just wrong. And Rupert Grint plays his heroic sacrifice quite well.
And Robbie Coltrane saying “you’re a wizard, Harry” is one of the few parts of the movies that I actually liked better than in the books.
I also think they did a good job replicating the sense of wonder from the first book.
It’s a Condensed Adaptation to be sure but not obnoxiously so.
Is the book better? Yes. Especially in its handling of Neville.
That said, this is still very much a decent adaptation.
Film Movie Review-Stumbles out of the gate
Harry Potter and the Philosophers/Sorcerers Stone is the first of 8 adaptations of JK Rowling's best-selling series about a boy who discovers a truly magical world and his destiny in it. This first movie establishes the world, the characters, and the conflict, and does so effectively.
The most important thing the movie had to accomplish was to establish a sense of wonder regarding the world, and in that respect it succeeds. Despite the dangers Hogwarts and Diagon Alley capture the imagination and make the audience wish they were real.
Another strength of the movie is its casting of the adult characters. It is almost as if they went through a list of the greatest living British actors. Characters like Alan Rickman's Snape and Maggie Smith's Mc Gonagall add a gravitas and an authenticity to the world that was sorely needed.
There are two major problems that bring the film down, however. One is the use of the musical score. Though it is a fantastic score in its own right, as should be expected considering that it was composed by John Williams, the main theme is overused and abused in scenes where it is not only not necessary, but detracts from the wonder the scenes are trying to convey. We did not need to hear it every time there were owls flying around, for instance. Later movies would use the same music much more effectively.
The other major problem is even more serious. The child actors were not good. Though they would improve tremendously in the following movies, in the first one they struggled with being convincing. The movie is badly hurt by the inability of the actors with the most screentime to actually act at this early stage in their career.
Because it fell to the all star cast of side characters rather than the main characters to carry the film, it ended up being the weakest of the 8 Harry Potter movies. Despite this, it is still a must watch for any Harry Potter fan, and is still a decent introduction to the world of Hogwarts.
Film The Worst Take on Harry Potter: The Philosopher's Sorcerer
My relationship with Harry Potter is complicated. Isn't everybody's? People love part of this book or part of that movie? Hate part of this book or part of this movie? Think the movie did something better? Think the book did something better? Or hate everything? Love everything? No lecture on the evils of Warner Brothers because frankly, we know this already. This franchise is being milked to death. It's all about just banking in on nostalgia. The crimes of JK Rowling and her crusade against certain people. So I'm gonna go to town. I'm here to present my take. The worst possible take on Harry Potter.
A story that was here to revive the fantasy genre and take the world by storm. A story that managed to completely win over the hearts of minds of thousands and millions of people who got sucked into the magical whimsy of this world. And then we get the movie, a movie that came out as the 90s started to die. It was the fantastical story we were waiting for and it only worked because it was a perfect combination of materials. You take away any element by itself and it looks completely terrible.
The story is as simple as any story you can think of. It has the complexity of your average school based shonun run. This is a little orphan boy who lives in a closet who dreams of being loved and making friends. He gets invited by a stupid giant to go to school and learn how to be a wacky wizard. He finds the power of friendship and uses this elementary superpower to overcome any obstacle and find that he's special and worthy of love. That's the movie. It's a live action manga.
It doesn't waste your time trying to be some advanced commentary on the nature of adolescence or human sin because it's very difficult to try to take what happens in this story that seriously or attempt to expect this film to follow, you know, logic. The movie looks amazing with gorgeous minitatures although some of the CGI looks pretty dated. Now the greatest thing this film has is the worldbuilding. And no I'm not talking about the wizards or Hogwarts castle that's fine I guess. What I get into when it comes to the worldbuilding are, the wacky things. I'm talking about Hagrid, a giant who is so harmless he could probably be killed by a Pikachu. The wands are little sticks. The kids play soccer on broomsticks and can fall out of the air and die. This sensory assortment is just completely magical to behold. People buy owls that can deliver your Times subscription. The goblins are horrifying monsters and they run your bank account. The troll goes to the bathroom and stalks prebubescent children. The three headed dog slobbers. And then we have the villain, no, I take that back. I'm not calling Voldemort the villain, that elevates him to too much status. This is a bad guy. He is just there to be 100% evil and spooky. He lives on the back of this dude's skull and he dies from getting touched innappropirately. This movie is just a joy to behold. This is great. This is a fantasy movie.
Now when it comes to this film I like to view this as a completely contained story. I don't think of what came after this movie or what came before. Forget about JK Rowling and forget about this being a money making franchise. When you just view this as an isolated experience this is a cute and charming fantasy story full of excitement and wonder and kids who act like smart adults and not the stupid adults. It empowers children to think that they are special and loved and I think that's a perfect thing for this movie to do. Now of course, if anything does well, and this did super well, you're gonna get more.