Tom Felton makes a stylish Draco; Matt Lewis' Neville character suffers from the acceleration, so the finale does come as a slight characterisation shock. Emma Watson possibly slightly overplays Hermione, but does so in a fully endearing fashion. The movie does include platform nine-and-three-quarters, though the way the kids disappear into the wall isn't as mysterious as I had visualized, and the sorting hat is there, minus the great poem explaining the differences between the four schools. Soon after the film opens, the boy discovers he has magical powers. We first meet a young wizard boy named Harry Potter Daniel Radcliffe. And much of what makes the Harry Potter phenomenon unique is that it is the first time in ages that a children's book, without a movie accompanying it, has generated this much popularity. The stills are wonderful, but the fastest animation is restricted by the limitations of real-world technology.
Time and money are sadly finite, cinema owners need to be pleased as well as fans and computer animation ain't perfect. Welcome to magic world The breeze stirred the neatly cut bushes of Tisovaya Street, silently lying under the ink-black sky. It's all kept tasteful, classy and above the belt; there's nothing to cringe about. Their eyes were glued to the big screen. And the spunky Watson adds some real sparkle to the film as Hermione, the one with the sense of urgency and the wherewithal to get things done; a real role model for young girls everywhere. My favorite character, the giant Hagrid, is played by Robbie Coltrane, and I say with no exaggeration that he is exactly how I imagined him while reading the book. The dialogue is intensely measured, the colouring is suitably epic, the selection of what to leave in is really tightly considered.
In its current form, it's almost like a preview of the book. There was someone behind the door, and he was obviously going to come in. You get chills in your spine at the right places; you feel the triumphs as all-encompassing endorphin highs. But these are exceptions; in my experience, most children's movies reveal their weaknesses in how they diverge from the books upon which they're based. It's like a false second act; almost nothing of major significance occurs in this period of the film. The soundtrack may rely too heavily on The Famous Bit, but it's clear that the balance and mixture of things in the finished movie are exactly right. Its lack of fullness, and its dependence on the book, might actually increase the popularity and endurance of Rowling's series by making those who see the film yearn for more, which they can get from the real thing.
A short word about the actors. Take away these details, and you're left with a fairly conventional tale of a young wizard fighting an evil sorcerer. Also turning in excellent performances are Rupert Grint as Ron Weasley, and Emma Watson as Hermione. However, there are occasions where some of the actors are required to convey high emotions and are only given a second or two of face shot, or head-and-shoulders shot, to do so. My favorite character, the giant Hagrid, is played by Robbie Coltrane, and I say with no exaggeration that he is exactly how I imagined him while reading the book. A wonderful performance by a gifted actor who has a great career ahead of him; without question the perfect choice for the role of Harry. And Chris Columbus, it turns out, was the right man for the job.
I have seen it several times and each time I am enchanted by the characters and magic. Sure they missed bits out but they captured the essence of the book brilliantly. Its lack of fullness, and its dependence on the book, might actually increase the popularity and endurance of Rowling's series by making those who see the film yearn for more, which they can get from the real thing. He inspired a kind of majestic calmness, every appearance on the screen calming. With over 100 million copies sold in over 46 different languages, J. I was pleasantly surprised that he did not direct the Harry Potter film in this way. Time and money are sadly finite, cinema owners need to be pleased as well as fans and computer animation ain't perfect.
But these are exceptions; in my experience, most children's movies reveal their weaknesses in how they diverge from the books upon which they're based. So it could never have been the film that the hyper-literalists were hoping for, then, but it is as good as the practicalities of the real world could possibly permit. Overall, however, his restraint works nicely in giving the film the kind of believability the book possesses. This forces practical limitations when making a movie. It's as if they took the image in my mind and transferred it to the screen. More than rising to the occasion and with some magic of his own-- and a lot of help from an extraordinarily talented cast and crew-- Columbus has delivered a film that is not only true to the story, but true to the very spirit that makes Harry Potter so special. Too bad it doesn't give enough depth to the side characters or subplots.
Exceptional performances from one and all, with two that stand out as especially memorable: Robbie Coltrane, who readily conveys the fact that Hagrid's heart is of a size that matches that of the man; and Alan Rickman, as Professor Severus Snape, deliciously droll while demonstrating menace through the fine art of articulation. Good-natured giant Hagrid, told Harry the striking news that he is not just a boy with a scar on his forehead, but a real magician. His strongest expressions are the bemusement that must be inherent at entering a world where science does not rule alone and the bravery that Harry shows in his achievements. Critics talk about how incredibly faithful the movie is to the book, and perhaps I'd have had an easier time detaching the two in my mind had the movie set off on its own course. However, it's extremely clear what an immense challenge it is to turn Philosopher's Stone from book to film. An instant classic in every sense of the word, this is truly a film for the ages. Harry found his friends, his family, found loyal defenders, but he does not even suspect what he will have in the future.
The movie does include platform nine-and-three-quarters, though the way the kids disappear into the wall isn't as mysterious as I had visualized, and the sorting hat is there, minus the great poem explaining the differences between the four schools. He's then thrust into an enchanting world of sorcery, magic, and witchcraft. By the way, I do not consider Michael Gambon a good Dumbledore, he turned out to be some kind of crazy, but this is not on this topic. He embarks for his new life as a student, gathering two good friends Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger along the way. They are true fans of the story, they are the right people for the job, it all bodes very well for the second film.
After thinking about it, it does seem like parts of the movie fail to convey a sense of urgency. Harry What to say, there would not be Harry James Potter, there would not be the book itself. He soon finds, however, that the wizarding world is far more dangerous for him than he would have imagined, and he quickly learns that not all wizards are ones to be trusted. Robbie Coltrane's Hagrid is the single dominant adult character, with maximum laughs extracted at every step. Richard Harris, as Headmaster Albus Dumbledore; Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall; John Hurt as Mr. I would have liked to see a little more emotion on the actors' faces at certain times. Given these limitations, this film is about as close to human perfection as it is possible to achieve.