» » Harry Potter och de vises sten (2001)

Harry Potter och de vises sten (2001) Online

Harry Potter och de vises sten (2001) Online
Original Title :
Harry Potter and the Sorcereru0027s Stone
Genre :
Movie / Adventure / Family / Fantasy
Year :
2001
Directror :
Chris Columbus
Cast :
Daniel Radcliffe,Rupert Grint,Richard Harris
Writer :
J.K. Rowling,Steve Kloves
Budget :
$125,000,000
Type :
Movie
Time :
2h 32min
Rating :
7.6/10

An orphaned boy enrolls in a school of wizardry, where he learns the truth about himself, his family and the terrible evil that haunts the magical world.

Harry Potter och de vises sten (2001) Online

This is the tale of Harry Potter, an ordinary 11-year-old boy serving as a sort of slave for his aunt and uncle who learns that he is actually a wizard and has been invited to attend the Hogwarts School for Witchcraft and Wizardry. Harry is snatched away from his mundane existence by Rubeus Hagrid, the grounds keeper for Hogwarts, and quickly thrown into a world completely foreign to both him and the viewer. Famous for an incident that happened at his birth, Harry makes friends easily at his new school. 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.
Cast overview, first billed only:
Richard Harris Richard Harris - Albus Dumbledore
Maggie Smith Maggie Smith - Professor McGonagall
Robbie Coltrane Robbie Coltrane - Hagrid
Saunders Triplets Saunders Triplets - Baby Harry Potter
Daniel Radcliffe Daniel Radcliffe - Harry Potter
Fiona Shaw Fiona Shaw - Aunt Petunia Dursley
Harry Melling Harry Melling - Dudley Dursley
Richard Griffiths Richard Griffiths - Uncle Vernon Dursley
Derek Deadman Derek Deadman - Bartender in Leaky Cauldron
Ian Hart Ian Hart - Professor Quirrell
Ben Borowiecki Ben Borowiecki - Diagon Alley Boy
Warwick Davis Warwick Davis - Goblin Bank Teller / Professor Flitwick / Voice of Griphook
Verne Troyer Verne Troyer - Griphook (as Vern Troyer)
John Hurt John Hurt - Mr. Ollivander
Richard Bremmer Richard Bremmer - He Who Must Not Be Named

Alan Rickman was hand picked to play Snape by J.K. Rowling, and received special instructions from her about character. Rowling even provided him with vital details of Snape's backstory, not revealed until the final novel.

The child actors and actresses would do their actual schoolwork in the movie, to make the school setting more real.

The filmmakers originally wanted to use Canterbury Cathedral as a filming location for some of the Hogwarts scenes, but the Dean of Canterbury refused to allow it, saying that it was unfitting for a Christian church to be used to promote pagan imagery. Gloucester Cathedral agreed to take its place; the Dean of Gloucester, the Very Reverend Nicholas Bury, admitted to being a fan of the books. Nonetheless, there was a huge media outcry in Gloucester when it was decided to use the local Cathedral as a filming location. Protesters wrote letters by the sack load to local newspapers, claiming it was blasphemy, and promising to block the film crew's access. In the end, only one protester turned up.

The Hogwarts' motto, "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus", means "never tickle a sleeping dragon".

The inscription around the Mirror of Erised reads: "Erised stra ehru oyt ube cafru oyt on wohsi". Reading the inscription backwards it says, "I show not your face, but your heart's desire."

Sir Richard Harris had trouble remembering his lines, and Daniel Radcliffe would ask him to help with running his lines, just to give Harris more practice.

The Restricted Section scene was filmed in the Duke Humfrey's building at the Bodleian Library in Oxford. They have very strict rules about not bringing flames into the library. The makers of Harry Potter were the first ever to be allowed to break this rule in hundreds of years.

Platform 9 3/4 was filmed at King's Cross, but on platforms 4 and 5. J.K. Rowling has admitted that she mixed up the layout of London's King's Cross railway station when she assigned the Hogwarts Express to platform 9 3/4, reached by using magic between platforms 9 and 10. She meant the location to be in the inter-city part of the station, but 9 and 10 are actually among the rather less grand suburban platforms. The movie conformed to the book: the platforms seen as 9 and 10 are, in real-life, inter-city platforms 4 and 5. However, there is, in fact, a "Platform 9 3/4" at King's Cross. It's located in the walkway area between the real platforms 9 and 10, as a treat for fans of Harry Potter.

The filmmakers attempted to go the extra mile of matching the kid's appearances to how the novel describes them, by fitting Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter) with green-colored contact lenses, and similarly make Emma Watson (Hermione Granger) wear fake buck teeth. But when Dan's eyes reacted strongly to the contacts, and Emma couldn't talk clearly with the fake teeth in her mouth, these ideas were dropped.

Nicolas Flamel, mentioned as the creator of the Philosopher's (Sorcerer's) Stone, has figured as a plot device in novels featuring characters such as, Batman, Indiana Jones, and Robert Langdon of Da Vinci kood (2006). He was (possibly) a real alchemist (born in France around 1330) who was believed by some people to have produced the Philosopher's Stone. Since there were mysterious circumstances surrounding his death in 1418, it has been rumored that he lived for hundreds of years. The book and movie gets his age right.

Warner Brothers originally considered making the entire "Harry Potter" film franchise as a set of computer animated films, or attempting to combine several of the novels into a single movie. The studio's reasoning mainly had to do with concern over the rapid aging of child actors and actresses, if production ran too long on any of the films, or if production was delayed between sequels, the leading actors and actresses might have to be re-cast. Author J.K. Rowling vetoed both of the ideas of combining books, and an animated film, so the studio decided instead to produce all eight films back to back, so the same actors and actresses could play their roles in every film.

J.K. Rowling revealed on her website that she was considered to play Lily Potter during the Mirror of Erised scene, but she turned down the role, which instead went to Geraldine Somerville.

In the film, the scar on Harry's forehead is off-center. This was done at J.K. Rowling's request. Due to the artwork on the covers of her books, many people have assumed that his scar is supposed to be in the center of his forehead. The books, however, never specify exactly where on his forehead the scar is located.

Rosie O'Donnell and Robin Williams were two of the celebrities who had asked for a role in the movie without pay, in their cases, Hagrid and Molly Weasley. They didn't get these roles, because J.K. Rowling wanted a cast strictly from the British Isles.

Robbie Coltrane was the first person to be cast.

At the time this film was in production, only four of the seven books had been published. J.K. Rowling was retained as a consultant on the film, not only to ensure consistency with the first book, but also to avoid conflicts with her vision for the later entries. It has been confirmed that at least one line of dialogue was removed from the script to avoid a contradiction with the then-unpublished "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix".

This movie and the novel on which it is based are known as "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" everywhere except the US. As a result, every scene in which the Philosopher's Stone is mentioned was filmed twice (once with the cast members saying "Philosopher's", and once with them saying "Sorcerer's") or dubbed (most notably, one of the times Hermoine says it in the library and her face isn't shown). Because the US publisher, Scholastic, had changed the title (and corresponding text) to "Sorcerer's Stone", this was done to keep the film consistent with the book. J.K. Rowling gave her consent for the title change, but has since said that she regrets having granted permission, and that, as a fledgling author, she wasn't in a strong enough position to fight it at the time.

Tom Felton did not read any of the Harry Potter books before auditioning, and at the audition, Chris Columbus was asking each contender for the role of Malfoy what his favorite part in the book was. When it was his turn, Felton said his favorite part in the book was the part at Gringrotts, which is what the previous contender had just said. Columbus saw through this very quickly, and thought it was very funny.

The last name "Dumbledore" means "bumblebee" in Old English. Also, according to the factoid trivia show QI (2003), the word "Muggle" existed in the early to mid 1900s, as a "jazz word" that was used for pot smokers.

The scenes at Hagrid's Hut were filmed on-location, on a small patch of land in London, not far from Leavesden Studios. The hut was demolished when the shoot wrapped, in case fans of the film swamped it.

In the script, the flashbacks to Voldemort killing Harry's parents were written by J.K. Rowling. The producers knew she was the only one who knew exactly what happened.

During the Harry Potter movies, Daniel Radcliffe went through 160 pairs of glasses.

In order to make the Dursleys' house even more unpleasant, set decorator Stephenie McMillan deliberately sought out the ugliest furnishings possible.

The tabby cat used in the movie ran away during filming and came back two days later.

Producer and director Chris Columbus has stated in interviews that he was disappointed with the visual effects in this film, saying that they were "rushed" and "never up to anyone's standards," and sought to improve them for Harry Potter ja saladuste kamber (2002). This did not, however, prevent the film from being nominated for a BAFTA award for "Best Visual Effects".

West Anglia Great Northern Trains, the company that owns "Platform 9-3/4", affixed the back end of a luggage trolley "disappearing" into the wall so as to allow fans to take pictures of themselves seeming to disappear into the wall.

During filming, Daniel Radcliffe changed the screen language on Robbie Coltrane's mobile phone to Turkish. Coltrane had to phone hair designer Eithne Fennel's Turkish father in order to find out Turkish for "change language".

The floating candles in the Great Hall were created using candle-shaped holders containing oil and burning wicks and suspended from wires that moved up and down on a special effects rig to create the impression that they were floating. Eventually one of the wires snapped, due to the heat of the flame, causing the candle to fall to the floor. Fortunately, no one was injured, but the decision was made to re-create the candles using CGI for the following films, as using real candles was determined to be a safety hazard.

In order to give Hogwarts Castle an authentic look and feel, much of the filming was done at locations around England, including Christ Church, Oxford, Durham Cathedral, Gloucester Cathedral, and Alnwick Castle. In fact, the only sets that were built for Hogwarts were the Great Hall, the Grand Staircase, and the Gryffindor Common Room. In the later films, additional sets would be built for the various classrooms and other locations around Hogwarts.

Richard Harris only agreed to taking the part of Albus Dumbledore after his eleven-year-old granddaughter threatened never to speak to him again. Patrick McGoohan was originally offered the role, but had turned it down due to health reasons. Harris later had health issues of his own, dying of Hodgkin's lymphoma shortly before the release of Harry Potter ja saladuste kamber (2002).

The film reveals that the twelfth use for dragon's blood is an oven cleaner.

The floor in the great hall is made of York stone. Production designer Stuart Craig had the foresight to invest a significant amount of his design budget on the stone. While this decision was questioned at the time, it proved to be a wise one, as the stone was durable enough to withstand the footsteps of hundreds of actors and actresses, as well as several camera crews, over the next decade to film the entire series.

Three owls play Hedwig: Gizmo, Ook, and Sprout, but mainly Gizmo.

J.K. Rowling insisted that the principal cast be British, and she got her wish, with the exception being Richard Harris who was, of course, Irish. Zoë Wanamaker, though she has made her name as a British actress, was actually born in the United States but grew up in Britain and formally became a British citizen in 2000. Additionally, Verne Troyer, born in Michigan, plays Griphook, but he's dubbed by a Brit; and Chris Columbus' daughter, Eleanor Columbus plays Susan Bones, though she never says a word.

J.K. Rowling hand picked Robbie Coltrane, Dame Maggie Smith, and Alan Rickman for their roles.

In the trophy cupboard, to the right of the Quidditch trophy, you can see the "Service to the School" trophy with part of "Tom M. Riddle" engraved on it; the trophy and the name on it are confirmed by Ron in a deleted scene from Harry Potter ja saladuste kamber (2002).

All of the food that you see in the Great Hall feasts is real. Chris Columbus wanted a very elaborate welcome feast to match the description in the book, with roast beef, ham, turkey, and all the trimmings. Unfortunately, filming under the hot stage lighting for hours at a time quickly caused the food to develop an unpleasant odor, despite the meat being changed every two days and the vegetables twice a day. For the following films, samples of real food were frozen, so that molds could be made of them, and copies cast in resin.

By February 2002, this was the second highest grossing film worldwide after Titanic (1997).

The platform attendant at King's Cross, who asks Harry, "You think you're funny, do you?" actually works for GNER. He is, however, a train manager, and not a platform attendant.

In order to understand what he believed to be caretaker Filch's lonely lifestyle, David Bradley and his cat rented an isolated Irish cottage, in which to live for a month, before filming began.

The troublemaking poltergeist Peeves (played by Rik Mayall) does not appear in the movie, nor in deleted scenes on any home editions of the film. However he can be seen for a moment in Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. When Harry and his friends go to the Gryffindor common room after dinner the first evening. He is seen 'walking through' Dean Thomas. Mayall claimed he didn't find out that he was cut from the film until he saw the movie. Mayall claimed that he was cut because the young actors and actresses kept laughing at his performance.

Robbie Coltrane's 6'10" body double for Hagrid is former England rugby International player Martin Bayfield.

Hagrid is eight feet six inches tall.

Neville received a remembrall from his grandmother, but he doesn't remember what he has forgotten. In that scene, Neville is the only student without his robe on. He must have not remembered to put his robe on.

When Chris Columbus was asked what type of child he wanted to play Harry Potter, he used a clip of Daniel Radcliffe from David Copperfield (1999) to show them what he wanted.

James Phelps and Oliver Phelps, the twin actors who play Fred and George Weasley respectively, both have naturally dark brown hair which was dyed red for their roles. Similarly, Tom Felton's hair, which is also naturally brown, was bleached blond for his role of Draco Malfoy.

The Wizard's chess set, with which Harry and Ron were playing in the Great Hall, is based on the Lewis Chessmen, which date from the 12th century. They were found in 1831 on a beach on the Isle of Lewis, Outer Hebrides, Scotland. In all, 93 pieces were recovered, with 11 now residing at the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh, and 82 at the British Museum in London.

Professor Quirrell's classroom was filmed on-location at Lacock Abbey in Wiltshire, in a room known as the Warming room. The cauldron seen in the room is not a prop, but in fact came with the location. It is believed that the cauldron is over five hundred-years-old, and was used by cooks who worked for Queen Elizabeth I.

The Quidditch trophy that has Harry's father's name on it also has inscriptions for M. McGonagall and R.J.H. King, the latter being a reference to John King, the supervising art director on the film.

Warwick Davis, who played Professor Flitwick and the first Gringotts Goblin, also provided the voice for Griphook, who was physically played by Verne Troyer.

Liam Aiken was originally given the role of Harry, but a day later the offer was revoked, when it was discovered that he wasn't British (Aiken had previously worked with Chris Columbus).

David Thewlis, who later played Professor Lupin in Harry Potter ja Azkabani vang (2004), was considered for the role of Professor Quirrell.

Julie Walters has said if had she known that fellow Midlander Mark Williams would be cast as Molly Weasley's husband Arthur in the following film, then she would have played up their shared accent, feeling that this would have helped signpost their family's perceived uniqueness in the magical world.

At one point, when Harry, Ron, and Hermione are approaching Hagrid, he can be seen playing a wind instrument. He is playing Hedwig's Theme.

As his audition, Rupert Grint sent a video of himself rapping while explaining why he wanted the part of Ron.

Ron's choice of opening, in the final chess match, is called Center Counter Opening (or Scandinavian Defense), which, due to its asymmetrical nature, is said to be a highly unpredictable, and difficult opening for either side, that rarely results in a draw.

The statue of the humpbacked witch, in the corridor leading to Fluffy's chamber, is a secret entrance leading to Honeydukes.

Daniel Radcliffe learned he'd won the role of Harry Potter while in the bathtub.

In addition to Steven Spielberg, other candidates for the director's chair were Jonathan Demme, Terry Gilliam, Mike Newell, Alan Parker, Wolfgang Petersen, Rob Reiner, Ivan Reitman, Tim Robbins, Brad Silberling, M. Night Shyamalan, and Peter Weir. Newell would later direct the fourth entry of the series, Harry Potter ja tulepeeker (2005). Gilliam was J.K. Rowling's first choice, but the studio finally picked Chris Columbus to direct, because he had experience directing child actors and actresses. Columbus was also asked many times by his daughter to direct, and he agreed after he read her copy of the book.

In the second book of the series, "Nearly Headless" Nick invites Harry to his "deathday" party, celebrating the 500th anniversary of his demise in 1492 (a fact that fans have used to place the entire book chronology in the years 1991-1997). 1492, is, of course, the year that Christopher Columbus made his famous voyage to the New World; this film's production company is "1492 Pictures", a deliberate reference to Chris Columbus' famous namesake.

Harry Potter's birthday is stated in the books to be July 31, 1980, as J.K. Rowling was born on July 31, 1965. By coincidence, Richard Griffiths (Uncle Vernon) was born on July 31, 1947. Daniel Radcliffe was once reported to been born on July 31, 1989, but this was merely a publicity stunt. In fact, Radcliffe was born on July 23, 1989.

Rik Mayall only took the part of Peeves, as the children at his own kid's school were talking about the books. He later said, "The film, with respect. No, with no respect at all. The film was shit."

The exterior used for King's Cross Station, is actually St. Pancras Station, which is just down the road. This was used because the façade of St. Pancras is more visually appealing than that of King's Cross.

Almost all the scenes with Harry and/or the trio were filmed in chronological order, most notable exceptions being: The final scene in the film, where the trio return home on the Hogwarts Express, was the first scene filmed, followed by the scene when Harry first sees the locomotive at Platform 9 & 3/4 (the only other scene which required the actual train present). Then, the Quidditch match was the last thing filmed, mostly due to how long it took the effects departments to figure out how to do it.

Sir Richard Harris, who had been acting for more than 40 years by the time this film entered production, stated that he had never been involved with a cast that was as close as this one.

The only Harry Potter film not to feature Mark Williams, who plays Arthur Weasley.

This movie has the highest number of Academy Award nominations for a Harry Potter movie, totalling three. The other entry to do this was the final film in the franchise, Harry Potter ja surma vägised: Osa 2 (2011). This is the only Harry Potter movie to be Oscar nominated for Best Costume.

Casting Harry Potter was the film's biggest challenge; they saw 5,000 boys audition, and none of them felt right. Chris Columbus saw Daniel Radcliffe in David Copperfield (1999), and showed it to the casting director, and said Radcliffe was the one, and that he was amazing. But she said they wouldn't get him, because his parents want him to focus on his schoolwork, and not acting, as well as all the attention he'd get. So they interviewed Harry Potters of different nationalities all over the world, and still hadn't found him. She got frustrated with Columbus, because he had his heart set on Radcliffe. By sheer coincidence, the producer and screenwriter of this movie went the theater, and in the front row was Radcliffe with his father, so they talked, and slowly persuaded him to cast Radcliffe.

When filming the scenes at Gloucester Cathedral, the cathedral's modern electric signs, light switches, and door locks had to be concealed behind panels that were painted to match the rest of the stone walls. The stained glass windows were also modified to hide the fact that the building was a church; the religious symbols were covered with colored plastic filter paper to blend in with the surrounding glass. One window depicted the naked figures of Adam and Eve; they were given clothes and even the trademark Harry Potter lightning scars on their foreheads.

Chris Columbus was amazed how beautifully Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint matured over the Harry Potter franchise, both physically and as actors and actress, compared with some child actors and actresses who start out adorable and either lose that or become bad actors and actresses as they grow older.

In the flying lesson, the whistle Madame Hooch is wearing is called a "Boatswain's Call" and was originally used in the early Navy (before P.A. systems) to signal an order, because the whistle could be heard from one end of the ship to the other. It is now used in the Navy as a ceremonial whistle.

Chris Columbus had wanted Daniel Radcliffe for the lead role since he saw him in David Copperfield (1999), before the open casting sessions had taken place, but had been told by Susie Figgis that Radcliffe's protective parents would not allow their son to take the part. Columbus explained that his persistence in giving Radcliffe the role was responsible for Figgis' resignation. Radcliffe was asked to audition in 2000, when David Heyman and Steve Kloves met him and his parents at a production of Stones in His Pockets in London. Heyman and Columbus successfully managed to convince Radcliffe's parents that their son would be protected from media intrusion, and they agreed to let him play Harry.

Troll (1986) features a character called Harry Potter, who fights trolls, and casts spells. It came out eleven years before J.K. Rowling published "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's (Sorcerer's) Stone". J.K. Rowling denies any connection.

The street that Harry and Hagrid walk down to get to the Leaky Cauldron is the same street on which Sir Sean Connery was parked, waiting for Catherine Zeta-Jones to leave the antiques shop in Lõks (1999).

Daniel Radcliffe said that he didn't think that he would play Harry in all of the films, as he believed he wouldn't fit the part, once he got older. However, he went on to star in all eight movies.

At one point, Harry mentions that during his trip to London, he heard Hagrid profess his love for dragons and his desire to own one. The scene that Harry describes was filmed, but deleted from the movie.

The word "bloody" appears in the film six times, along with one "arse", one "bugger", and two "blasted"s. This, and some very scary scenes in the haunted forest, led to its PG rating.

Emma Watson's Oxford theater teacher passed her name on to the casting agents, and she had to do over five interviews before she got the part. Watson took her audition seriously, but "never really thought I had any chance of getting the role." The producers were impressed by Watson's self-confidence, and she outperformed the thousands of other girls who had applied.

All of the cars on Privet Drive are Vauxhalls, no matter the time period. The Dursleys own a silver 2000 Vauxhall Vectra Estate. All of the other cars parked in the drives are Vectra Estates in the present day, with Astra, Belmont, and Cavalier Saloons from the late 1980s in the pre-title prologue.

Chris Columbus, remembering his experiences with Macaulay Culkin during the production of Üksinda kodus 2: Kadunud New Yorgis (1992), would only audition child actors and actresses without "stage parents" during casting.

Screenwriter Michael Goldenberg wrote a draft of the script, but was ultimately rejected by David Heyman in favor of Steve Kloves' draft. Heyman, however, was impressed with his draft, and was subsequently brought in to write the script for Harry Potter ja Fööniksi ordu (2007) when Kloves backed out to commit to a personal project.

Emma Watson has stated that she hates the way her hair looks in this film. In the following films, her hair was made less bushy, and more wavy.

This movie has the distinction of opening on more screens in the U.S. than any other (3,762).

Steve Kloves was nervous when he first met J.K. Rowling, as he did not want her to think he was going to "destroy her baby". Rowling admitted that she "was really ready to hate this Steve Kloves", but recalled her initial meeting with him: "The first time I met him, he said to me, 'You know who my favorite character is?' And I thought, 'You're gonna say Ron. I know you're gonna say Ron'. But he said "Hermione", and I just kind of melted."

For the Gringotts interior scenes, the Australian High Commission in London was used. The exteriors are the Silver Vaults located not far from the Australian High Commission.

Daniel Radcliffe was initially meant to wear green contact lenses as his eyes are blue, and not green like Harry's, but the lenses gave Radcliffe extreme irritation, and, upon consultation with J.K. Rowling, it was agreed that Harry could have blue eyes.

The only Harry Potter movie not to feature a stylized version of the Warner Brothers logo, although the film's theme is played over the standard logo, as opposed to the original Warner Brothers theme.

James Horner was contacted to compose the music for the film, but he was unavailable, because of his schedule conflict. The task ultimately went to John Williams.

Crabbe and Goyle have no dialogue.

Hatty Jones auditioned for Hermione Granger before it went to Emma Watson. She and Emma were the last girls for the audition.

The design for the Great Hall set was based on the hall at Christ Church, Oxford. Oxford University also served as a filming location.

Despite having less than a minute of screentime, and only two lines of dialogue, the unnamed Head Goblin at Gringotts is featured prominently on the American theatrical poster, right under Ron and Harry's faces. It is thought by many, that this is because of his rather striking appearance.

Tim Roth was a leading contender for the role of Professor Severus Snape. Roth dropped out of contention, however, to pursue his role as General Thade in Tim Burton's adaptation of Ahvide planeet (2001).

In the warehouse section of the National Railway Museum in York, there is an apparently authentic and suitably pitted and rusty white-on-orange sign saying "Platform 9 3/4", in the style that British Railways used in the 1950s and 1960s.

Despite the objection to the Harry Potter series by certain Christian groups, several historic churches in the UK, including Durham Cathedral, Gloucester Cathedral, Lacock Abbey, Christ Church College Oxford, and in the later films, St. Paul's Cathedral, were used as filming locations for the franchise. They even inspired much of the layout and architectural details of Hogwarts.

The owls used in the film were shipped over from Massachusetts.

The highest grossing film of 2001.

Judianna Makovsky re-designed the Quidditch robes, having initially planned to use those shown on the cover of the American book, but deemed them "a mess". Instead, she dressed the Quidditch players in "preppie sweaters, nineteenth century fencing breeches, and arm guards."

Scenes from Chris Columbus' script for Young Sherlock Holmes (1985) were used in auditioning the young actors and actresses.

Film debut of Emma Watson.

In the original draft, Drew Barrymore, a self-proclaimed Harry Potter fan, had a cameo.

John Williams composed a piece of music specifically for the movie's trailer without having seen a single frame of film, and it is found on the soundtrack as "The Prologue". As of March 2002, he has done this only once before, for Steven Spielberg's Kapten Konkskäsi (1991). (However, on the collector's edition of the soundtrack for Lõuad (1975), a previously unreleased track appears called "Shark Attack", which was only used in the trailer for that movie, in 1975.)

The "Hogwarts Express" locomotive portrayed in this film, a 1937 4-6-0 "Hall" class steam engine number 5972, originally belonged to the Great Western Railway and went under the name of "Olton Hall".

Apart from Peeves the Poltergeist, two other minor characters from the book did not make it into the film. The first is Mrs. Arabella Figg, Harry's friendly elderly neighbor from across the street, who is described in the early chapter of the book. Although she was omitted from the first four movies, she finally appears in Harry Potter ja Fööniksi ordu (2007). The second character to be omitted is Professor Binns, Hogwarts' teacher of History of Magic. The book describes him as the only teacher who is a ghost, seemingly being quite unaware of the fact that he died in his sleep.

Fluffy the three-headed dog's appearance is physically based on a Staffordshire Bull Terrier.

Simon Fisher-Becker says he signed a four-picture deal to play the Fat Friar, but this was the only film he did, and nearly all of his role was removed in post-production.

J.K. Rowling made up the names of the four Hogwarts houses while on a plane. She wrote them down on a barf bag (empty, fortunately) so she would remember them.

Daniel Radcliffe was reportedly paid one million pounds for the film, although he felt the fee was not "that important".

The film cast includes one Oscar winner: Dame Maggie Smith; and four Oscar nominees: Sir Richard Harris, Sir John Hurt, Julie Walters, and John Cleese.

JK Rowling previously stated the 't' in "Voldemort" is silent, as it is in the French word for death, "mort". Jim Dale pronounced it so in the US audio books that came before the release of this film, where the characters pronounced the "t". After this, Dale changed his audio book pronunciation accordingly.

In this movie, when the birthday cake that Hagrid brings for Harry is shown, the message "Happee Birthdae Harry" is written on it. In the novel, Hagrid did bring Harry a birthday cake, but J. K. Rowling specifies that Hagrid is perfectly able to spell the cake's greeting correctly, describing it as "a large, sticky chocolate cake with 'Happy Birthday Harry' written on it in green icing."

Chris Columbus pitched his vision of the film for two hours, stating that he wanted the Muggle scenes "to be bleak and dreary" but those set in the wizarding world "to be steeped in color, mood, and detail." He took inspiration from Great Expectations (1946) and Oliver Twist (1948), wishing to use "that sort of darkness, that sort of edge, that quality to the cinematography," taking the color designs from Oliver! (1968) and Ristiisa (1972).

Much of the stonework around Hogwarts (excluding the areas that were filmed on-location) is actually plaster that has been painted and distressed to make it appear as though it is hundreds of years old.

This is the only Harry Potter movie where Harry does not cast an attacking spell.

This and Harry Potter ja saladuste kamber (2002) are Chris Columbus' two biggest financial hits.

Chris Columbus wanted to work with director of photography John Seale, and asked the studio to hire him, but at that time, Seale was committed to shooting Timeline (2003). However, production delays for the latter film enabled Seale to be available for this movie's photography period.

When Harry's scar hurts when he sees Snape at the head table, the back of Quirrell's head, where Voldemort lies, is facing him. Harry attributed the pain to Snape's presence, when Voldemort was staring at him all along. Also, watch Snape's reaction when he sees that Harry's scar is hurting. He looks over at Quirrell, obviously suspicious of him.

Filming started in September 2000, and finished on March 21, 2001.

The movie features nearly 600 visual effects shots, involving numerous companies.

There is a painting of Anne Boleyn hanging in Hogwarts, to the right of the staircase just before Harry, Ron, and Hermione encounter Fluffy for the first time. Anne Boleyn was Henry VIII's second wife, beheaded for the supposed crimes of treason, incest, and witchcraft.

When the directors first came to J.K. Rowling to ask if they could make movies on the entire Harry Potter series, she said yes, but on one condition. She said that as she imagined all the characters to be British, all of the actors and actresses have to be British.

Bonnie Wright was never meant to say the words "good luck" to Harry at Kingscross. She was not meant to say anything, but the editors kept those lines in any way.

After Steven Spielberg dropped out, he recommended M. Night Shyamalan for the project, but he ultimately turned it down.

Sir Alec Guinness was considered to play the role of Dumbledore, but he died shortly before filming began.

If one looks at old seventeenth century maps of London, Muggle Street exists near Shakespeare's Theater, a possible influence for the word.

In the troll scene, in the girl's bathroom, Daniel Radcliffe isn't actually on the troll's neck, because the motions would have snapped his neck; therefore, his image was digitally added.

Chris Columbus originally planned to use both animatronics and CGI to create the film's magical creatures, including Fluffy.

For most of the film, the body double for Hagrid would wear a animatronic head that resembled Robbie Coltrane. The head is displayed at the Harry Potter Studios in London.

Fluffy, the three-headed dog, was modelled after Cerberus, the three-headed dog of the underworld, from Greek mythology.

William Moseley, who was later cast as Peter Pevensie in The Chronicles of Narnia movies, also auditioned for the role of Harry Potter.

Dudley Dursley is played by Harry Melling. There is a brief moment in the film, which was not in the book, in which Hagrid mistakes Dudley for Harry, to which Dudley responds that he's "not Harry".

Unlike the book, Ron gets detention in Neville's place. This was likely because Ron is one of the main characters while Neville was only a supporting character.

The only film where Hagrid serves as a supporting protagonist. Starting from the Chamber of Secrets Hagrid gets less screen time and less lines than he did in this film.

It is now well known that Daniel Radcliffe only briefly wore the green contact lenses to make his eyes look like his character in the book. He only wore them in the first scene that was filmed before they became too painful. The scene that was filmed first was actually the final scene in the movie, that of the Hogwarts Express leaving the school . In fact, in all behind the scenes pictures from the filming of this scene, Daniel is wearing sunglasses because he was too afraid to tell anyone that his eyes were bothered by the contacts. In fact, there is actually footage of director Chris Columbus on set talking to Daniel about the scene, and he asks if Dan is going to take the sunglasses off, to which Daniel hesitantly replies that he wants to keep them on until they start shooting.

Although Steven Spielberg initially negotiated to direct the film, he declined the offer. Spielberg reportedly wanted the adaptation to be an animated film, with Haley Joel Osment to provide Harry Potter's voice, or a film that incorporated elements from subsequent books as well. Spielberg contended that, in his opinion, it was like "shooting ducks in a barrel. It's just a slam dunk. It's just like withdrawing a billion dollars and putting it into your personal bank accounts. There's no challenge." J.K. Rowling maintains that she had no role in choosing directors for the films, and that "anyone who thinks I could or would have vetoed him (Spielberg) needs their Quick-Quotes Quill serviced." David Heyman recalled that Spielberg decided to direct A.I. - tehisintellekt (2001) instead.

The ornate ceiling of the Great Hall (including the trusses) was created entirely using CGI. In real life, the ceiling consisted of nothing but studio stage lighting.

Warner Brothers had initially planned to release the film over the July 4, 2001 weekend, making for such a short production window that several proposed directors pulled themselves out of the running. However, due to time constraints, the date was pushed back to November 16, 2001.

Dancing with the Stars (2005) pros Mark Ballas, Derek Hough, and Julianne Hough made uncredited cameos as Hogwarts students.

Tom Felton originally auditioned for both Harry and Ron before getting the part of Draco.

Once in an interview, Rik Mayall (the voice of Peeves), said he hadn't read the book and claimed that he did to his agent, and it was one of his favorites. On the set, when asked to read his lines, he constantly made the children burst into laughter with his voice, which had got out of hand, and he was asked to turn his back to the kids to read it, which was also useless. Then they asked him to go all the way to the other side of the cathedral, and shout his words, which also caused them to laugh. According to him, Peeves was in the movie, but after a few weeks, they decided to take his scenes out. He said that when his children saw the movie, and came back home, they said to him: "That was bloody good make-up. You didn't look like yourself at all. It was really good." He said that they had mistaken him for Hagrid. He also said that the "movie was shit" because he wasn't in it.

Gabriel Thomson was considered for the role of Harry. His Minu pere (2000) co-star Zoë Wanamaker plays Madame Hooch.

Hermione was supposed to have buck teeth but Emma Watson thought it looked weird and found it hard to talk. The only part in the Harry Potter movies where she is wearing false teeth is in the last scene on Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone.

John Williams composed the score at his houses in Los Angeles and Tanglewood before recording it in London in August 2001.

Fiona Shaw, who portrays a woman despising the supernatural and witchcraft, in this film, ironically portrayed a powerful witch in True Blood (2008).

Daniel Radcliffe's second film.

John Coppinger stated that the magical creatures that needed to be created for the film had to be designed multiple times.

When Chris Columbus scripted Young Sherlock Holmes (1985), that film featured similarities to his future association with the Harry Potter film franchise; the teenage Watson resembles Harry Potter; school experiments; Draco Malfoy's rivalry with Harry is similar to one Holmes has with another student, Dudley; Draco and Dudley both come from rich parents; cavernous libraries; sweets; train stations; the novelization uses the word potty, or Potter; students being injured and needing to see the school nurse; teachers and students eating in the Great Hall; Holmes, Watson, and a third character solving mysteries at school and Harry, Ron, and Hermione doing the same at Hogwarts; staircases; Harry, Holmes, and Watson creeping through a school library at night; both Watson and Hagrid say "sorry about that"; the end of school term; the threat of expulsion; no family for Harry to return to, even at Christmas; Harry has a scar on his forehead and Holmes has one on his cheek; seemingly innocent teaching staff exposed as the opposite; head boys, et cetera.

Originally Bruce Springsteen recorded a original song for the movie called "I'll Stand By You Always". But the producers felt the song didn't match the story and mood of the film and cut it from the final cut of the film along with the scene of Rik Mayall as Peeves. However, the song was released to the public on February 10, 2017.

Steve Kloves described adapting the book as "tough", as it did not "lend itself to adaptation as well as the next two books."

Although Harry casts no spells during this movie, he does perform several acts of magic (such as talking to a snake), all of which are accidental. This is designed to show he is a natural wizard, but untrained, so he must attend Hogwarts.

In the book series, the forest outside Hogwarts is called the Forbidden Forest. In the first two films, it is called the Dark Forest. In "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt. 2," Voldemort calls it the Forbidden Forest.

When Harry first meets Prof Quirrel in the bar with Hagrid, Harry extends his hand to him to shake it. Quirrel makes it a point not to shake it. It is shown at the end of the movie that when Harry does touch Quirrel it causes him to physically break down due to his dark magic and association with Voldermort.

Chris Columbus sold scripts to Steven Spielberg for Gremlins (1984) and Kõurikud (1985), but his career didn't fully take off until the massive successes of Üksinda kodus (1990) and Meie issi, proua Doubtfire (1993), which led to the even greater success of the Harry Potter franchise.

Caio César, a prominent Brazilian voice actor who dubbed Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter, and in other films, was also a military cop and died at the age of 27 in 2015 after being shot in the neck at the Complexo do Alemão slums in Rio de Janeiro.

The first Harry Potter film to be the highest-grossing movie worldwide the year it was released. The second was Goblet of Fire in 2005 and Deathly Hallows Part 2 in 2011.

Hermione isn't seen wearing non uniform clothing until almost 2 hours into the movie.

Simon Fisher-Becker signed a four-picture deal to play the Fat Friar. However, he only appears in one scene in this film, and not in any others.

Throughout the eight movie franchise, five actresses played Pansy Parkinson:

  • Katherine Nicholson (this movie and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002), uncredited in both),
  • Genevieve Gaunt (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)),
  • Charlotte Ritchie (Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005), originally listed as "Student" and uncredited),
  • Lauren Shotton (Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007), again uncredited as Pansy)
  • Scarlett Byrne in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009), Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010), and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011).

In the Wizard Pub, The Leaky Cauldron, Harry and Hagrid go into the bar, the bartender says, "usual I presume" to Hagrid. This is possibly a reference to the books, where Hagrid would frequently get drunk.

When Chris Columbus scripted Young Sherlock Holmes (1985), Watson believed Holmes obsessed over a case, even at Christmas, because unlike other boys his age, he had no family to which to go home, like Harry Potter, or Kevin McCallister. Columbus has ties to both the Harry Potter and Home Alone franchises.

In this movie, John Cleese plays Nearly Headless Nick, a knight whose head barely remains attached to his body after having almost been beheaded. Ironically, one of the many characters he played in Monty Python ja Püha Graal (1975) was the Black Knight, who had every body part cut off except his head.

It has been noticed by some that Robbie Coltrane's costume and character in the "Blackadder's Christmas Carol" Christmas special, has a nearly identical portrayal to his much later role as Hagrid, in the film versions of J.K.Rowling's series of Harry Potter books. Also, its been claimed that JK Rowling herself had said Robbie Coltrane was always intended to have been cast as Hagrid in the films, suggesting that this Blackadder episode may in part have inspired the creation of Hagrid, both while creating the world within the books, and his costume and casting within the Harry Potter films as the literal personification of how he was imagined to look.

During the Quidditch match when Snape is seen muttering an incantation, it can be briefly seen that Quirrell is also saying a spell. It turns out that his was the hex, while Snape was using a countercurse and Quirrell's concentration was killed when he was knocked over in the stands.

The only Harry Potter movie that features a set of triplets, the Saunders Triplets (baby Harry Potter, 1999) and a set of twins James Phelps and Oliver Phelps (Fred and George Weasley, respectively, born 1986).

Robbie Coltrane and Geraldine Somerville had previously costarred in Cracker (1993). However, they have no scenes together here.

Chris Columbus released Üksinda kodus (1990) on November 16, 1990, exactly eleven years earlier.

Model Lucy Elgee-Taylor appeared in the background of the scene in the great hall.

The first of eight movies based on the Harry Potter book series by J.K. Rowling.

Among the numerous directors who were interested in tackling the film were Simon West, Brad Silberling, Robert Zemeckis, Jonathan Demme, Jan de Bont, and Joel Schumacher.

When Dumbledore is announcing team points, two candles can be seen rapidly floating.

Not only was Terry Gilliam very interested in directing this film, he was also the first choice of J.K. Rowling. He became upset when Warner Bros. rejected him.

Despite many instances of Harry being noted as a "great wizard", Harry does not, in fact, cast a single spell during the entire movie.

One of Chris Columbus' daughters had trouble reading, until she read "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" in two days, which opened her eyes to the world of books. After reading Chamber of Secrets, she asked Columbus to make films out of them, but there were 50 other directors already interested. Columbus fell in love with the first two books too, so he sat down with Warner Bros. saying how obsessed he was with making The Sorcerer's Stone more than anything else. Columbus asked to be the last director Warner Bros. saw, which took about 10 days. Columbus stayed up until three a.m. re-writing the script each day. It was already a good script, but Columbus wanted to talk about the visuals. He told Warner Bros. he had re-written the script for free, and that made an impression on them, because that didn't happen in Hollywood, where they have to be paid for everything. Because Columbus had done that without any pressure from Warner Bros., it made the difference, and after subsequent meetings, and five weeks later, he got the job of directing it.

Hermione performing magic on the Hogwarts Express to mend Harry's broken glasses was not in the book. It was added for the film.

During Harry's first Christmas at Hogwarts, Fred and George bewitched snowballs to zoom in and hit the back of Quirrell's turban. In doing so, they were unknowingly hitting Voldemort in the face.

On Christmas Day, when you see the sweater Ron's mother made him, there is a yellow R, but in the book, his sweater didn't have a letter. In the book, George and Fred come into the room and complain Ron doesnt have a letter. They said "I suppose she thinks you don't forget your name. But we're not stupid. We know we're called Gred and Forge."

Hermione never flies on a broom, but in the book, she flies on a broom with Harry and Ron to catch the flying key.

In the book, Harry, Hermione, Neville, and Malfoy spend a night in the Forbidden Forest with Hagrid for the detention, but in the movie, Neville is replaced by Ron.

In the book, Hagrid gave Harry the flute for Christmas, which he later used to lull Fluffy to sleep.

The fire trapping Harry in the dungeon with Quirrell and Voldemort was not in the book, but it was based on the colored fire Harry and Hermione face with the seven potion bottles in the novel (but not in the film) after winning the chess game. This practical effect of the fire surrounding the dungeon was accomplished with pipes placed in the floor around the dungeon set, which were lit after Ian Hart snapped his fingers.

During the scene where Harry sees his parents in the mirror, it was supposed to be his entire family (according to the book).

Behind-the-scenes pictures show a different design for the incarnation of Voldemort that is stuck on the back of the head of Professor Quirrell. This version has much more animalistic features, most prominently a panther-like snout and large jaw filled with big incisors. This was later changed: Ian Hart provided the voice and motion captured Voldemort's face, which was later added with computer graphics. Richard Bremmer portrayed Voldemort in the flashback to the death of Harry's parents.

After Harry picks up the stone Voldermort's soul attacks him. The reason Voldermort did not die was because of his Horcruxes but JK Rowling did not reveal this until "Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince".

When Harry loses control of his Nimbus 2000 during the Quidditch match, Hermione focuses the binoculars on the spectator tower where the teachers are sitting. If one watches closely before the binoculars zoom in on Snape muttering his counter-curse, Quirrel can be seen with his eyes focused on Harry's broomstick (presumably using a non-verbal incantation jinx).

The entire Sorting Hat and Harry sequence can qualify for the last movie. The former seems very keen to put the latter in Slytherin, believing it will send him to "greatness". Harry actually has a fragment of Voldemort's note soul inside him, and hence, the Sorting Hat likened him to Voldemort himself in the choosing.


User reviews

JoJosho

JoJosho

The breeze stirred the neatly cut bushes of Tisovaya Street, silently lying under the ink-black sky. Of all the streets in the world, this street was the least suitable for amazing events. Harry Potter turned in his sleep. A small hand groped for it and squeezed the envelope. The boy was asleep ... "(c)

June 30, 1997 in the light came the debut of the writer Joan Kathleen Rowling. Literally such words began to become great, a series about a small wizard, with a scar on his forehead. The story that absorbed the minds of adolescents around the world, as it was said in the press "... a book that can tear boys and girls away from TVs and computers, return it to the house from the street ..."

Just imagine...

"A dull, dank, dark night. In the street a storm. The little boy lies on the floor of his "room", in a small shack and draws a finger in the sand with an inscription, "Happy Birthday, Harry!". The cry of the soul, he knows that no one will congratulate him, no one will affably caress the top of his head. In a minute he will be eleven. Ten seconds ... Nine ... You can wake Dudley - just for laughing ... Three ... Two ... One ... A loud knock at the door, there's no knock, just a crash. There was someone behind the door, and he was obviously going to come in. "

I think anyone will guess what happened next. 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.

A short word about the actors.

Harry

What to say, there would not be Harry James Potter, there would not be the book itself. Whatever happens in the books, I was always entirely for his character. In the first part, he's just small, you can even tell a confused boy. All situations, difficult fights, intricate situations, are still ahead. Now he just scooped up this great knowledge - magic. The first real home, first friends, first classes, the first meeting with this evil, he is experiencing all this in the first part. Hermione

Hermione Jane Granger is my favorite female character in the book and film. In it, I see a part of myself. Hermione loves to learn and she pays a lot of time. Sometimes she is too arrogant and excessively proud of her success in her studies. Born of a muggle, so often heard the offensive word "Mudblood" in her address. Hermione is just a smart girl, how many times she has yet to pull friends out of difficult situations.

Ron

Ronald Bilius Weasley. Redhead. Already this word can give some characteristic. Ron is the sixth child in a wealthy family of hereditary magicians. Always the elders took on everything superior to Ron, be it study, sport, or female attention. Arriving at Hogwarts, gets to know Harry, the same situation is repeated as with the brothers, but he reconciles with his second plan. Whatever it is, he remains the best friend of Harry and Hermione.

I wanted to say that the whole trio was exactly the same as it was represented by millions of readers in the world. Actors took absolutely unknown, but this film made them real little stars.

The movie has good enough, more famous actors, the same Maggie Smith, Alan Rickman, Robbie Coltrane, Julie Walters and the inimitable Richard Harris. His death was just a blow to all the fans, his Dumbledore seemed to come off the pages of the book, the same wise look from under the half-glasses, gray hair and beard, hooked nose. He inspired a kind of majestic calmness, every appearance on the screen calming. 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. It is quite possible to write now a complete retelling of the book / movie, but you know, absolutely do not want to. Joan Rowling created an amazing, magical world, thanks to her, millions of boys and girls began to look for a scar on their foreheads and with impatience and hope to wait for their 11th birthday. And I'm certainly happy about how Chris Columbus embodied this idea on the screen, the fairy tale turned out to be absolutely childish, very bright, joyful and for some reason the word Christmas comes to mind, although there is not so much Christmas there.

Children's dream came true. Harry found his friends, his family, found loyal defenders, but he does not even suspect what he will have in the future. However, it will not be soon, but now enjoy watching!

Dedicated to: all those who are ready to go with Harry to the end.
Ffleg

Ffleg

Once upon a time (and not that long ago), in the vivid, fertile imagination of author J.K. Rowling, a character was born: A boy. A young boy named Harry, who was destined to become one of the most beloved characters to emerge from a work of fiction in a long, long time, and was quickly embraced by young and old alike in all corners of the world. And now, thanks to the magic of the cinema, Harry and his companions fairly leap from the pages of the novel to the silver screen in the phenomenal motion picture, `Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone,' directed by Chris Columbus and written for the screen by Steve Kloves. Indeed, Harry Potter is a boy, but not just any boy; because Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) just happens to be a wizard. But, orphaned as a baby, Harry has been raised by his Aunt Petunia (Fiona Shaw) and Uncle Vernon Dursley (Richard Griffiths), who never let him in on the fact that he was, well-- what he was. It seems that Petunia didn't approve of her own sister-- Harry's mother-- because she was a witch; nor of Harry's father because he, too, was a wizard. When Harry turns eleven, however, the secret is out of the bag when-- after some strange goings-on-- a giant of a man named Rubeus Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane) shows up at the Dursley's door to collect Harry and take him off to `Hogwarts,' a school for wizards and witches and all who would perfect the gift with which they were born: The gift of magic! And from the moment Harry boards the train (from station platform nine-and-three-quarters) that will take him to his destiny, the magic is alive-- for Harry, and for the audience, as well; and it's a journey you will never forget.

What a monumental undertaking to even think of attempting-- translating and transferring this passionately beloved work from novel to the screen. Because to millions of people, Harry and his companions are so much more than merely characters in a book; these are characters for whom people have made a special place in their hearts, which puts a great burden of trust upon the man who would attempt to bring them to life. And Chris Columbus, it turns out, was the right man for the job. 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. The special effects are absolutely beyond astounding, and Columbus, with a keen eye for detail and without missing a beat, keeps it all on track and moving right along at a pace and with a sense of timing that makes this an absorbing, thoroughly entertaining and enjoyable experience from beginning to end. From the opening frame you get the feeling that you're about to have a singular experience; and you're right. Because you've just entered the world of Harry Potter. And it's magic.

Even having the best special effects do not a great movie make, however, and this film is no exception; what catapults this one to the top are the performances, beginning with Radcliffe, whom you quickly forget is an actor playing a part. And that about sums up what kind of a job this young man does here. Without question, he IS Harry Potter, physically and emotionally, and when he waves his wand and does what he does, you believe it. 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.

Also turning in excellent performances are Rupert Grint as Ron Weasley, and Emma Watson as Hermione. As with Radcliffe, the casting here could not have been more perfect. Grint is `Everyboy,' with that special glint in his eye and a manner that makes him especially endearing. 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.

It's obvious that a lot of care went into the casting of this film, and it's a big part of why it is so successful. Richard Harris, as Headmaster Albus Dumbledore; Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall; John Hurt as Mr. Ollivander; Ian Hart as Professor Quirrell. 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.

The additional supporting cast includes John Cleese (Nearly Headless Nick), Warwick Davis (Professor Flitwick), Julie Walters (Mrs. Weasley), Zoe Wanamaker (Madame Hooch), Tom Felton (Draco Malfoy), Harry Melling (Dudley) and David Bradley (Filch). From Rowling's imagination to the written page to real life (albeit via the movie screen), `Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone' is a triumph many times over; a unique film of truly universal appeal, the likes of which is as rare as, well-- a sorcerer's stone. A film in which adults and children alike will rejoice, because it speaks to the heart in a universal language of life, love, experience and imagination; a film that states unequivocally that magic exists-- as long as there's a single child with a single dream somewhere in the world, and real wizards like J.K. Rowling, Chris Columbus, Steve Kloves and every member of this wonderful cast and crew around to bring it to life as they have here. An instant classic in every sense of the word, this is truly a film for the ages. A remarkable achievement, this IS the magic of the movies. I rate this one 10/10.
Twentyfirstfinger

Twentyfirstfinger

I enjoyed this movie immensely. But, like "The Phantom Menace," I've had a very hard time viewing it objectively. There was so much anticipation leading up to its release, I simply enjoyed the experience of being there. Having read all four books in the series a few times each, I am overly familiar with the events in the story. As I watched the movie, my continuing thought was "How well will the next part of the story be translated to the screen?" rather than "How entertaining is this film overall?" I have trouble answering the latter question because I was already entertained by watching a wonderful story dramatized, so I'll never know how I'd have reacted had I seen this movie without having read the books.

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. Indeed, many classic children's movies, like "The Wizard of Oz" and "Mary Poppins," are so successful partly because they're so different from the books that inspired them. 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. 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. According to an article I read a year ago, the universe of Harry Potter has become as real in the minds of youngsters and adults as that of a popular movie series like Star Wars. Therefore, it will be very hard for any film based upon it to compete with it. In the minds of die-hard fans, any changes made to the story will be seen as desecrating the fantasy world that Rowling created. That's why it's easy to understand why the filmmakers were so reluctant to change anything.

As a faithful rendering of the book squeezed into a two-and-a-half hour period, the movie is beautifully done. I don't have a single complaint about any of the actors, who successfully bring to life, with the aid of costume design and special effects, the many colorful characters from the book. 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. It's as if they took the image in my mind and transferred it to the screen. While I had my own personal image of Snape (for some reason, I always imagined him as the head villain from another Chris Columbus film, "Adventures in Babysitting"), Alan Rickman is perfect in the role. I usually expect to have words of criticism for some performances, but I just don't. The remaining adult actors, including Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall and Richard Harris as Albus Dumbledore, are as good as they possibly could be, and the kids do an excellent job of holding their own against these veterans. Some have criticized Daniel Radcliffe for appearing too subdued in the title role, but that's exactly how the character is portrayed in the book: modest, unassuming, and laid-back. The kids who play Harry's two best friends are flawless.

I had a lot of worries about the fact that it was being directed by Chris Columbus, whose entire directorial career so far has consisted of over-the-top slapstick films. I was pleasantly surprised that he did not direct the Harry Potter film in this way. Except for brief moments like the children's delayed reaction to a giant three-headed dog they encounter and Harry's swallowing the quaffle ball, there is nothing here to remind us that this film is directed by the same person who gave us films like "Home Alone" and "Mrs. Doubtfire." Indeed, I think Columbus may have gone just a tad bit too far in trying not to make the film seem cartoony. I would have liked to see a little more emotion on the actors' faces at certain times. Overall, however, his restraint works nicely in giving the film the kind of believability the book possesses.

But much is left out. Harry's caretaker Uncle Vernon, a prominent character in the book, is given less attention in the movie than some of the bit characters. The gently satirical aspects of Hogwarts School aren't in the movie at all. We never see the ghostly history teacher who died several years back but kept on teaching. Lines like the following--"Professor McGonagall watched [her students] turn a mouse into a snuffbox--points were given for how pretty the snuffbox was, but taken away if it had whiskers"--find no equivalent in the movie. 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.

Not that I'm blaming the movie for omitting some details. Some things from the book would not have translated easily to the screen, and it would have been very difficult to stick everything in. Had Columbus done so and allowed the film to be as long as necessary (eight hours, maybe?), like a BBC miniseries, the film might have been a masterpiece, but few kids would ever have had the patience or attention span to sit through it.

The problem is that the amusing details are much of what make Harry Potter such a special story. A whole universe is created in Rowling's series, in which a magical society exists within our own ordinary "muggle" world and is kept secret by a bureaucracy with its own rules, history and politics. The way magic is treated in her books, not as something medieval but as very similar to the way our own contemporary world works, is a large part of their charm. Take away these details, and you're left with a fairly conventional tale of a young wizard fighting an evil sorcerer.

Although the audience I was with broke into applause as soon as the movie ended (something I've never seen happen before, though I don't go to the theater that often), some people have complained about the movie dragging at certain points. I didn't have that problem, but, as I said, I wasn't really trying to get involved in the movie's story. After thinking about it, it does seem like parts of the movie fail to convey a sense of urgency. Why should this be? I never felt that way when reading the books, and this is without a doubt the very same story.

The answer, I think, is that the books portray much of Harry's anxiety in trying to succeed in school (for if he's kicked out, he'll go straight back to his horrible uncle) and fit in with the kids there. The movie doesn't tap into these anxieties enough, so why should we care whether he wins the Quidditch match (other than that he survives in one piece) and gets through the school year? The only real suspense in the movie after he arrives at Hogwarts comes from the story of Lord Voldemort returning, which in the book is almost secondary. Harry's adventures getting along in the school are fun and interesting, but as they are presented to us in the film, there isn't enough tying them all together.

What we have here is a serviceable dramatization of a wonderful children's series, but it doesn't entirely succeed in standing on its own. Perhaps it should have diverged from the book just a little, to compensate for the difficulties in translating some of the book's delights to the screen. In its current form, it's almost like a preview of the book. 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.
NI_Rak

NI_Rak

To be faced with the challenge of adapting Harry Potter for the Silver screen must have been any director's nightmare- the chance of directing possibly the biggest film of this decade, but also the hardest audience-the millions of fans of the book who know every line and will pick up on every mistake. Being one of the above, I can only say that Christopher Columbus and all of the team working on HP did marvelously. The cast was brilliant (particularly notable are Alan Rickman as Snape, Maggie Smith as McGonagall, and the eerily creepy David Bradley as Argus Filch), the directing wonderful, and the scenery perfect. The only qualm is that it does not track perfectly with the book, but squeezed into 2.5 hours, this can only be expected. Well done all involved!
Shadowbourne

Shadowbourne

This movie is a delight for those of all ages.

I have seen it several times and each time I am enchanted by the characters and magic.

The cast is outstanding, the special effects delightful, everything most believable.

You have young Harry, a mistreated youth who is "Just Harry" to himself. And then, he embarks on a most beautiful adventure to the Hogwarts school.

He meets Ron and Hermione, one an adorable mischief maker, the other a very tense and studious young lady.

Together, the trio try to set things right in the school.

It's the ultimate fantasy for young and old.
Tyler Is Not Here

Tyler Is Not Here

We live in a world where economics is hard. This forces practical limitations when making a movie. Time and money are sadly finite, cinema owners need to be pleased as well as fans and computer animation ain't perfect. Given these limitations, this film is about as close to human perfection as it is possible to achieve. However, it's extremely clear what an immense challenge it is to turn Philosopher's Stone from book to film.

Two and a half hours is not long to explore a wonderful, magical world. Furthermore, the directors have bowed to the inevitable temptation to show us things that cannot be communicated so effectively in a book. The consequence is the feeling of a slightly breathless sprint in places.

It also means that the movie has to stay true to the spirit of the book rather than to the letter of it. There are omissions and there are changes. The changes that were made capture and maintain the spirit of the story really well; indeed, there are places where the story is more clearly and straightforwardly told in the movie than in the book. Some aspects of the story are fleshed out on screen and the additions are delightful, completely in keeping with the flavour of the world.

The humour of the movie is inevitably more visual than that of the book; no belly laughs, but a lot of smiles. Some punchlines have changed, but the reasons why the jokes are funny remain the same. Not knowing exactly what's coming next is a good thing! It's all kept tasteful, classy and above the belt; there's nothing to cringe about.

The voice acting is almost uniformly brilliant. 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. This isn't as much freedom as they need and they fall a little short. The blame here must fall on the decision to give the actors too much to do too quickly, not on the actors themselves.

Other than these rare jarring instances, the physical acting is frequently excellent and seldom less than completely adequate, judged against the highest of targets set by the book's clear emotion descriptions.

Dan Radcliffe has the look, the mannerisms and the charm of Harry down pat. 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. Emma Watson possibly slightly overplays Hermione, but does so in a fully endearing fashion. There's one scene which gives her too little chance to truly express panic; otherwise her performance needs no changes.

Rupert Grint has comic timing way beyond his years, hitting Ron's lines perfectly. Tom Felton makes a stylish Draco; Matt Lewis' Neville character suffers from the acceleration, so the finale does come as a slight characterisation shock.

The Phelps brothers' Fred and George are distinctively cheeky rather than proactive pranksters; Chris Rankin imbues Percy with genuine authority. Sean Biggerstaff shines; his Oliver Wood is likeable and an ideal Quidditch team captain.

Robbie Coltrane's Hagrid is the single dominant adult character, with maximum laughs extracted at every step. The movie changes strongly exaggerate one side of Hagrid's nature, though; probably inevitable considering how much plot exposition his character has.

David Bradley has a vicious Argus Filch; John Hurt's Ollivander is an eccentric treat, giving a wonderful introduction to the Wizarding World. The professors are uniformly excellent, though Richard Harris' Dumbledore comes off as disappointingly flat until the end.

The most ambitious point of the movie is the computer generated imagery. The stills are wonderful, but the fastest animation is restricted by the limitations of real-world technology. The book makes extremely stringent demands of the CGI; sometimes their overall effect in the movie is merely good rather than insanely great. Some of the magic spells and effects look awesome; others don't capture the imagination nearly so much.

The world cannot yet completely convincingly animate human beings doing inhuman things, which serves as a clear reminder that you need fictional magic to make the impossible possible. The Quidditch scene is the most demanding of them all; while the sequence is action-packed and good-looking, disappointingly, it's not a total success. Perhaps some of the scenes would have been better with more conventional special effects? (For instance, the lower-tech-looking Sorting Hat scene is one of the most delightful of them all.)

The set looks gorgeous. However, it may not stand up to detailed analysis. It's fairly obvious that things are shot in many disparate locations, rather than one big Hogwarts School near Hogsmeade.

The score is absolutely wonderful. 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.

The feel of the whole movie is everything fans could have hoped for. The dialogue is intensely measured, the colouring is suitably epic, the selection of what to leave in is really tightly considered. You get chills in your spine at the right places; you feel the triumphs as all-encompassing endorphin highs. It's clear that the production have thought long, hard and lovingly. They are true fans of the story, they are the right people for the job, it all bodes very well for the second film.

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. Don't expect miracles and you'll love it. I look forward to watching it again and again.

8/10 at the very least. A really satisfactory film!
HyderCraft

HyderCraft

To millions of children of all ages, November 16 has been more eagerly anticipated than Christmas, as the long-awaited film version of J. K. Rowling's beloved novel "Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone" hits the screen.

Each of Rowling's four Harry Potter books have been critically acclaimed worldwide best-sellers, turning a generation of video-game playing children into avid readers.

In translating Rowling's world of wizards and magic to the screen, the film makers claimed to be intensely aware of the fans' high expectations and had sworn to be faithful to the book.

"Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone" is indeed the most loyal film adaptation of a book that this fan has ever seen.

It's the story of an orphaned boy who discovers on his eleventh birthday that his parents were wizards and that he is in fact a famous and powerful wizard himself.

Released from the clutches of his desperately ordinary (and non-magical) Uncle Vernon and Aunt Petunia - and their deliciously obnoxious son Dudley - Harry takes his place in the wizarding world as a first year student at the venerated Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.

A great deal of "Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone" is an introduction to this fantastic and dangerous world and its richly drawn characters. There's not only a lot of plot to cover in this film, but an entire world to create.

At two and a half hours long (hit the restroom before it starts), the film includes the book's most memorable scenes, bringing many of them to life with pure cinematic wizardry.

The Quidditch match (a soccer/hockey/rugby thing played on broomsticks) is much more exciting on the screen than on the page, as is the bathroom battle with an enormous mountain troll and the larger-than-life game of wizard's chess.

The frightening aspects of the book are in full force in the film, and its PG rating (for some scary moments) should be taken seriously.

Screenwriter Steven Kloves ("Wonder Boys") has done a fine job of streamlining Rowling's tale while maintaining its spirit. Director Chris Columbus ("Home Alone") makes good on his promise to be faithful to the book. But at times the film is a bit too reverent; you want the actors to cut loose and have a bit more fun.

Columbus clearly understands that fantasy works best when it's played most real. Across the board, his fine ensemble of actors are so perfectly cast that they appear to have literally stepped out of Rowling's book.

In the title role, Daniel Radcliffe pulls off the very difficult task of playing an introverted hero who spends most of the movie reacting to the amazing sights and events around him. He beautifully captures the deep soul and untapped potential of Harry Potter. And when this kid smiles the screen lights up.

Rupert Grint is delightful as Harry's sardonic buddy Ron Weasley and Emma Watson nearly steals the film as their overachieving friend Hermione Granger. Three cheers to the film makers for giving three unknown child actors the top billing they deserve.

The strong cast of veteran actors includes Richard Harris as the wise Headmaster Dumbledore and Robbie Coltrane as the lovable giant Hagrid. Alan Rickman is wonderfully villainous as Professor Snape and Zoe Wanamaker has just the right touch of girls gym teacher as flying instructor Madame Hooch.

As the strict but just Professor McGonagall, Oscar winner Maggie Smith seems born to play the role - and is ready for another Oscar.

John Cleese (as Nearly Headless Nick) and Julie Walters (as Mrs. Weasley) have all-too-brief cameo roles, but if the next film "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" remains true to the book, we'll be seeing more of them.

In addition to being highly engaging, the film is a marvelous thing to look at. From the bustling wizard street Diagon Alley to the magnificently gothic Hogwarts School to the dark and misty Forbidden Forest, the film breaks new ground in imaginative production design.

To paraphrase the film's tagline, let the magic (and box office records) begin.
Grinin

Grinin

I watched this movie first time when I was left with no choice. My expectations were extremely low as I always wondered if Harry Potter books were over-hyped. How-ever after watching the movie it did make me a Harry Potter movie fan. And needless to say - this continues to remain my favourite of HP series. That brings to a point here.... the effect of expectations over a movie. True, expectations reduce joy.

Without going into the story I would certainly say Chris Columbus churns out a perfect pot-pourri of emotions, suspense and magic, delivering something appealing to all ages.

Every character brought to life on screen has done justice and leave an impression on you. Particularly notable performances by Emma Watson and Alan Rickman.

CGI are in plenty and made good of. The Quedditch game is picturised amazingly. The wizard's chess is treat to eyes.

Let's hope that the forthcoming HP series carries the similar magical touch.
Buzalas

Buzalas

When I knew the film was being made, I thought how could they make a film that would be up to the standard of such a perfect book. But they did! Sure they missed bits out but they captured the essence of the book brilliantly. One member of the cast was mis-cast for me but my children disagreed.I even found myself believing they were flying and not wondering "how are they doing that?" So 10 out 10 Warner Brothers. Bring on the next one!
Agantrius

Agantrius

I feel, next to Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is the best book-to-movie adaptation that I've ever seen. The sets were stunning - the actors were first rate - the effects were breathtaking. The film flowed quite smoothly in it's transition from page to screen, never tripping on the awkward conventions that other books on film have struggled with. The screenplay, by Steven Kloves, stripped away all unnecessary elements to get to the root of the story. Though many events from the book were excluded, the essential ones made it to the film. And it makes for one smooth story and very enjoyable movie-going experience.

Many kudos to Chris Columbus and the rest of the Harry Potter cast/crew for not turning this movie into what it easily could have become: a 2 and a half hour commercial advertisement for action figures and collectibles, kid's meals and fast food tie-ins, soft drinks and snack products, etc. and instead focused on bringing J.K. Rowling's story to life as accurately and as lovingly as it deserves. There has been much speculation on whether Columbus was the correct choice for the first two installments of the series and I say to that, Yes. I feel that he accomplished what most would have failed. He has proven, at least to me, that Diagon Alley truly exists - if only I could find the right brick to tap on. The world of Harry Potter is no longer fantasy to me, but instead a place where any of us mere Muggles could hope to visit, one day.

One of my favorite moments, is what I'm going to refer to as the Adrenaline Sequence. By Adrenaline Sequence, I mean the sequence in a movie that for all intents and purposes, doesn't necessarily propel the story, but gives the audience a huge theatrical payoff, ala the Pod Race sequence in The Phantom Menace. The Adrenaline Sequence for this particular movie is the Quidditch sequence. I was very happy to finally see the 'hockey/soccer hybrid on a broomstick' come to life. The Quidditch Sequence is, by far, my favorite sequence in the whole film. The scene is dizzying in it's violence and it's one breathless moment after another. My hat goes off to Columbus and his team for succeeding in making this scene as memorable as it should be.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is a fantastic movie for children of all ages. Fans and non-fans alike will enjoy this colorful story of good versus evil and the friendships that endure.
Gavikelv

Gavikelv

HARRY POTTER / (2001) *** (out of four)

Here's a method of evaluating a movie based on previously published material: ask yourself if the film makes you want to read the material from which it is based?

Before the release of "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," I was one of the few remaining souls who had not read J.K. Rowling's fantasy book series. After screening the first film installment, I did want to read the book. Borrowing the novel from a family member, I briefly skimmed over the chapters. The book's intelligence and similarities with the film really surprised me.

With over 100 million copies sold in over 46 different languages, J.K. Rowling's best-selling series of books has become a worldwide phenomenon. Naturally, with soaring expectations abound, the filmmakers felt great pressure to create a faithful adaptation. They have. This film is essentially a visualization of the words in the novel, with very few differences.

That said, the film does run into a few conflicts with the book's story. The middle of the movie has nowhere to go. It's like a false second act; almost nothing of major significance occurs in this period of the film. The young characters wander from scene to scene with nothing much to do and nothing much to say. We're left with a grand display of eye-popping special effects.

"Harry Potter" certainly dazzles us with a solid beginning and an engaging final act, however. We first meet a young wizard boy named Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe). Soon after the film opens, the boy discovers he has magical powers. He's then thrust into an enchanting world of sorcery, magic, and witchcraft. He's sent to a school for young wizard children, where he meets new friends, learns about magic, and participates in fun competitions. But someone at the school doesn't like Harry, as mysterious events begin to occur. Harry soon finds himself in the middle of a diabolical scheme of revenge. Who is the culprit and what do they want with Harry?

The film asks some involving questions. Too bad it doesn't give enough depth to the side characters or subplots. We don't really care about the mystery because we don't know enough about the suspects. The movie does conclude with a twist, but it doesn't encourage another examination of the movie. It lacks a foundation altogether. The story spends so much time foreshadowing the villain's identity, it is pointless for the story to abandon its proceeding plot points and develop a new villain at the end. The book gets away with this; the movie does not.

After his gentle "Home Alone" and sweet-natured "Stepmom," many questioned the ability of director Chris Columbus to bring a sense of darkness to the story-and for good reason. "Harry Potter" contains charming, likable characters and a rich pallet of lush, inventive images. Unfortunately, the film lacks an edge. It's missing the dark atmosphere Rowling's novel so vividly brought to life. Columbus does construct some memorable sequences, but the individual scenes themselves are much better than the movie as a whole.

Despite it's childish story and pre-teen characters, many define "Harry Potter" as a film for all ages. While that's debatable, during my screening, adults were plowing through the isles every five minutes. Going to the bathroom? Getting drink refills? Buying concessions? Who knows? But not a single child budged from their seat. Their eyes were glued to the big screen.

Conclusion: It's a sure-fire experience for children, especially if they've read the books. But adults may not encounter the same enticement as kids. Then again, if I had nothing better to do than to count the people leaving the theater, why am I recommending the film?
Nuadora

Nuadora

When I first saw this movie I was ten years old, the same age the characters where supposed to be. My older cousin and her boyfriend took me to the Mall to watch a movie. Back then I wasn't going very often to the cinema, due to the fact that my parents didn't have time and I wasn't old enough to go alone to any theater. The movie captivated my attention like nothing before and I became so interested in anything that had to do with this movie, and I heard that it was made after a book. I didn't had Internet back then, but I found the first book at a library and convinced my mother to buy it. That's how I became obsessed with reading and writing.

I may say, "Harry Potter" affected me in a positive way, because after I finished reading all the published books back then, I wanted to read more books and I must thank J.K.Rowling for her genius, if it wasn't for her books, I might have been right now an average seventeen year old, at some party, drinking my brains out. This movie got me to the right path in life.

I know, you probably don't care about my story, you readers only want to hear about what I thought of the movie, but I believe my story can influence you if you are a parent and thinking whether or not you should let your children watch this film. My advice is yes and I have presented my reason above.

The story is simply magical and "Hogwarts" is a genius invention. The movie is done well, almost perfect. It's the closest to the book they can get and it's an amazing experience for any kid.
Coiwield

Coiwield

First episode also known as ¨Harry Potter and the philosopher's stone¨ deal with Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe)and friends fighting dark forces in an amazing adventure . In this early installment of JK Rowling saga, our protagonist is freed by Rubeus from the custody of his selfish uncle (Richard Griffiths) and miserable aunt (Fiona Lewis). Harry goes his destiny at Hogwart's school , there meets our friends Ron(Rupert Grint) ,Hermione(Emma Watson) and his enemies Braco Malfoy(Tom Felton), along the dark forces which threatens Hogwart, and finally Lord Voldemor . Besides the professors as Minerva(Maggie Smith), Severus Snape(Alan Rickman), Dumbledore ( Richard Harris), Madame Hooch (Zoe Wanamaker), Quirinus (Ian Hart)and of course Rubeus(Robbie Coltrane). Here some legendary events take place , including a Quiddich match, and Harry Potter competes in confronting in series of dangerous happenings , challenging monsters as unicorn, centaur and horrible creatures and an ending spooky climatic battle .

This episode contains loads of adventures and action and is such deeply riveting and emotional as its followings , furthermore gets lots of bombastic special effects and several images have you on the edge of your seat including an amazing array of technical bizarre creatures, a breathtaking ogre ,a three-head animal , and Potter fighting creepy , scary monsters and an exciting final taking on between Harry and the Dark Lord and his henchmen . The picture displays stimulating action set pieces illuminating the full-blown adventures , blending wizardry, witchcraft, horror, humor and is extremely amusing and pretty enjoyable. Darkest even that subsequent chapters is thrilling, dramatic, touching and very exciting. Provide enough amusement to keep the chat rooms humming until the epic ending comes out . In spite of overlong runtime, it suffers from over-length, and the difficult of adapting, the film still managing to keep a quick enough pace for those unfamiliar with the literary and highly detailed work by J. K. Rowling. The motion picture is splendidly filmed with sensational production design and colorful cinematography by John Seale . Phenomenal and spectacular music by master John Williams. The movie is magnificently directed by Chris Colombus . The film is for Harry Potter saga lovers as well as neophyte who have never read J. K. Rowling novels. The follow-up titled ¨Harry Potter and the goblet of fire¨ verse pretty much the same at the first one .
Fato

Fato

Having read the first few Harry Potter books before 2001 and hearing about the hype for the first movie, I was excited. I heard there was going to be an all-British cast (which makes sense, right?) and we'd get to see a live version of one of the defining novels of our generation. From what I remember I went with my family and a family friend to see the movie the day after Christmas and was pleasantly amazed. After the movie was over, I watched the credits and discovered some familiar names (the late Alan Rickman, Sister Act's Maggie Smith, James Bond 007's Robbie Coltrane, and Star Wars' Warwick Davis); others not so familiar (the kids, some of whom had their debut). But it was a good movie and was a party of colors and sights for all to see. This is easily my favorite of all the Harry Potter films. The catalyst of the movie series!
grand star

grand star

There is a major difference between reviews here and this is very easy to explain. Anybody who (like me) has read the books multiple times, knowing the slightest details and loving absolutely everything from the series, can´t be completely happy with the film. For the neutral watcher who read the books maybe once or not even at all this movie must seem like a really entertaining and well directed film. The problem is that though very good acting, especially Alan Rickman as Snape, a beautiful scenery and very good camera work, the most important essentials of the books are pretty much non-existing. For instance, I, as an hardcore fan since the first time reading the books when i was 9, was always extremely interested in reading a passage of a normal school lesson or a normal day at any job of an fully educated wizard, eg in the ministry of magic. Rowling made us have the desire to always experience more of the universe she created. I was always amazed by the lightness and uncomplicated way of Rowlings writing, how she managed to let us accompany Harry in his daily life, making the actually extremely strange and funny way of the magicians life seem so normal and casual for the readers. The film on the other hand is more of a build-up to Harry´s first encounter with Voldemort, a scene that´s perfectly directed with impressive effects and good filming, which is definitely the highlight of as well film and book, with the difference that the book is more focused in describing Harry´s adventrous first year as a whole. The film is a little bit inconsistent in terms of how close it sticks to the book´s plot and this is another problem. Because of the book being so comprehensive and full it is nearly impossible not to skip any sections of the book. In my opinion the screenwriter should have either sticked closer to the book or distanced the filmplot more from it. Another thing i miss is the great dry humour the book is spiced with in a lot of ways. The problem is that this can´t really be translated in the movie because it´s often in the way Rowling describes things and not only in the dialogues. One thing that is awesome is the music. In my opinion John Williams is the best film music composer and the way he captures the mysterious and thrilling atmosphere and the majesty and greatness of Hogwarts is marvelous. At the end I can say that the film can meet the expectations but it´s just not possible to convince a haerdore fan completely, just because while reading the book, everybody creates his own picture of Hogwarts, the characters and the scenery. This is called imagination, it is the best part of reading a book, not possible to be translated completetly satisfyingly into a movie and the reason to my big recommandation concerning Harry Potter and also every other book which is filmed. Read the book first! If you watch the film first and read the books afterwards you´ll miss a great time imagining everything for yourself. And this will come espescially pronounced in the books of Harry Potter.
fightnight

fightnight

This is a wonderful movie for the whole family! Though I don't like the idea of witchcraft, this is still a creative world. Moving staircases, all-flavor jellybeans (from chocolate to grass; yes, ladies and gentlemen, ALL flavor), wands, friendly ghosts, and spells will have you blown away and welcomed into an imaginative world with a clever plot! This is the best remake of the book possible. It's a fun movie that I see once and then long to see again, which isn't often, so this is a treat.

Besides the idea of witchcraft, there was one other thing I didn't like--the acting. The kids did a wonderful job for ten or eleven- year-olds, but the acting was still poor, and two of the main protagonists, Harry and Ron, often looked like they had only one emotion or were dazed. Emma Watson did a good job, and the adult actors were wonderful, but the acting from Harry and Ron didn't often look real. It was at least good enough to keep me in the story.

But other than the weak acting (don't worry, the acting becomes EXCELLENT the next movie) and witchcraft, this movie is a wonderful delight! With superior plot twists, a clever world, and friendships, this is a wonderful movie!
Bolv

Bolv

I have, in all my life as a lover of both literature and the cinema, hardly ever come upon a piece of work more unimaginative, more ugly, more uninteresting, more lacking in suspense, more lacking in charm, more greedy, more incoherent... Okay, okay. I'll stop with the superlative negatives. Surely there have been worse, and, yes, off the top of my head, I can think of many that are worse. However, for a book that over 125 million people have read, and for a movie that cemented the record for the biggest opening weekend in history, and also for a book that has had not only kids but critics singing its praises, and also for a movie which one particularly fat-headed critic called the Wizard of Oz of its generation, I am more than severely disappointed. I know that, had it not been so overhyped, it would have been just as bad. Now, however, my anger for it is completely hardened and it's going to be a passionate battle for me for years to come.

I go into an in depth criticism, but it would be impossible for me to keep to 1000 words. There is hardly a piece of it that I liked. As a film, it was poorly edited, poorly acted (by most), poorly filmed. The only really memorable scene is the troll in the bathroom, although the payoff to it makes no sense whatsoever. The Quidditch game, which has been hyped to all heaven, is completely boring and poorly created. It looks like the FX guys created it with photoshop. When the chess game looked like it was about to be the most exciting sequence in the film, Christopher Columbus, who, I must say, lives up to his reputation completely, begins to edit furiously. I heard afterwards that this was done to avoid a PG-13. My immediate thought is that the filmmakers didn't trust their young audience to enjoy watching a chess game, no matter how exciting it might have been. I'm still not sure which story to buy.

But the person I really want to tear into is J.K. Rowling. What a hack. Never has the word "hack" been more fitting. A former waitress, her idea of imagination is to call things by weird names. Only in the mind of a psychopath (or idiot) could the name Draco Malfoy or a Cerberus clone named Fluffy be considered clever. Writing children's literature is not difficult, but this is simply awful. She's clearly ripping off Raoul Dahl like there's no tomorrow, especially in the exposition. The game of Quidditch, which seems to be a drawing point of some sort, is absolutely nonsensical. As a preteen, I invented much more interesting games with much less interesting playing pieces. Quidditch is a game where people score ten points at a time, unless someone catches a special type of ball, which ends the game immediately. So theoretically, the game could end in thirty seconds. And all the other forms of scoring matter not at all. And let's talk about the surprise climax. Really, anyone could have been standing in front of that mirror at the end. It is tremendously unclever. And the penultimate sequence, where the crown is awarded to the best dorm, is anticlimactic and just rude to the children of Slytherin, We only hate one of them, so why should we be happy that the award at first goes to them, and then is cruelly snatched away. And what about Hogwart, anyways? If you're not supposed to use magic when you're away from Hogwart, why the heck would you want to be a wizard anyways?

Friends, you're well on the path to making your children drooling morons. If they want a great series of books about sorcery and magic creatures, make them read the Chronicles of Narnia by C.S. Lewis. This is the most soulless garbage imaginable. And I thought Shrek had taken that title. 3/10
Grari

Grari

***SLIGHT SPOILERS*** As an adult, it didn't appeal to me in the least. The effects were poorly done, the giant plot leap in the middle ("lots of strange things are happening-- hey, I know! it's definitely because the creepy teacher guy wants the thing under the trap door under the three-headed dog") threw me completely out of the story. It's really a kids only movie, which disappointed me, because I'd been hearing such good things about it. And then at the end, Harry is sent back to his abusive adoptive parents. So much for changing one's situation.

And I know that they had to cut tremendous amounts of story in order to make it only 2 1/2 hours long (which was still way too long for this movie). After waiting in line outside the theater with tickets bought a week ahead of time, I must say I was truly disappointed. I'm even more saddened by the commercial success and the lunacy of die hard Harry Potter fans which will keep this sad and poorly-written movie in theaters much longer than it needs to be.

Some books should remain books.
Wohald

Wohald

This film is simply awful, the acting is a joke. Being a fan of the book I decided to buy the DVD without seeing at the cinema or renting it before, but I was extremely dissapointed. Daniel Radcliff's acting is terrible, in my honest opinion he was only hired because he looks like the illustrations of Harry Potter and he is definatly what I had pictured in my mind but his acting makes a mockery out of the film and turns it into a spoof of the book, instead of bringing it to life. I definatly won't be rushing to the shops to get the second film too soon.
Natety

Natety

About halfway through Harry Potter 1, I considered walking out. It's not that it was godawful, but having read the book, I knew how it all worked out-- and I had no confidence left that there would be anything the least bit interesting about how Rowling's story would be illustrated.

That's what it is; the book faithfully, and dully, illustrated, line by line. It's so faithful to the order of incidents (and the need to keep the story moving) that it has no time to give us any of the characterization that made us root for Harry; at best we get instantly recognizable movie stereotypes (Draco Malfoy has a Richie Rich 'do, therefore he must be from the same snotty rich kids' fraternity as Greg Marmalard). Seemingly ideal casting-- Alan Rickman as Snape, say-- is wasted when the characters turn out only to have half a dozen lines in the entire movie, most of them expository. Maggie Smith, Ian Hart, Richard Griffiths, Fiona Shaw, all wasted; the peerless John Cleese as Nearly Headless Nick has, as memory serves, all of two lines-- one to explain why he's nearly headless, and one to announce, in Boys' Own Weekly cliches, that the Quidditch Cup is sure going to be hotly contested this year. Maybe only Robbie Coltrane and John Hurt get enough dialogue to begin to sketch a character.

The other problem-- not unrelated, surely-- is that Chris Columbus is, for the millionth time, the wrong wrong wrong director for the job. He has no sense of magic, of mystery, of English eccentricity. Give him two wizards skulking about a suburban tract house, and he'll make them seem as ordinary as two retirees strolling and chatting about the weather. Give him an evil spirit sucking the blood of a dead unicorn and being interrupted by a centaur, and he makes it seem like two retirees strolling and chatting about the weather. Give him a chess game, and he makes it seem like World War III. Give him Gringott's bank, and he ignores the baroque set that's been built and can't wait to show us a big pile of gold, which is surely a bit revealing. This isn't as awful a blockbuster as, say, Tomb Raider, but it comes from the same land of impoverished imagination camouflaged with booming, expensive yet somehow cheap-looking special effects.
Kirimath

Kirimath

terribly contrived and juvenile. From the outset, it treats viewers like they were little children - the problem is, that most children won't realize how terrible it is because they haven't the breadth of experience to notice how contrived and unoriginal the plot is.

I don't blame Columbus though, JK Rowling has created a cliched story full of unoriginality and character shallowness. The fact that Harry Potter seems to be everybody's favourite and is virtually invincible in the film just makes you feel sick at how predictable this film is.

And the ending - my gosh, what a terrible ending. Star Wars was bad enough with their super proton topedoes that destroy whole mother ships (and stupid Darth Vader never learnt the lesson of having such weaknesses from his experience in The Phantom Menace). But Harry Potter tops it with it's ridiculous ending whose sole explanation is a mother's love? Ludicrous!

Go see a real movie, from the original genius of JRR Tolkien: The Lord of the Rings.
Aria

Aria

**SPOILERS**Before I briefly state my views, I must confess that I have never read a word of or even picked up a Harry Potter book in all of my life. I had many friends rave and rant about them, and at my work, I often see my co-worker's kids sitting in corners, waiting for their mothers to take them to school, reading the latest chapter in the series enthusiastically. But because I have never read Harry Potter myself, I have no understanding of the series, the characters, or the plotlines outside of the world this movie has created. Therefore, this is a review for viewers like me: They haven't read the books, and they're curious to see what all the hype is about.

Well....judging soley from this film, it's not about much, I can tell you.

Overall, I would rate this film as either a C- or a D+. Since, if you're still reading this review, you've probably already seen the movie, I shall simply state my opinion without elaborating too much on the happenings of the film. There are a lot of cool ideas presented here....A LOT of cool ideas. In fact, I am not ashamed to state that every idea presented was involving and a work of genius....masterpieces to themselves. For the first hour, I was completely engrossed in the world that this movie had created...indeed, this was a magical movie. From the moving stairs to the floating candles and the interacting paintings, this was the stuff of a master artist. Just the goblins set the film apart....never have I seen a film-creature look so convincing.

Unfortunately, after a while, the wonderful pictures get bogged down and dull due to the absense of a storyline. There was no story or plotline to give this film a firm foundation to stand upon....nothing to move these wonderful ideas that I was watching along. As a result, the move becomes a patch-work of cool-looking ideas, but with no backbone or soul behind them. Eventually, since there is no real storyline, the film just gets old and boring, regardless of how neat the pictures are. I wasn't the only one in the theater drawing these conclusions...indeed, about 90% of the audience were all children, and in the final hour, they were all chattering away to each other, ignoring what was going on in the film, and I could see the parents around them glancing at their watches.

In the last twenty minutes or so, a plot is finally found, but it's so painfully contrived....so cliched and predictable, that it hurts to watch it (i.e. "You defeated your enemy with love;" Harry's team winning all the points and earning the trophy, etc.). This is a pity, because the plotline seemed to be good, and if the director had just cut the film's length in half and spent more time developing this story, we could have had a real winner on our hands, on par with other children's fantasys like "Wizard of Oz" and "E.T."

Veteran British actors such as Richard Harris, Alan Rickman, John Cleese, John Hurt, and Maggie Smith are wasted in throw-away roles, though the lead youngters certainly aren't bad.

All in all, a dissapointing effort, made even more dissapointing by the fact that there were so many likable qualities to it, among them the ideas presented and the visuals achieved, which set it apart from any other film of its kind. Watching this film has not motivated me to read the books; however, I shall certainly be in line to watch the second film. Hopefully, with a better story for the viewer to follow, the visually and undeniably magical world of Harry Potter will be a truimph the second time around.

*1/2 out of ****
Thiama

Thiama

2 1/2 hours of Boredom. Half the audience fell asleep, including most of the kiddies. Beautiful to look at, but that does not make for a interesting film. Rather spend your money on Lord of the Rings.
Zeueli

Zeueli

This movie was so corny and unimaginative, a real Chris Colombus piece of hack work. The great cast saves the film from being utter dreck, but otherwise this is pretty dim, formulaic movie-making. Compare it to its announced competition, movies like The Wizard of Oz, Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, The Never Ending Story, or even more recent fare like The Secret Garden or Photographing Fairies. C'mon, you've got to admit this flick is mediocre at best. Stop lapping up the hype and buying into every stupid trend they throw at you. Discriminate a little.
Kabei

Kabei

At first I liked the Harry Potter series, it was imaginative, it was original, it was funny, and it had promise. Then the second one came out, "oh WOW this is heaven, it can't get better than this", then the third came out, "I was wrong about the second, because this is awesome". Then in between finishing the third and the release of the fourth I read the Lord of the Rings. And shortly after, the movies for both came out. I realized the huge difference, I was psyched out when I heard they were making a Harry Potter movie, but there they go and ruin it. Did you know Spielberg was originally supposed to direct, until Miss Rowling insisted it HAD to be an all British cast, in walks in Chris Columbus, a guy who directed Robin Williams in becoming a woman in "Mrs. Doubtfire", and a guy who's obviously willing to give in to any demand thrown at him by the author as long as he makes money. Well Mr. Columbus seemed to direct Ron into acting like a woman as well. You throw in a B list of child actors and a list of acclaimed adult actors who are far past their prime and who only opted to make these films because their grandchildren begged them to, and you have the first Harry Potter movie. There has never been a more horrific performance than that of Rupert Grint, who now dominates the worst performances of all time, kicking Jake Lloyd from The Phantom Menace out of the way. Daniel Radcliffe doesn't really possess much talent either, I highly doubt he has any future after this film, as far as acting goes anyways. As for Emma Watson, who thinks she's the best in the world, and if you think I'm talking about her performance as Hermione, you're dead wrong, have you listened to her in interviews? The room can barely fit the three of them; her, the interviewer, and her ego. Her performance is also astonishingly bad. I forgot to mention the horrible special effects, I have seen better on TV watching "Power Rangers". I mentioned the Lord of the Rings earlier to make reference to the obvious ripoffs of Miss Rowling. Firstly there are the dementors, cloaked ghostlike figures whose faces you never see (cough, RINGWRAITHS!). The whomping willow seems to ring a bell (ENTZ). The Giant Spider named Aragog (SHELOB). The trolls also seem to resemble something I've seen before... OH YEAH, the trolls in Lord of the Rings! Hopefully Warner Bros. choice of hiring different directors for the rest of the films will pay off. But this is the perfect example of a book that could have made an Oscar worthy classical movie, but fell short because instead of making it what it was intended to be they chose to skimp on the effects to make more money on little kids who think it's great because they're too young to watch real special effects in Star Wars or LotR. It really makes me sad, because in the months prior to the first movie I was marveling at the promise of it all. Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, Alan Rickman, they got John Williams to do the score, and like that, it was ruined. Although it does seem that my opinion differs from the rest of the world as Miss Rowling is just raking it in and so are the filmmakers, making even more money by skimping on the special effects that will no doubt succeed in dazzling children who aren't yet potty trained. Here's one buck the woman won't get her hands on.