Review: "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone"

[angelx_ph2002 at yahoo.com]

Here's my review of the film:

HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE 
Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, John Cleese, 
Robbie Coltrane, Richard Griffiths, Richard Harris, Ian Hart, Alan 
Rickman, Fiona Shaw, Maggie Smith, Julie Walters. 
Dir: Chris Columbus 

Boy, did I underestimate the crowds today! I left the house at around 
11:00 am to catch the first show at around noon. I thought most of 
the audience for this film was either at school or at work and only 
die-hard fans like myself willing to call in sick and absent 
themselves for the day would be going to see it. I thought it would 
be a modest crowd. Not too big. Boy, was I wrong! All the first 
screenings were sold-out. Suprisingly, I looked around, 90% of the 
people were actually composed of older teens and young adults. I only 
saw a handful of kids on hand for the opening day. 

But what about the movie, you ask? First the good news, Steve 
Kloves's script was faithful. It nailed pretty much 90% of the
book 
and captured the much of the book's wit and charm. Relative 
newcomers, Radcliffe, Grint and Watson, acquit themselves quite well 
to their roles. They truly made the characters come to life. The 
adult cast was also superb with Coltrane, Rickman and Smith as 
standouts. Stuart Craig's sets and the visual effects also nailed
it 
right on the mark. The Quidditch match and the Chess Game were way 
better than anything I could imagine. I don't care what other
critics 
think, I liked the John Williams score. 

The bad news? Well, despite all the good material to work with, Chris 
Columbus's flaws as director were still there (thankfully, he did
not 
get too slapstick-y or syrupy).He did not seem to know what to do 
with all the great material he had to work with and seemed to not 
know what to bring to it. He lacked the whimsy and edginess needed to 
truly an artistic success (which Tim Burton and Terry Gilliam would 
have certainly brought to it). 

Despite the two-and-a-half hour running time, it did not feel like it 
at all. As a matter of fact, I felt it was too short. It, 
unfortunately, reduced the roles of the other characters in the book, 
namely the Weasley twins (who were hilarious in the book but 
hopefully, they'll shine in the second film), Mrs. Weasley (whose 
role in the book was short enough as it is. It was further reduced in 
the film. What a pity! Anyway, with Julie Walters in the role,
she's 
gonna be superb when her character's role increases in the
succeeding 
books) and Neville Longbottom. 

Yes, I think the book's still better but at least the film did
not 
butcher it too much. I won't be hunting down Chris Columbus to 
disembowel him this time. LOL. 

Oscar Prospects: Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay are not out-
of-reach. Should be a contender for Best Art Direction, Best Visual 
Effects, Best Sound, Best Makeup, Best Sound Effects Editing and Best 
Costume Design. 

Grade: A-