| Harry
Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone |
| Rating
- 4.5 |
| |
Chances are that if you had an even mild interest
in seeing Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone,
you have already seen it. Perhaps more than once.
And perhaps you are tired of hearing about it. Why,
then, should I choose to do a review on it?
Well, in case you've been living in a box, it is
a well-known fact that Potter pulled in the
single biggest opening weekend of all time. It also
showed on more screens opening night than any other
movie of all time. These were events I predicted
to happen months ago, and that prediction wasn't
exactly a risky one. I'd go so far as to say that
this movie will easily crack the top 5 highest-grossing
films of all time.
Does that answer your question? What is without
a doubt the biggest movie since (or beyond) Titanic
is in our midst, and won't be leaving anytime soon.
It's just too big not to talk about.
So here goes.
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's
Stone is fantastic. Stunning. Amazing. Awe-inspiring.
Humorous. A fine example of what a well-crafted
movie can and should be. Every single bit of hype
you have ever heard about it is probably true. Now,
it could be said that I am speaking from a position
where very few good movies have been released in
the last two years; it could be that Potter
really is just that fuckin' good.
For you box-dwellers, a story summary. Young Harry
Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), orphaned in his infancy
when his wizard parents were slain by the dark wizard
Lord Voldemort, is made to live with his aunt and
uncle Dursley and their son.
The Dursleys are, shall we say, less than charming.
They endlessly spoil their overweight brat of a
child while forcing Harry to live in a cabinet under
the stairs, wearing raggedy hand-me-down clothes.
Why do the Dursleys act so hideously toward Harry?
Oh, simple really. They know just what he is and
what his parents were, and since the Dursleys are
the worst types of Muggles (non-magical people)
around, they want none of that witching nonsense
in their house. One flurry of invite letters later,
and Harry is whisked away by kindly (and gigantic)
Hagrid (Ronnie Coltrane) to the Hogwarts School
of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
It is here that the movie reaches its true form.
Hogwarts is in itself a presence, an intimidatingly
large and sprawling castle, and for the remainder
of the movie it becomes the world in which Harry
and his friends live. Ghosts openly wander the halls,
portraits move as if alive, staircases shift and
move at random, and the internal layout is so labyrinthine
that there's no shortage of secret passages and
forbidden rooms to explore.
Early on Harry makes friends with two other first-year
students, fully entertaining characters in their
own right: Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint), a plucky
redheaded boy with as many siblings as there are
hairs on a dog, and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson),
a know-it-all overachiever who is nevertheless very
talented and very likable.
Since one of the main functions of Sorcerer's
Stone (both book and movie) is to establish
the world and its rules for future supplements,
most of the first half of the film is almost entirely
expository in nature. We are introduced to the teachers
one by one. We are shown the differences between
the four houses of the school. A sports-obsessive
boy explains to Harry (and the audience) just how
the wizarding sport of Quidditch works (for the
curious, it's a combination of basketball and hockey,
with flying
broomsticks thrown in to taste). For those not familiar
with the books, this is all fascinating and a marvel
to behold. For those who know the story, there is
nothing quite like seeing something in your mind's
eye projected onto a movie screen so faithfully.
The rest of the story I will leave for you to discover,
as it is a joy to see the real thrust of the plot
emerge amongst all the technical and storytelling
wizardry (pun intended).
What we have here, friends and neighbors, is an
instant classic. The three leads turn in faithful
and sturdy performances as Harry, Ron, and Hermione,
and the supporting cast is an all-star lineup of
British talent, including Richard Harris, Maggie
Smith, John Cleese, and of course Alan Rickman as
the shady, Potter-hating Professor Severus Snape.
Though the running time may seem daunting at 152
minutes, the movie never the less flows naturally,
and not once does it drag or bore. The scene where
Harry, Ron, and Hermione play a real game of Wizard's
Chess is worth the price of admission alone.
So why not a perfect rating? Well, rarely any movie
can get off scot-free, though my complaint for Potter
is one I wish I could complain about more often,
with other book-to-movie translations. The movie
is a direct translation from the book, and with
very few exceptions, follows the book loyally beginning
to end with heart and soul intact. This is a delight
to see, but on the other hand, if one has already
read the book, the movie contains no surprises.
You know exactly what will be coming at every twist
and turn, and thus experienced Potterites will get
most of their joy from the pristine performances
and stunning visuals. To the movie's credit, those
alone are enough to satisfy.
See the movie. If you've seen it already, I suggest
you see it again. But if you really want a good
time, see the movie with a child, maybe a child
no older than Harry himself. It makes it so much
easier to become a child yourself for those two
and a half hours. |
| |
| Where to See It?: Now.
Anywhere. Everywhere. Take your pick, it's only
showing on about ten zillion screens. |
| Counterpoint: Wow. So,
I guess the movie was pretty WIZARD, huh? (rimshot)
- Stepladder |
|
|
