Subject: Review: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001)

From: Laura Clifford <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 19:24:31 -0000

HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE
-------------------------------------

Director Chris Columbus ("Mrs. Doubtfire") brings the first of the hugely 
popular J.K. Rowling series to the big screen.  Daniel Radcliffe ("The
Tailor of Panama") stars as the 11 year old orphaned boy born of a wizard
and a witch and marked but not killed by the evil Voldemort in "Harry
Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone."

While Chris Columbus has done what Warner Brothers, Rowling and most of
her readership wanted - faithfully adapting the book to the screen - 
in doing so he's ironically lost some of the magic.  The film also
demonstrates something which the books did not - it's indebtedness to
the mythology and ideas of the "Star Wars" series.  

Harry, like Luke Skywalker before him, is an orphan destined for a
supernatural greatness (magic, 'the force'), guided and mentored by one duo
(Hagrid and Dumbledore vs. Obi-Wan and Yoda) and assisted by another
(Hermione and Ron/Leia and Han) to battle a dark lord of mysterious 
background (Voldemort/Darth Vader).  Chess pieces move themselves across 
boards, strange creatures abound and the game of Quidditch recalls a certain
race through a Redwood forest.  But then, "Star Wars" itself has its roots in 
a Kurosawa film ("Hidden Fortress") and mythologies have common themes, so 
back to "Harry."

The production mostly looks great, from the Dursleys' typical British home to
the fanciful Hogwarts where candles float in mid-air and paintings and
photographs come to life (although the ghosts who wander about give the
place an unfortunate Disney's Haunted Mansion feel).  Special effects are
good, especially a troll that needs dealing with, but the artificiality
creeps through on occasion (the initial approach to Hogwarts is too
obviously matted).  John Seale's ("The Perfect Storm") cinematography is 
straightforward and Richard Francis-Bruce's editting is mediocre (particularly
in the wizard's chess game which builds no suspense).  The less said about
John Williams's score the better.

The cast is a who's who of British talent, all well cast.  Richard Harris
initially seems an odd choice for kindly Professor Dumbledore, but he wears
the robes well.  Maggie Smith puts a witchy twist on her old teacher role
of Miss Jean Brodie for Professor McGonagall.  Robbie Coltrane has both
the bulk and gentleness of spirit for Hagrid.  Fiona Shaw and Richard
Griffiths were born to play the Dursleys.  John Hurt gives his all to his
small role as Mr. Ollivander, who matches Harry to his wand in Diagon Alley.
The best performance comes from Alan Rickman, made up to look like a silent 
film Rasputin, as Professor Snape.  Rickman reaches somewhere off kilter,
making one wish the entire film had been invested with his imagination.

Of the three leads, newcomer Rupert Grint as Harry's pal Ron Weasley, is
the most natural and delightful.  Radcliffe is a bit neutral as
Harry, but as the first story's reactions evolve into more action on Harry's
part Radcliffe will have more opportunity to act.  While Emma Watson
leaves the film as Hermione, she's rather stiff and actressy initially.

"Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" is good entertainment that lacks
soul.

B

For more Reeling reviews visit www.reelingreviews.com

[email-masked]
[email-masked]

==========
X-RAMR-ID: 30296
X-Language: en
X-RT-ReviewID: 268208
X-RT-TitleID: 1109764
X-RT-SourceID: 386
X-RT-AuthorID: 1487