Mixed Feelings... (Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (DVD))

Member Name: Cwej1

Product:	Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (DVD)
Date:	23/11/01 (29 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: The story is still amazing, Good effects, Discovering Emma Watson

Disadvantages: Just doesn't live up to the promise, A little overlong, Difficult for non-book readers to understand

The highest-grossing first weekend sales of all time go to a film which has mediocrity stamped all over. Unlike Jurassic Park which was a masterpiece of special effects and tension from the beginning to the end (and also an adapatation of a very successful novel), Chris Columbus has created a film that has its moments of greatness, but also moments where the whole premise of Rowling's incredible first Harry Potter novel just falls through in its adaptation to the screen.

That is not to say Columbus has moved away from Rowling's novel to any extent. To the contrary, he has stayed as faithful to the book as any novel I have ever read. Once again this begs the comparison to Jurassic Park. While Michael Crichton's novel was adapted quite heavily to fit the screen, Rowling's book stayed almost exactly the same, right down to many of the jokes. Normally this would not be a criticism. However, some frightfully unnecessary moments were kept in the film that made it over-long and possibly too complex for a film. The number of strands to the storyline (The troll, the dragon, Nicolas Frenel, the good teachers, the bad teachers, the Mirror, the Philosopher's Stone) seemed so much to take in for somebody not familiar with the books, particularly a child.

Having said that, some of the horror moments have been heavily tamed for a child's audience. Once again going back to the Jurassic Park comparison. That film was a genuinely scary movie at many moments and was rated a PG, the same rating as Harry Potter has. Harry Potter and The Philosopher's Stone has one scary moment (the scene with 'he who shall not be named' in the woods) - the revelation of who the bad guy is at the end is done with such a lack of tension and suspense that I was quite disgusted and the climax to the story in particular was very weak. Why tame down the Troll and Fluffy so much? Children are desperate to be scared!!

The problem with the film is no
t just the adaptation and direction though. Some of the acting is laughable, not only from the children but also from the adults (sorry to go against the general consensus with this!). Maggie Smith (Professor McGonagell), despite being one of my favourite actresses of all time, possesses a laughable accent for the movie, Fiona Shaw and Richard Griffiths are about as nasty as candy floss in the opening half an hour of the film as Harry's wicked aunt and uncle and Richard Harris as Dumbledore cannot be forgiven for his terrible delivery of the classic line: 'Alas, earwax' (that could have been SO funny!)

Worse still are the child actors. We have seen some brilliant child actors over the last 2 or 3 years, particularly the obvious two, Haley Joel Osment and Jamie Bell... so how did this cast of children make it through the auditions?!?!? Daniel Radcliffe is weak to say the least. The audience cannot feel the sympathy that a tragic character such as Harry Potter deserves.. (the scene in the mirror should be tear-jerking but his gormless expression, just like it is in every scene, just stops you feeling upset and makes you want to throw something at the screeen). Rupert Grint and Tom Felton are marginally better as Harry's best friend, Ron, and worst enemy, Draco, respectively. At least you can tell the difference between their happy and sad faces, unlike Harry. The only notably GOOD performance from a child in the film is Emma Watson's attempts to make Hermione both likable and irritating at the same time. She pulls this off very well and manages to make Hermione a character that develops throughout the film. Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid is very good - it was a shame we didn't see more of Julie Walters in the film, an actress who can bring any character to life: Hopefully she'll return as Mrs Weasley in a slightly bigger role in 'Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets'.

So what is right with the film? Well, the special
effects are done well as is the set design. Hogwarts is made to look quite spectacular and though not particularly scary, the Troll and Fluffy are quite convincingly made. The flight sequences on broomsticks are particularly notable in the special effects department, particularly the game of Qudditch.

It is nice to see that Columbus and his casting team decided to make the cast British as well. For once a film that comes across as primarily British does well worldwide.

And the story itself cannot be faulted. It is a well-written thriller in which the story is revealed at just the right pace - and the audience is still left guessing a little bit at the end (though not nearly as much as in the books). I can't help but give the film 3 stars for this alone. But it could have been so much better... I wait to see 'Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets' with reservation - perhaps the acting will be better with each year as the children get older? If not, they will not be able to pull off the much more mature fourth chapter in the series, where Rowling's books really start to get dark. The embarrassment if the child actors do not improve by then will be too much to sit through...

Summary: