More in-depth film festival coverage than any other website!
Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 
Advertisement

Overall Rating
3.57

Awesome32.45%
Worth A Look: 27.55%
Average: 17.36%
Pretty Bad: 10.19%
Total Crap: 12.45%

9 reviews, 211 user ratings


Latest Reviews

Golden Era, The by Jay Seaver

Maze Runner, The by Daniel Kelly

Art and Craft by Jay Seaver

One Chance by Jay Seaver

St. Vincent by Peter Sobczynski

Wyrmwood by Jay Seaver

Judge, The by Peter Sobczynski

Over Your Dead Body by Jay Seaver

Breakup Buddies by Jay Seaver

Dracula Untold by Daniel Kelly

subscribe to this feed


Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
[AllPosters.com] Buy posters from this movie
by Erik Childress

"Magic Lost In The Transition"
3 stars

Ah, to be a kid again. Grade school, say, prior to the age of 13 and somewhere between the years of 1975-1989. That was a time to be a kid, if for no other reason than for the movies we got to see. Whimsical, exciting and funny tales of fantasy and adventure dominated our tastes and sparked our imaginations as much as anything we could possibly read in a book.

Aside from the trilogies of Indiana Jones and Star Wars, a favorite film list of any kid from that period would likely include more than one of the following titles (The Goonies, Dragonslayer, Cloak and Dagger, Willow, The Princess Bride, Superman (1 & 2), Gremlins, E.T., The Dark Crystal, Labyrinth, The NeverEnding Story, Innerspace, Young Sherlock Holmes, Explorers, The Last Starfighter, Time Bandits, Flash Gordon, Masters of the Universe).

Even after riding through the cynicism experience that is high school and my thorough awareness of everything that goes into making a film, my tastes have not changed so much that I can’t enjoy modern attempts to capture that same magic I had at the movies as a child. Recognizing flaws in any movie one loved in their early years is common for any adult. Some of those titles may forever be labeled “guilty pleasures”, but we are still able to discern which films accomplish that magic and excitement and those, like Harry Potter, that do not.

In case you’ve set up residence at a cave in the Forbidden Forest the past several years, the Harry Potter novels are their own pop culture time zone. Kids crave these books, reading them up and even camping out to await the next one the way many people used to (and still do) with Star Wars. Big kids though have also taken a liking to the story of the young orphaned boy, set up to live with his aunt and uncle who refuse to tell him about his real heritage. At least not until a mysterious man comes along to put him on the path to his destiny and tell him tales of wizards, magic and evildoers going over to the “dark side”. Sound familiar, campers?

Not to nitpick the pattern of virtually every “hero’s tale” since the days of the early Disney films, Conan comics (and even prior), but its easy to see the appeal of Harry Potter. After reading only a single chapter of the book, I was hooked and ready for wherever it would take me. So full of wonder was the first story of The Sorcerer’s Stone, that I stopped reading just as Harry and his band of “first years” were taking their boat ride to the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry because I wanted to leave something for the movie.

The movie begins as faithful as you can imagine with baby Harry and his infamous lightning-shaped scar being delivered to Aunt and Uncle Dursley by Headmaster Albus Dumbledore (Richard Harris), Professor McGonagall (Maggie Smith) and the Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane), the giant with the flying motorcycle and pink umbrella. In an almost immediately disappointing turn of events, Harry’s dreadful experiences with the Dursleys is too hurried to develop the kind of rooting sympathy necessary for us to see him escape into the enchanting new world that awaits him.

But what a world it is, filled with goblins, magic wands and secret underground areas of London, also known as Diagon Alley or Platform 9 ¾. If you were able to probe someone’s imagination while they were reading the book, visually this is an exact match. With school supplies in hand, Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) hops aboard the Hogwarts Express and meets fellow soon-to-be classmates Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson). These two characters are so funny and charming, that it calls to attention how dry Harry himself has been set up in the flesh as opposed to in print. We root for Harry Potter only because his name is Harry Potter.

Consequently that same identification those readers will have (and applaud for) in the movie is a symptom that also seems to plague the filmmakers. Clocking in originally with a cut over four hours (scaled back to two and a half), everyone seemed so intent on squeezing every moment of the book into the film to please its fans that it didn’t work on much of anything else. As if all the magic and excitement was inherent in the book and would instantly translate to the screen. Such is not the case.

There are many elaborate set pieces designed to test and further the adventures of the children. The centerpiece of which is the highly anticipated realization of the Quidditch match, a kind of Lacrosse on flying broomsticks. An exciting concept to be sure and there are a couple shots which evoke that sense of wonder we’ve been hoping for, but many of the aerial special effects are thoroughly unimpressive, taking us out of the moment and into our own realization that human flying FX haven’t come along that far since Superman.

A battle with an ultra-ugly troll proves worthy of a few clenches, but director Chris Columbus (Home Alone, Mrs. Doubtfire) completely flushes his big climax faster than you can say Devil’s Snare. Not only does Columbus and screenwriter Steven Kloves (Wonder Boys) eliminate Hermione’s “drink me” bottle challenge (which could have continued to up the tension), but the amazing Chess sequence (with Harry, Hermione and Ron forced to act as pieces on a living board) has been cut into nothing more than a montage of fallen pieces. The build-up is tremendous and the payoff would have completely worked if we were allowed to participate in the experience with the characters. But we’re not since it’s treated like a subliminal action scene and not the exhilarating showstopper it should have been, putting a final straw on the back of the film that is full of setups and payoffs, but nothing in-between to payoff the setups.

For a story that isn’t heavily reliant on a plot structure, it’s easy to see how many of its weaknesses present themselves when the nefarious plotting surrounding the Sorcerer’s Stone take center stage. We are denied developing the rivalries between the four houses (Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw and Slytherin) or more scenes of the school’s actual curriculum where the kids start learning their newfound craft. With a series of seven books planned by author J.K. Rowling and a second film already set to be released 364 days to the date of this one’s release, it’s reasonable to foresee this as our first step into a larger world. I just hope the payoff is better.

The Sorcerer’s Stone, is by no means, a complete failure at Hogwarts. At over 150 minutes, the film never drags thanks to some wonderful visuals and charming performances. The children are terrific, especially Rupert Grint and Emma Watson, who with her snappy delivery, could become the next Natalie Portman if she plays her cards right. Radcliffe has the perfect look for Harry and does a nice job with the role despite the screenplay’s shortcomings. Of the adults, Robbie Coltrane continues to bring a smile to my face just by knowing his name is in the credits and he gets the richest material as Hagrid. Richard Harris and Maggie Smith bring a nice royal-like credibility to their respective roles, but Alan Rickman (in a somewhat thankless role as Professor Snape) gets some of the best moments by just using his eyes.

There is a lot to enjoy about Harry Potter and just as much to disappoint and I have to take points away from director Columbus for it. As if in a perpetual state of Petrificus Totalus, Columbus contributes such a pedestrian direction just as though he was looking for his own place in the House of Hufflepuff “where they are just and loyal.” Columbus had a hand in writing three of the titles in that aforementioned list (Gremlins, The Goonies, Young Sherlock Holmes) and its surprising that he couldn’t recognize where the elemental excitement laid within this story, whether it be the action or just throwaway moments of visual effects. For someone who managed to force emotion into nearly all of his other directorial efforts (Stepmom, Bicentennial Man), was he not able to grasp how important the foster care scenes of the Dursleys were and how important Harry’s orphaned underdog status would later payoff in the Mirror of Erised scene? If they were as choosy spent picking out the director as they are with Harry’s magic wand, conceivably the right spell could have been cast.

No matter what anyone says about this Harry Potter adaptation, kids are liable to eat it up, especially those who read the book. If I was still a kid (in age) or this film was released around the time of my childhood, I still believe I would have had the same reaction. Maybe I would have liked it just enough to give it three stars, but it certainly wouldn’t rank among my favorites. Even now, only the familiar strains of John Williams’ terrific score regressed me back enough to those first glimpses of cinematic discovery. Those comparing Harry Potter in the same league with The Wizard of Oz and Willy Wonka are out of their gobstopping minds. Maybe they just don’t make movies like they used to. At least when I was a kid.

link directly to this review at http://www.efilmcritic.com/review.php?movie=3892&reviewer=198
originally posted: 11/16/01 09:33:20
[printer] printer-friendly format  
Trilogy Starters: For more in the Trilogy Starters series, click here.

User Comments

6/10/12 Gob Hollow, shallow, boring, tedious, 3rd-rate 1 stars
3/12/10 cr a good movie and great characters, wonderful effects and story. 4 stars
1/28/10 Dane Youssef One of the better family films to come out that year. Something good for the kiddies. 3 stars
1/13/10 Quirinius Snobb Fairly faithful adaptation, which works. 4 stars
7/26/09 David Good adaption 4 stars
7/14/09 cody interesting movie with a good story and good effects, but slowed, the last 20 mins saved it 2 stars
1/27/09 Shaun Wallner Awesome Film. 5 stars
6/09/08 Akarsh Budhraja Fantastic movie 5 stars
5/18/08 PAUL SHORTT A BLAND MISH-MASH OF FAIRYTALE, MYTH AND FANTASY 1 stars
4/04/08 bloody mustache such a hollow, hollow film 1 stars
3/30/08 Pamela White can't count the errs with the book but cute story 4 stars
1/30/08 Laladina REALLY GOOD!!!!!q 5 stars
11/20/07 marcela samora it was fucking retarted... 1 stars
8/18/07 CHRISTOPHER BANU Loved this movie to bits, cant wait for the next installments of the series 5 stars
7/27/07 Bitchflaps Entertaining, although too much like a job well done rather than a real film, 3 stars
7/11/07 Hello Stranger prisoner of azkaban movie has to be the best. out of the franchise. this one sucked majorly 1 stars
5/05/07 aL wA7sH The book was so much better... the movie sucked 2 stars
4/18/07 Stevo UK If you are a retard, I strongly suggest this movie. If not, stay away. 1 stars
3/21/07 dude good movie 4 stars
2/14/07 Kalman its my favourite movie ever 5 stars
11/19/06 Ionicera Well, Oliver Wood was cute, anyway 3 stars
10/17/06 Mini HP is now my life XD 5 stars
9/02/06 Stanley Thai A great family film. 5 stars
8/09/06 Dragon The Artist The Harry Potter phenomena is an overrated, semi-kid friendly,popcorn flick. 3 stars
8/05/06 David Cohen Captures the spirit of the book as well as any movie could 5 stars
6/11/06 Dave Webber Great sense of dry humour - like a classic British novel 4 stars
4/22/06 Jack This movie is just magic 5 stars
1/26/06 Sean Hartlieb This film has good magic, just really dull setting. 3 stars
12/28/05 tony Amazing! One of the greatest fantasy movies in the world! 5 stars
12/01/05 a a 1 stars
11/27/05 mew Liked the others but the 1st film was so empty, hollow and souless I almost died of boredom 1 stars
11/27/05 Daveman Decent film, but the least impressive in the series so far, plot sags in the first half. 3 stars
11/24/05 chris very good 5 stars
11/23/05 Quigley I have nothing against colombus or the CG, but harry sounded - shall we say - not human 3 stars
11/16/05 Adrian Looking past the child acting, this is without a doubt a gem. 5 stars
10/27/05 dobo fuks potter shite 0/5 1 stars
10/19/05 Valerie really cool! just awesome! 5 stars
9/16/05 Jonathon Holmes as juvenile as "The Phantom Menace", but neater eye candy & some good supporting work 3 stars
8/12/05 Littlepurch Think the film's gd. For ES, Americans don't know what a Philiosopher is, so title changed. 4 stars
8/11/05 ES philosopher's stone the original title, the US got sorcerer's stone, I wonder why? 4 stars
7/29/05 Allison it was good 5 stars
6/18/05 ravindra gaur students 4 stars
5/27/05 tony great plot but toooooo long. but still very good 5 stars
4/22/05 Pippin007 This movie is GAY!! Who would give it 5? 1 stars
4/13/05 scott einig harry must have been castrated, along with Ron, who is a freakishly nerdy weiner 3 stars
3/25/05 Valerie Awesome! 5 stars
3/18/05 Nic T there is no magic at all, no impressive acting, and horrible special effects! good luck HP! 2 stars
2/16/05 thomas hopkins it was realy good 5 stars
1/31/05 Bonnie James Excellent 5 stars
12/19/04 roy TOTAL SHIT 1 stars
10/26/04 lotrEEproper owns lol harry potter lmao u little 12 y olds,u suck,lotr rules over this shi& 1 stars
8/06/04 Anthony G that girl in the movie is fucking hott as fuck even though she is 12 3 stars
7/03/04 American Slasher Goddess Too cutesy for it's own good, but passable. 3 stars
6/13/04 Daveman Not as suspenseful or as technically accomplished as the other two but still very good. 4 stars
6/03/04 Angel Quite good adaptation. 4 stars
6/02/04 T-2 Hellava lot better fantasy movie than Lord Of The Rings... 4 stars
5/13/04 Danielo Asdino Oh,no!The movie is bad!Not that good like book! 2 stars
5/11/04 Tim The movie was prettty good, and i would have to agree that Emma Watson, is quite a hottie! 5 stars
5/07/04 Michael EMMA WATSON IS SO DAMN HOT!!!!!!!!! 5 stars
4/25/04 Carla condensation sucks, i would rather watch 5 hours of the whole thing 3 stars
2/27/04 ian good 5 stars
2/02/04 Rocko horse shit 1 stars
11/19/03 Johnny's Been Rotten Awesome movie. It made Diagon Alley and Hogwarts totally come alive! Rickmas as Snape :-) 5 stars
11/03/03 American Slasher Goddess Fluffy, a little overlong for a kid's movie, but not bad. 3 stars
10/19/03 Littlepurch Too much cut from book. Good acting tho and a gr8 cast, but Harry really annoyed me!!! 4 stars
10/18/03 Mariel Cappetta IT WAS TOTALLY RETARTED!!!!!!!!!!!1 1 stars
8/21/03 I Love Daniel Radcliffe The movie was awsome and so was the charictor selection 5 stars
8/14/03 Panda could hav stuck more to plot---otherwise...great!!!!!! 5 stars
7/31/03 Patrick Conner Kelley A superb work of art, however, it did not quite meet all fans' expectations 5 stars
7/31/03 patrick Awesome, totally cool! 5 stars
7/22/03 Monster W. Kung Mediocre and instantly forgettable. Overhyped like hell. 2 stars
7/18/03 blabity blah blah blah Followed the book as truthfully as it could. Awesome sets. Good story. 5 stars
7/07/03 Emperor's New Clothes? Nope. Just a Fat, Ugly, Naked, Guy. Doesn't do justice to the books. Why J.K, you sellout, procrastinating, greedy ho? Why? 2 stars
6/24/03 Harry's magic 'wand' You know where i'd like to shove his broom stick........ 1 stars
6/04/03 HP lover The movie totally rocked!!!!!!!! Daniel Radcliffe , Rupert grint and Tom Felton are great! 5 stars
5/24/03 Bloody Vixen The movie is a vile interpertation of the book, enough said. More eye candy than substance. 2 stars
5/22/03 I HATE EMMA WARTSON sHE sucks!! she ruined the movie with her overacting 1 stars
5/19/03 ALLY IT ROCKS 5 stars
5/18/03 TLsmooth Good adaptation of a fantastic book. 4 stars
4/28/03 ScRoOgED Nothing special. Don't believe the hype, it's a sequel. 2 stars
4/26/03 Shadaan Felfeli i enjoyed this one better than the sequel. Again too many characters and jibberish places ! 4 stars
4/23/03 Heather Purplethorne Kinda lame compared to sequel about the chamber pot of secrets. 3 stars
4/17/03 Jon "Thumb the Toad" Lyrik A Classic, and Just Short of Better. 5 stars
4/05/03 Bloody Vixen The only worth while thing about the movie is the Draco. 2 stars
4/02/03 Mr. Do OK, we have here the most f*cking overblown hype in human history. Stick this film up your 1 stars
3/29/03 Liz I LOVE the HP series, but I hate the movies. Emma Watson should die. 2 stars
3/27/03 Ionicera glossy but lifeless adaptation 2 stars
3/27/03 Taylor A decent fantasy film for all ages. I really can't say much beyond that 3 stars
3/17/03 G-man a very bad influence on kids 1 stars
2/10/03 FcPoliFan Too bad... 3 stars
2/06/03 MovieFan It was a great movie. Quit trying to compare it to LOTH. They are far too different. 5 stars
1/31/03 ? HARRY POTTER SUCKS ASS 1 stars
1/24/03 Andy Bronson anyone who has anything good to say about this movie should fuck off and watch a good film 1 stars
12/28/02 Harrys Turds Anybody who enjoys this movie is braindead. GET A LIFE MORONS! 1 stars
12/28/02 Rayna Kuzio I didn't think I would like the movie until I sat down and watched it! Awesome! 5 stars
11/16/02 Big Ted Columbus is a hack. Kloves saves the film. Watson is the best actor of the 3. 3 stars
11/15/02 Jenny Tullwartz Where do the girls poo after their crapper is destroyed? 4 stars
11/14/02 Rabid Lord of The Rings Fan The book was great, but the magic was left out from the movie. 1 stars
10/21/02 sarah good book, bad movie; lord of the rings is the best translation, hydrian! 1 stars
10/15/02 Joana It's a good a movie but the book is tons better! 5 stars
10/09/02 Chance never read the book until I saw the movie. loved the movie. 5 stars
10/07/02 Sheridan Flat and lifeless and above all brainless. For dumbed-down fools or under-10's 1 stars
10/06/02 TheOthersFan Tries too hard to preserve the insignificant details, and leaves major plot holes. 3 stars
9/29/02 Peter Sherlock Pity about Harry's inability to act 2 stars
9/27/02 John McNew Didn't care about the sensless story or the dull lead character 3 stars
9/11/02 Zefram Mann Great movie. Excellent Williams score and tons of charm. 5 stars
9/04/02 Hydrian One of the best book to movie translations ever. 5 stars
9/03/02 AshFan The kids in it, who have barely any experience, are wonderful. For all ages!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 5 stars
8/30/02 Jesse Probably not appreciated much by burned out morons but great for everyone else 5 stars
8/06/02 sarahfar88 give #4 to Jackson, i hope that Spanish guy can make #3 good like the book, i wont see #2 1 stars
7/27/02 barely legal Are you intelligent? Then watch LOTR instead 1 stars
7/21/02 sdjfsdkjf should have had more snape and where the fuck was peeves? Still good though. 5 stars
7/08/02 henry ginsberg i LOVE harry 5 stars
6/23/02 7of9 Warning to over 15's: prepared to be bored. Kids? Enjoy... 2 stars
6/13/02 swetething3000 great - mvie #4 is gonna be rated R and by #5 snape will be inluv and well hav sex scenes 5 stars
6/12/02 sarahfar88 Give the rights to Jackson. He can make the other, more violent books into great movies. 2 stars
6/11/02 hum i would have loved this as a kid but i dont see the apeal for adults 3 stars
6/07/02 Joe Levy Brilliant 5 stars
6/05/02 I'm in (L) with a Jedi get the $10 u spent on the ticket and buy the book ull get more enjoyment! 2 stars
6/03/02 Keith probably okay for people under age 13, but otherwise, YAWN. 3 stars
6/02/02 QT Pie Awsome 5 stars
6/02/02 Chris I loved everything about this film. One of the greatest movies ever made. 5 stars
6/02/02 Justin Great! 5 stars
5/31/02 Matt Is it just me or does Snape look like Trent Reznor? 4 stars
5/25/02 Danielle Ophelia Hopefully I missed the bandwagon. Silly fucks. 4 stars
5/16/02 Candace Troy Powers I hoped it'd deal with issue of where girls would poop after their bathroom was trashed! 3 stars
5/16/02 Tiffany Faye Hawthorne Ponderously slow getting started, but second half is good. 4 stars
4/21/02 Film Guy Surprisingly well done movie. Anyone who makes fun of me for liking this I'll kick your ass 5 stars
4/19/02 CHONG PUI SIM Very best 5 stars
4/03/02 Cecilia A generally good movie; I really liked it, but Daniel Radcliffe badly needs acting classes. 4 stars
3/28/02 Lindsay Cormier Totally awesome too bad for u fuckers who have no taste 5 stars
3/22/02 hongkongkian totalli disappointing...left me wondering why the heck the books were so popular 1 stars
3/16/02 kalman and chris banu it was grate 5 stars
3/06/02 Turtle Great movie, but they hacked too much off of the beginning. 5 stars
2/28/02 Chowie im pretty pissed i read the books first-t'was pretty boring 4 me........................... 2 stars
2/28/02 boggle the biggest pile of shite ive seen in a long while! 1 stars
2/26/02 Hewrd Frost Awesome! What did'ya expect? It's the biggest movie of 2001! 5 stars
2/17/02 Ashley Thompson definitly a reasonable adaptation 5 stars
2/17/02 Devil Boy B This "film" had no Magic. Danny DeVito should have direct 2 stars
2/08/02 sarahfar88 Get a new cast and Peter Jackson. Only he should be aloud to make movies from books. 4 stars
2/07/02 nizam aziz excellent magician movie! 5 stars
1/23/02 Some Guy This was horrible. The kid can not act. Give me a good actor and I may watch it again..... 1 stars
1/15/02 liz what the hell were you thinking? it was complete and utter CRAP! the acting sux! 1 stars
1/12/02 Audra I loved it!! No wonder it broke five records when it came out. Fantastic movie! 5 stars
1/06/02 gregory mcmillan i think that the movie was the best movie i ever saw. 5 stars
1/02/02 Joe Zappa Better than I originally thought it was gonna be. 4 stars
1/02/02 Britney Spears Dumbledore was SO hot!! 5 stars
1/01/02 Ryan this is bull! id rather watch barney!!!! i hate daniel readcliffe! he is such an idiot.. 1 stars
1/01/02 Henry Ginsberg what is all the fuss about? the storyline was teedeous, and the acting was generaly poor. 3 stars
12/31/01 RoboGuy I loved it and found it very true to the book. The second viewing was even better. 5 stars
12/27/01 Flick Chick not quite a classic, but entertaining for both young and old alike. 4 stars
12/21/01 Tinka Disapppointing by-the-number adaptation that even manages to lose some of the magic. Pardon 3 stars
12/20/01 Goldhammer Technically well-done adaptation that neatly captures the book's pointless amoral vaccuum. 3 stars
12/16/01 spaceworm Somewhere between 1964 Mary Poppins and 1967 Doctor Dolittle. 4 stars
12/15/01 Jack Hunter an 80 year old, I've read the first 2, andloved the movie. 5 stars
12/14/01 white tiger Nice, if you haven't read the book. 4 stars
12/11/01 viking could have been worse 4 stars
12/11/01 puckfreak Just OK 4 stars
12/08/01 Waylon Roundtree I was blown away, and ended up liking this movie a hell of a lot more than I expected! 5 stars
12/08/01 Axe Murderer hype=bad 3 stars
12/08/01 Faraz Jalal Not to exciting a thing, compared to the book. Disappointed 2 stars
12/06/01 Jake A classic! Great performances all around. 5 stars
12/05/01 Jimbo Kids only movie 4 stars
12/05/01 Bid-wad excellent, and the films not bad either 5 stars
12/04/01 Andrew Carden Radcliffe Gives A Weak Performance, but Grant is Great. 3 stars
12/04/01 Saw_it_yesterday Friggin Awesome 5 stars
12/03/01 Jimmy James rather cheesy, but very watchable (at least, the first time through) 4 stars
12/03/01 Matan Dahan WOW 5 stars
12/02/01 travis r. sorensen effects below star wars standards, too long yet rushed, and quidditch kinda sucked. 3 stars
12/02/01 jawsboy24 Fun, but it had a shitty beginning and only average effects. Some bad editing also. 3 stars
12/02/01 Matthew Bartley Never read the book but loved this. 5 stars
12/01/01 discerning viewer fun but mediocre, dullish 3 stars
11/30/01 Mr. Hat (formerly Joe Zappa) I originally didn't want to see this, but when I did,I didn't think it was very bad at all. 4 stars
11/29/01 Amy Overblown and few laughs. 3 stars
11/29/01 Quess Paraya The book made visual - just like I wanted it. 5 stars
11/29/01 Mortis I was very surprized at how good this film is. I highly recommend it. 4 stars
11/28/01 E.P. a much-needed dose of innocence 5 stars
11/28/01 Xalt Coooooool. I'm glad they kept it close to the book. 4 stars
11/28/01 bradgray96 Great acting. Still a children's movie, but most of the great ones are. 4 stars
11/27/01 Nyartholep Decent enough, a little better than I expected. 4 stars
11/27/01 Brian Excellent Movie for all ages. 5 stars
11/27/01 The Flaming Chancehead A great film experience for all ages! Fun, magical, and a pleasure all around! 5 stars
11/27/01 bobber Just not worth full price. 3 stars
11/25/01 GP Good movie!! Needs a little more UMPH, and excitement, not just suspense on what is coming. 4 stars
11/25/01 hilary aesome 5 stars
11/24/01 miyax left a funny commercial-cheese taste behind... 4 stars
11/24/01 Freyja Has flaws, but who cares, it made me feel like a kid again 5 stars
11/24/01 Mom & Harry Fan Take it for what it iz - a dazzling film 5 stars
11/23/01 Blaise fantastic translation of an excellent book. someone teach hermioine to act 4 stars
11/21/01 Katie Loved the books..expected too much fromt he film..but it was still really good 5 stars
11/21/01 Butterbean Excessive hype by the media annoyed me, but it was a very good movie. 5 stars
11/21/01 tom F. Can an adaptation be TOO faithful to the book? YES, but still very good. 4 stars
11/20/01 jim donal hype and no substance 1 stars
11/20/01 Heather One of this year's best, truly amazing movie 5 stars
11/20/01 Michelle Candocia I wish it were longer,to capture more of the book, but still a fantastic ride 4 stars
11/19/01 Rabbits running The movie is good! I'd have love to see it as a mini series myself but that's just me. 4 stars
11/19/01 Boy In The Designer Bubble Read all 4 books, the movie was good, but the hype nearly kept me away!! 4 stars
11/19/01 Meryl Kopy Loved it ~ not as much as the books, of which I'm a great fan, but I loved it all the same. 5 stars
11/19/01 Martinelli's I never read 'em, but these are wonderful, charming movies. Emma Watson is adorable too. A+ 5 stars
11/19/01 E disappointing 3 stars
11/18/01 grunter Cliff Notes "Potter" or "The Worst Witch:The Motion Picture" - flat, lifeless, inert 2 stars
11/18/01 brent i highly recommend the film (and erik, harry potter kicks willy wonka's ass). 4 stars
11/18/01 Maypo Retlaw It was very good. I think it captured the magic of the story quite well. 5 stars
11/18/01 Unanon They did as best they could, but nothing beats the book! 4 stars
11/17/01 Reverend Krule Form was way over function on this one 2 stars
11/17/01 Morrison Hodges great 5 stars
11/17/01 Max Feingold Really bad. Total mess. No plot or character development. Coltrane is good. 2 stars
11/17/01 Alex Severely disappointing 1 stars
11/17/01 Emily It was great 5 stars
11/16/01 Frankie anged storylines and changed the names of places 3 stars
11/12/01 laura jones its great,really worth a look 5 stars
IF YOU'VE SEEN THIS FILM, RATE IT!
Note: Duplicate, 'planted,' or other obviously improper comments
will be deleted at our discretion. So don't bother posting 'em. Thanks!
Your Name:
Your Comments:
Your Location: (state/province/country)
Your Rating:


Discuss this movie in our forum

USA
  16-Nov-2001 (PG)

UK
  N/A

Australia
  31-Mar-2002 (PG)




Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 
eFilmCritic.com: Australia's Largest Movie Review Database.
Privacy Policy | HBS Inc. | |   

All data and site design copyright 1997-2014, HBS Entertainment, Inc.
Search for
reviews features movie title writer/director/cast