Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone

Data
Title: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
Year: 2001
Length: 152 minutes
Director: Chris Columbus
Writer: Steve Kloves, based on the book by J.K. Rowling
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson
Music: John Williams
Oscars: nominations for Best Score, Best Art Direction/Set Decoration and Best Costume Design
I saw it: in the theater, 2001; on video a couple times, most recently yesterday (rented from Greencine)
Synopsis: an orphan learns that he’s a “wizard,” and goes to a magic boarding school

My reaction
Concept:2/4 (Indifferent)
Story:2/4 (Indifferent)
Characters:2/4 (Indifferent) At this point in the series, everything that’s good is shamelessly plagiarized.
Dialog:1/4 (Bad)
Pacing:1/4 (Bad) Most of the movie is like watching a really long trailer. It doesn’t give you a chance to get bored, though; I’ve got to give it that.
Cinematography:2/4 (Indifferent)
Special effects/design:2/4 (Indifferent) Great design, bad special effects.
Acting:2/4 (Indifferent) So, of course the kids aren’t very good at this point. But what’s weird is that none of the many great actors, with the exception of John Hurt, are much better than the kids.
Music:2/4 (Indifferent)
Subjective Rating: 6/10 (Okay, 2/4 (Indifferent)). For the longest time I’ve remembered this movie as being a horrendous waste of time, but I suppose that was because I initially went in expecting greatness. Yesterday I went in expecting a horrendous waste of time, and was surprised to find a harmless, almost pleasant, children’s movie.
Objective Rating (Average):1.8/4 (Eh)

Advertisements

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: