Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone|
Academy Award® Nominee
A big-screen interpretation of the first book in the most popular children's fantasy series since The Hobbit. Young Harry Potter realizes that his adventures are about to begin as he is invited to... View more >
some scary moments and mild language
Starring Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint... View more >
Check out the Harry...
View more information about this movie >
Looking for more opinions? Check out our Featured Movie Reviews for Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone.
Make Your Voice Heard!
How would you rate this movie?
Please Note: Reader Reviews are submitted by the readers of The BigScreen Cinema Guide and represent their own personal opinions regarding this movie, and do not represent the views of The BigScreen Cinema Guide, or any of its associated entities.
|by Aaron ||Nov 17, 2001|
Dumb ass movie. I thought that this movie would be good from the scenes. But it was the stupidist movie i have ever seen. I have to agree with the critics that the movie was way too faithful to the book that it didn't have have any sort of dramatic element (of movies.) The Harry Potter movie is a proof that why a movie shouldn't be too faithful to the original book.
If you've read the book you've seen the movie.
|by sunshine ||Nov 18, 2001|
I give this movie 3 stars, here is my summary
Harry Potter is a likeable 11 year old boy living in England.. He lives with his Aunt and Uncle and a Cousin. Harry's room is under a stairwell. He is not treated with kindness or respect by these relatives...
Harry's Mom was a witch who married a Mr. Potter but they both were killed by an Evil Wizard named Voldemort... Harry was suppose to been killed too but was only left with a Z shaped scare on his forhead...On Harry's 11th birthday he is brought to this train station. At the train station Harry has to walk up to the platform called the 9 3/4 platform and walk through this wall to enter this Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry...
Harry meets 3 friends at this School of Wizardry.. They are assigned the same house at this School. They will have to 'compete' with other students for POINTS.
Each student is given a wand. Soon they learn to levitate feathers and ride broomsticks through the air, make potions, etc.
At this School 100 candles hang suspended from a high ceiling and people in pictures come alive and stairwells move.....They are warned not to go to the dark forest or to the 3rd floor of this school....
Harry and his 3 friends soon learn about the Sorcerer's Stone and how it can transform metal and make you immortal.... BUT this Stone is under a trap door on the 3rd floor! There is a 3 headed dog and snakes, etc to get past. (I can't tell you what happened....but I can say this; (this movie has wonderful special effects and great acting and I liked the moral of this story)
|by Puddleglum ||Nov 18, 2001|
Ok, here's the deal. The movie was great. It had wonderful effects, especially the scenes with Quidditch ( wizard sport on broomsticks ).
If you are a die hard fan willing to stand in line at bookstores waiting for the latest release of Harry Potter books you might be slightly disappointed. I think Chris Columbus did the best job he could though given the circumstances. Harry Potter has millions of fans worldwide, there is no way he could construct a movie and have the same rhythms as the book.
I could have sat through four hours of Harry Potter but unfortunately it is a short 2 1/2 hours. The best character in the movie was Rubeus Hagrid. Robby Coltrane did an excellent job of portraying him. The kids did a good job too, Emma made for an excellent Hermione, and Rupert was great as Ron. Daniel also did a good job with Harry.
All in all it was a good movie, and I will see it again, plus whatever sequels they come out with. But, I erised the books more.
|by Jenny ||Nov 18, 2001|
Absolutely spectacular. I want to see it again. If you love the books, you will love the movie. If you haven't read the books, you will want to after seeing this movie. The movie stayed true to the story in every sense of the way. The casting was perfect - the characters in the movie looked exactly like how I would have pictured them from the books.
This is truly a fun movie. It does not matter if you are 4 years old or 94 years old - it is great for all ages!!!
|by sarah* ||Nov 19, 2001|
great movie. don't know what aaron was talking about but the movie was worth the trip!
|by daisyone30 ||Nov 19, 2001|
My son has been waiting for this movie for a long time and it was well worth the wait. I might have enjoyed it even more than he did!
A truly enjoying 2 and a half hours of fantasy and fun. If you enjoyed the book, you will love the movie. I can't wait to see it again.
The film is "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" and despite the hype that surround this film, it did quite well.
I saw the film on the fourth night so that I don't want crews from television station to stick their mikes into my face, asking about the movie. Conservative christians who protested the books, never ever read the book, not even one page.
I never read the books either, I know that a good number of kids are big fans of the books. After seeing the movie, I wish I was reading the books too.
The film featuring the hero Harry Potter who was raised by mean spirted step-pareants, along with a half-brther who didn't like him at all. One day he was appointed to study witchcraft at a castle, and from there the magic lighted up the movie.
I love this movie because the film is loyal to the book and the kids are fun to watch. Lots of special effects and a great music score by John Williams helped the movie along. This movie has plenty of stuff to see.
I recommend that you see a second time because at 2 hours and 22 minutes, this film is huge and full of ideas. "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" is a must see.
|by Jake ||Nov 21, 2001|
This movie was like taking a tour of everything about the first "Harry Potter" book in just under two and a half hours.
Given as how I couldn't get enough of the book, I loved the whole experience from beginning to end. Seeing settings from the book that I'd imagined a hundred times while reading was really incredible. All the actors were perfect, and the movie doesn't take itself seriously at all. All the settings and special effects have a certain amount of fantasy about them, giving you the feeling that you really are in the book.
The movie may get a bit too scary for younger kids, especially in the last twenty minutes or so.
All in all, if you liked the book, you'll love the movie.
|by Vern Black ||Nov 24, 2001|
A very fine movie. A movie that is actually fun with some adventure too. Can't beat that.
It's been a terrible year for movies but this one movie just might help turn the tide the other way. Go see it and have fun!
|by Aaron ||Nov 25, 2001|
waste of money! GO LOTR
The core audience for this movie will be the millions of people who have read and enjoyed the very popular book series, of which "Harry Potter & the Sorcerer's Stone" is the first installment.
That's a good thing, because as a film companion to the book, it works well. As a movie by itself, I believe that it falls short of telling the complete story with a style that is to be expected in 2001.
I read the book before seeing the movie, part out of curiousity of what all the fuss was about, and part to enjoy the movie even more if large portions were removed for the sake of flow and overall length. I have to say, the book was more enjoyable, but that is the case with 99% of the book-then-movie combinations out there.
The movie flows like a greatest hits montage, making sure you get the high points of the story and the cool scenes that allowed the ILM team to have some fun. The visuals were excellent, and matched my mental images of the various characters and scenes perfectly. Few deviations from the book were made, which will surely please die-hard "I've read the book a dozen times" fans.
I found the transitions between scenes jarring at times, where you would be thrown from one part of the story to the next (a few pages ahead, in a book paradigm) without an appropriate segue to lead the way. I fear that anyone who has not read the book will find the movie somewhat disjointed at times, and that may hurt their ability to fully enjoy the film.
The performances of the child actors were pivotal to the success of the film, and the actors who played Harry, Ron, and Hermione were certainly up to the task. They are in virtually every scene of the movie, and they do an excellent job!
Perhaps it was the theater I visited, but the film exhibited a grainy look that is similar to my camcorder in low light conditions. This was distracting at first, and then I just accepted it as part of the look the director must have intended. It will be interesting to view the film in another theater, and when it comes out on DVD to see if the grain is purposeful or a byproduct of poor projection.
It goes without saying that if you enjoyed the Harry Potter books, this movie is a must-see. If you have not, be prepared to come out of the theater wondering if you've missed something, for what you missed is surely on a cutting room floor somewhere, waiting for the 3.5 hour extended version on DVD.
|by Jon Murphy ||Nov 26, 2001|
Very good it's a must see.
|by angelz ||Nov 28, 2001|
This is a wonderful fantasy which matches the book. Young and old alike will be able to follow the movie to a "T". I believe that is one reason the movie is so well received.
It isn't a "confusing" movie, it's straight forward and fits the book and nothing "messed with." My children and I enjoyed this very very much. It isn't an "evil" movie as some obsessed fundamentalist christians are calling it and it will not turn little children into occult worshipping teenagers. That's what peers and parents who don't care are for.
I can't wait for the 5th book and for the next movie!!!
I'm a 37 year old non-fan, and I thoroughly enjoyed this movie.
|by mnm ||Dec 5, 2001|
Again, I am an adult and have never read the Books. I really enjoyed this movie, and I felt I followed it completely. My wife isn't into "Fantasy" movies, but enjoyed it as well. Our 5 yr old son had a good time, but got restless in the last 1/2 hour (of a 2:20 flick). Personally, I wished it had been longer - The movie never had a lag, never seemed stretched out, never got dull. I highly recommend it
5 stars out of a possible 5
|by osija ||Dec 7, 2001|
This is a wonderful movie! We saw it twice and it keeps getting better! I give it 4 stars!
|by John ||Dec 25, 2001|
OK I haven't read any of the Harry Potter books, and after this movie I do not think I will. The story of a wizard in training has many possibilities, but the slow pace the plot takes allows the viewer to lose interest. Aficionados of the books tell me that like the first novel, which was also slow-moving, the film is laying the foundations for the future works. This is a rather presumptious attitude from both author and producer. There is nothing in this film that would attract me to see a sequel.
Additionally one would expect the young wizard to break out of the humdrum life he was being forced to live with a few pranks. But these are hardly comparable to the cruelty he has been forced to live. Life at Hogwart is boring. Even the the "first years" who do try their stuff are very tame.
The special effects, especially in the game the houses play, do not measure up to other films. These special effects look fake.
A very boring movie.
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is a good adaptation of the book. I have read all the books in the series, and the book is much better than the film. the film was a little slow at points, but was pleasing overall and entertaining.
It was interesting to see how they would bring the book to life, and it was a job well done. If you would like to see a good adaptation of this book or have little kids, go see Harry Potter. Otherwise, I would say to go see Lord of the Rings.
|by Christine Roessger ||Dec 29, 2001|
I would have put my ratings as "see now" but I feel this movie is aimed for kids and even though I am adult in my thirties I did enjoy the movie very much.
I feel if you are going to see this movie that you should go see it while it is on the big screen. It might loose some of its affect on video, on a small tv screen.
|by wideejay ||Dec 31, 2001|
The actors of the main characters (Harry, Ron & Herminoe) seemed like they were just reading their lines, not acting them. That's what Chris Columbus gets for using amateurs instead of professional actors.
The movie dragged on and on for me. I think I read the book faster! I guess the hype and promo's made me expect more than I actually got from the movie.
Oh well, it will play well on the small screen.
|by lynn ||Apr 7, 2002|
The movie was made good, but the movie didn't follow the book. The director cut out some of the best chapters. I should know because I have read the book like 3 times! The movie was really poorly made at the end because the director totally screwed it up. He didn't even add the good parts of the end.
I loved this movie.
After reading the books (Before my son finished the first one :D ) I was a little concerned that they would drift too far away from the original storyline and characters. But all due congratulations to Chris Columbus for sticking to the book.
For those who have read the book, this movie will bring it to life. For those who haven't, it will give you a good idea as to why the books are so popular.
Looking forward to the 6? sequals.
Anyone wanting to comment on my comments can reach me via firstname.lastname@example.org
Just fantastic!!! Great film with brilliant actors and actresses that match every part. J.K. Rowling won't be disappointed and neither will anyone who sees this film!
I am a huge fan of the books, and I loved this movie as well. It is perfect for people who like a movie with mystery and suspense, and also like to have a somewhat scary ending but not scary enough to keep you up at night (like me).
The special effects in this movie were very cool, especially in the Quidditch, Great Hall and first-sight-of-Hogwarts scenes.The actors did very well in really conveying the characters' attitudes and views.
The movie stuck to the book's storyline, which can be both a good and bad thing. A movie does need to have some independence and add in a few details, which I think that the people producing the movie did. Sticking to the storyline, though keeps fans of the Harry Potter books happy and gives a new interpretation of the visuals.
Overall, the movie was a great first debut and set the stage for the many wonderful movies based off of the books to come.