2 of 5

Critics at Movieguide lavish praise on the technical aspects of the film. "The production values … are excellent and state-of-the-art. The movie almost perfectly depicts the fantasy elements from the book." But they add, "There are several digressions in the middle of the story, which take away from the plot involving Harry, the villain Voldemort, and the sorcerer's stone. The story finally gets back on track toward the end, but by then, it's almost worn out its welcome."

It is indeed quite a long haul. (My review is at Looking Closer.) Near the end, Professor Dumbledore opens a ceremony saying, "It's hard to believe that a year has passed!" and I heard a few chuckles in the audience. The matinee began at 1:40 p.m. I checked my watch, only to realize that the Stone named in the title was not even mentioned until 3:30 p.m.! Perhaps the movie should be renamed The Many Expressions of Harry Potter. The film introduces us to a vast cast of characters and important magical objects, and for each one the camera zooms in on Harry's reaction—puzzlement, happiness, semi-wicked glee, astonishment. Harry is so busy reacting that we don't get to know him. That's too bad.

In the books, Harry taps into our longings for identity and family. In the hands of a director with greater vision, Big-Screen Harry could have done the same thing. But the movie's in too big a hurry. Harry is reduced to a wide-eyed cipher, looking about at characters far more interesting, witty, and surprising than him.

And what a colorful crew they are. Most enchanting of all is Hermione, the brainy girl who befriends him. Her cocksure attitude makes her a big-screen cousin to Princess Leia. She's played by Emma Watson, one of many young talents making an impressive debut here. Veteran actors John Hurt (Alien) and Alan Rickman (Die Hard, Galaxy Quest) almost steal the movie with brief but vivid scenes and over-the-top delivery. And it is uncanny how perfectly the character of Hagrid fits Robbie Coltrane—he's burly, brusque, and prone to blunders, and he brings the film much-needed energy and personality.

But these fine performances are nearly buried by Columbus's predictable direction and an overbearing, relentless soundtrack. Columbus's style is not distinct; he's content to resemble Spielberg, slow-zooming toward every gaping youngster. (It's then that you remember, ah yes, he directed Home Alone.)

Potter brings out the worst in composer John Williams. His overdramatic, redundant themes are catchy, but they're just variations on his earlier work: Schindler's List (the main theme is only a few notes different), Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and, above all, Hook. At times the music drowns out action and even dialogue.

Still, there are enough good laughs and enthralling environments to make this film worthwhile. Steve Kloves' script highlights the wit of each character. Gorgeous sets are decorated with delightful details even in shadowy corners. People in the portraits on Hogwarts' walls move, just as they do in the book, and some are hauntingly beautiful. The children have good chemistry. I look forward to seeing them grow up in the sequels … which, by the way, are already being produced.

next page... |  2 of 5

share this page

November (Web-only) 2001, Vol. 45