- Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint,
Richard Harris, Alan Rickman, Robbie Coltrane, Richard Griffiths, Tom Felton,
Maggie Smith, Bonnie Wright, Ian Hart, Matthew Lewis, Chris Rankin, Leslie
Phillips
- Director: Chris Columbus
- ScreenWriter: Steven Kloves
- Studio: Warner Bros.
- Genre: Fantasy / Family
Synopsis
We live in a world where economics is hard. This forces practical limitations
when making a movie. Time and money are sadly finite, cinema owners need to
be pleased as well as fans and computer animation ain't perfect. Given these
limitations, this film is about as close to human perfection as it is possible
to achieve. However, it's extremely clear what an immense challenge it is to
turn Philosopher's Stone from book to film.
Two and a half hours is not long to explore a wonderful, magical world. Furthermore,
the directors have bowed to the inevitable temptation to show us things that
cannot be communicated so effectively in a book. The consequence is the feeling
of a slightly breathless sprint in places.
It also means that the movie has to stay true to the spirit of the book rather
than to the letter of it. There are omissions and there are changes. The changes
that were made capture and maintain the spirit of the story really well; indeed,
there are places where the story is more clearly and straightforwardly told
in the movie than in the book. Some aspects of the story are fleshed out on
screen and the additions are delightful, completely in keeping with the flavor
of the world.
The humor of the movie is inevitably more visual than that of the book; no
belly laughs, but a lot of smiles. Some punchlines have changed, but the reasons
why the jokes are funny remain the same. Not knowing exactly what's coming next
is a good thing! It's all kept tasteful, classy and above the belt; there's
nothing to cringe about.
The voice acting is almost uniformly brilliant. However, there are occasions
where some of the actors are required to convey high emotions and are only given
a second or two of face shot, or head-and-shoulders shot, to do so. This isn't
as much freedom as they need and they fall a little short. The blame here must
fall on the decision to give the actors too much to do too quickly, not on the
actors themselves.
Other than these rare jarring instances, the physical acting is frequently
excellent and seldom less than completely adequate, judged against the highest
of targets set by the book's clear emotion descriptions.
Dan Radcliffe has the look, the mannerisms and the charm of Harry down pat.
His strongest expressions are the bemusement that must be inherent at entering
a world where science does not rule alone and the bravery that Harry shows in
his achievements. Emma Watson possibly slightly overplays Hermione, but does
so in a fully endearing fashion. There's one scene which gives her too little
chance to truly express panic; otherwise her performance needs no changes.
Rupert Grint has comic timing way beyond his years, hitting Ron's lines perfectly.
Tom Felton makes a stylish Draco; Matt Lewis' Neville character suffers from
the acceleration, so the finale does come as a slight characterization shock.
The Phelps brothers' Fred and George are distinctively cheeky rather than proactive
pranksters; Chris Rankin imbues Percy with genuine authority. Sean Bigger staff
shines; his Oliver Wood is likeable and an ideal Quidditch team captain.
Robbie Coltrane's Hagrid is the single dominant adult character, with maximum
laughs extracted at every step. The movie changes strongly exaggerate one side
of Hagrid's nature, though; probably inevitable considering how much plot exposition
his character has.
David Bradley has a vicious Argus Filch; John Hurt's Ollivander is an eccentric
treat, giving a wonderful introduction to the Wizarding World. The professors
are uniformly excellent, though Richard Harris' Dumbledore comes off as disappointingly
flat until the end.
The most ambitious point of the movie is the computer generated imagery. The
stills are wonderful, but the fastest animation is restricted by the limitations
of real-world technology. The book makes extremely stringent demands of the
CGI; sometimes their overall effect in the movie is merely good rather than
insanely great. Some of the magic spells and effects look awesome; others don't
capture the imagination nearly so much.
The world cannot yet completely convincingly animate human beings doing inhuman
things, which serves as a clear reminder that you need fictional magic to make
the impossible possible. The Quidditch scene is the most demanding of them all;
while the sequence is action-packed and good-looking, disappointingly, it's
not a total success. Perhaps some of the scenes would have been better with
more conventional special effects? (For instance, the lower-tech-looking Sorting
Hat scene is one of the most delightful of them all.)
The set looks gorgeous. However, it may not stand up to detailed analysis.
It's fairly obvious that things are shot in many disparate locations, rather
than one big Hogwarts School near Hogsmeade.
The score is absolutely wonderful. The soundtrack may rely too heavily on The
Famous Bit, but it's clear that the balance and mixture of things in the finished
movie are exactly right.
The feel of the whole movie is everything fans could have hoped for. The dialogue
is intensely measured, the coloring is suitably epic, the selection of what
to leave in is really tightly considered. You get chills in your spine at the
right places; you feel the triumphs as all-encompassing endorphin highs. It's
clear that the production have thought long, hard and lovingly. They are true
fans of the story, they are the right people for the job, it all bodes very
well for the second film.
So it could never have been the film that the hyper-literalists were hoping
for, then, but it is as good as the practicalities of the real world could possibly
permit. Don't expect miracles and you'll love it. I look forward to watching
it again and again.
