Harry Potter
and The Sorcerer’s Stone (***)
review by Ken Gumbs
Hey, do you like magic? Hey, do you like English kids? Hey, do you like owls?
Well, I have the movie made just for you.
With the enormous success of the Harry Potter series of books and now the first
edition of a series of films, it is only a matter of time before owls become
the pet of choice and England replaces Disneyland as the ideal child’s
vacation.
Traditionally, I have disliked many of Hollywood’s high concept films,
but I would be lying if I said there was not a bit of charm within
the film’s big budget, and spectacular effects. Harry is a young wizard
who leaves his foster guardians
to attend an elite school for witches and warlocks. At school, Harry learns
more than just magic, he learns about friendship and to how to cope with the
loss of his parents.
For a film that
seems aimed at children, the production values were through the roof. Not only
were effects great, but
costuming and acting were also excellent.
For a little story about a young wizard’s year at school, the 2.5 hr. running
time does seem a little long for a movie aimed at 10 year-olds. I have devised
a great way to test a film’s quality. Every time you look at your watch
to determine
how much longer you have until it ends you deduct one point. Five or more points
deducted constitutes a movie that is way too long. Under this system ‘Harry
Potter’ definitely received it’s share of subtracted points. Harry
seemed to be getting in misadventure after misadventure without really moving
the story forward.
That was my only
real complaint with the film, though. In the end, ‘Harry Potter’ has
an above average story line, made
by some excellent filmmakers. I would recommend watching this film, but don’t
expect the “Wizard of Oz” of this generation, as many have billed
it. I am actually very surprised that so many young children would even be able
to sit
through a 2.5 hr. movie about magic, English kids, and owls. That may be why
I don’t work in Hollywood.
respond to ken@filmbrats.com