A Nice 1st year for Harry

Rating: 8/10 (6 September 2005)

I came to reading the Harry Potter adventures after, for the want of something better to do, picked up the first book and enjoyed it immensely. The book is very readable, whatever age you are, and I rather hoped that the film would live up to expectations.
Surprisingly, it did. Chris Columbus does a really good job of bringing Rowling's boy wizard and his adventures nicely to the cinema. The whole film is a bit rushed but watching it, you get enough of an idea of what Harry's situation is and why he is at Hogwarts and who his chief nemesis is. The other children do an excellent job of support. Emma Watson is perhaps the most like her character of the swotty, bossy bookworm Hermione and Rupert, as Ron Weasley, does a great job both as some comic relief (his comments after witnessing Professor McGonagall's transformation from a cat to female for example) and as friend to Harry. I thought a lot of very unfair criticism had been directed at Daniel Radcliffe for his portrayal of Harry but I am not sure how much more Daniel could have done as much of his part consists (as with so many films incorporating a lot of special effects) with reacting properly to things which would have been put in later. In my view, he has nothing to apologise for. Long may Radcliffe play the part, hopefully to Harry's last book.
The teachers are brilliant. Rowling's insistence on a largely British and Irish cast has paid off and Coltrane's portrayal of Hagrid is just spot on as is the late Richard Harris playing Professor Dumbledore, a kind of surrogate grandfather to Harry. I thought too little was seen of Maggie Smith, though.
All in all, nicely played.