A Mindless Interpretation of Outstanding Literature

Rating: Null/10 (23 December 2001)

I'll admit it; I'm a teenager and have read every one of the "Harry Potter" books several times over. I love J.K. Rowling's subtle, sarcastic wit and clever story-telling, which was completely missing from this movie.

"Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" is a beautifully made movie that fails to involve the viewer. It skims over the best parts of the books, which are, sadly, the smallest and most minute details that apparently didn't seem important enough to garner screen time. Case in point: the Weasley twins. Fred and George provide the most entertaining comic relief in the books, and were barely mentioned in the movie, let alone shown. Except for the Quidditch scene, of course. The tiny nuances of Rowling's writing can't be shown on the big screen, and so the film cannot compare to reading the series.
Another qualm I had with it was the fact that Cris Columbus focused mainly on making "Sorcerer's Stone" a child-oriented action flick. If they had spent more time working with the actors, who were, by the way, very good with the small parts allotted them, I might have been more moved.
Don't get me wrong. Some parts were excellent, such as Diagon Alley. The casting was well done; the children work well with each other and the adults all fit their characters' descriptions to the nines. But I thought it was predictable (obviously) and plodding, completely lacking any inspiration. I'm hoping, for the audience's sake, that the makers of "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" find the magic that makes the books the marvels they are.