Somewhat dull

Rating: Null/10 (8 January 2002)

It's HARD for a film to live up to its studios own hype, so lets give this film a couple of extra points.
And it needs every point it can get. The scripting is lackluster and VERY episodic, the camerawork is rather pedestrian, the special effects are pretty humdrum and the music is dull and ponderous.
The scripting is a rather dull, plodding affair, really. The film IS very faithful to the book, but it's also full of unnecessary detail and one tends to wonder how long the film is going to go on for. Do we really need a scene where the layout of the Hogwarts dormitories is explained? Do we really NEED to be introduced to the School ghosts when they play no part in the subsequent story? What's the point of wasting time on Norbert the dragon when he doesn't really play any part in the story? When halfway through the film they begin talking about the philosopher's stone, I found myself thinking "THAT'S right... THAT's what this film is about" but by then I'd lost interest in the whole mess. Worst of all, the film lacks the atmosphere of the book. The book has a real sense of menace throughout and every piece fits in well. This film drags on for the first three quarters and then, finding itself in more familiar Hollywood territory rushes through the last bits.
The camerawork is pretty pedestrian, the film feels SMALL and there is little attempt at introducing a real sense of grandeur in the visuals. The special effects were a bit disappointing, but then again it's HARD to know what a game of Quidditch would really look like. I didn't like the centaurs or the troll at all, they look plastickey and somewhat stilted. Finally, the music belongs in some 1940s Errol Flynn movie. Still, it's nice to see a film with an ACTUAL SCORE rather than a bunch of pop songs thrown together.
Having said ALL that, this film is WAY above the usual kiddie film: it's better than most Walt Disney product, for example, and it's interesting to note that one CAN actually discuss this film in "grownup terms". Actually, this film comes out a lot better and with a lot more depth than (say) your usual James Bond film. The story line is more intricate and the characters are richer.
Overall, the acting is not bad, although of course it'd be surprising if such an illustrious cast of British actors couldn't play these roles while standing on their heads.
Anyway, 'nuff said.