What is the attraction?

Rating: 3/10 (10 June 2002)

After viewing a movie which seemed like 10 hours of thinking "Get on with it", I only need four statements to sum this movie up.
1. Incredibly over-hyped.
2. Acting, isn't it a requirement anymore?
3. Beautiful scenery.
4. Did I hint at booring?
Overall I can appreciate good children's movies, like The Never Ending Story, Lord of the Rings and The Phantom Menace, so I think I'm not biased when it comes to films like this one. I think in a movie, very important is the acting and thus that particular area of this motion picture needs some further mentioning. Aside from Alan Rickman (who is always excellent as a villain) and the rather good acting from the young couple Emma Watson and Rupert Grint, all the rest of the cast was utter hogwash (hey, wasn't that the name of the main setting, the school?). Worst of all the cast (I wouldn't want to draw shame upon the acting community by calling this bunch actors) was the shrunken version of John Lennon, a.k.a. Daniel Radcliffe. This kid wouldn't know acting even if it snuck up and bit him in the rear.
Over all, a huge disappointment and I'd give it a 3 out of 10 (one point for each of the previously, by name, mentioned actors)