It's here and it's entertaining especially if you're under 15. 4 Flys Out Of Five

Rating: Null/10 (2 December 2001)

Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone has remained faithful to the book and there are millions who just love J.K Rowling's books about the little boy who is a wizard.
But we should remain mindful of the little boy who said that `I like books more than movies because the pictures are better.' We are also sensible to be a little trepidatious when we approach film adaptations of our favourite books, particularly if the book is as full as the Harry Potter books are of wonderful, vibrant mind images.
So there are some minor disappointments in the film. Hermione is far too earnest, all of the time, and isn't as little girl scruffy as I imagined her. And where was her cat? The great hall I imagined to be larger and in fact the castle that is Hogwarth's school just seemed too small altogether.
Our sighting of Voldemort supping on the Unicorn wasn't as horrifying as I hoped it would be and the centaur looked a little fake but these are mild criticisms and are also in keeping with the rather bland treatment of the more frightening moments from the book.
And I'm sure that that's exactly what the producers and J.K. Rowling were aiming for because Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone is above all a very nice, intriguing and imaginative children's movie not especially designed for older viewers. Here is a film aimed at lovers of the book who are also children.
Still there was enough to enliven a good deal of interest for older viewers.
The Quidditch game enlivened my mental images from the book as did that wonderful Troll, dumb enough to be both dangerous and funny. Young Ron was a delight as was Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid. Alan Rickman owns the rights to characters you shouldn't trust and Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter mixed just the correct amount of fear, boyish enthusiasm and intelligence into his work.
All of those owls delivering that hail storm of letters was remarkable and the moving stairs were fun, but we'd been let down by seeing them in the shorts.
The film is long, too long for me, but I doubt that a younger lover of the books would agree. But then it could have been much longer if all of the details from the book had been covered. It's just that the books are so richly dense with ideas.
The ghosts had almost no play for example and the guardian portraits were only introduced. I did enjoy the way images moved, were alive, on things like cards and portraits though. That was created more vividly in the film than in the book. Where was that confrontation with dark forces on the train.
But there are at least four more of the these films to be released and no doubt many of these tantalising aspects will be dealt with.
Younger film goers will want to see Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone more than once. Older viewers might find it a tad tiresome but still pretty good fun.
4 Hogwarts Flys Out Of Five