Boring

Rating: Null/10 (11 December 2001)

I saw this film at the weekend and I was deeply disappointed by what I saw. I went to the cinema with an open mind, my girlfirend raving about how could the book is but I still didn't expect that much, and it did not deliver.
The film looks nice and the established actors do their job adequately (Robbie Coltrane, I have to confess, was excellent) but the younger actors just don't convince. I had heard a lot of good things about the ginger haired kid, yet his only lines that brought any laughter from the audience were when he degenerated into saying the phrase 'bloody hell' - that is a cheap laugh I would expect from a second-rate play at the local theatre.

I'm sure reading the book makes the film more enjoyable, but a film should stand on its own two feet. However, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's stone may look good, but it is mainly poorly acted, the character's are undeveloped and it is simply boring viewing.
It will please the under twelve age group, anyone older is trying too hard to enjoy it. Where is the motivation behind looking for the stone? I'm sorry but 'they're just curious kids' will not wash with me after the film has had £90 million spent on it.
This isn't the worst film I've ever seen, 'Dude Where's my Car' is far worse to be fair, but it is very overrated and only made semi-interesting by a brilliant Robbie Coltrane. My mark? 3/10.