Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

***Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone*** (released in the United States as ***Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone***) is a 2001 fantasy film directed by Chris Columbus and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. It is based on J. K. Rowling's 1997 novel of the same name.

## Plot

A boy named Harry Potter who learns on his 11th birthday that he is the orphaned son of two powerful wizards and possesses unique magical powers of his own. He is summoned from his life as an unwanted child to become a student at Hogwarts, an English boarding school for wizards. There, he meets several friends who become his closest allies and help him discover the truth about his parents' mysterious deaths.

## Why Harry Is The Wizard

1. It is the beginning of the phenomenal, beloved *Harry Potter* film franchise.
2. Amazing grasp at the source material and captures the magical, adventurous tone J.K. Rowling's books had.
3. Good direction by Chris Columbus.
4. Brilliant character and story development.
5. All of the actors’ performances in this movie are beyond spectacular, especially from Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter.
6. Stunning visual effects, especially when it comes to the magic wands.
7. Well-done camera work and great cinematography.
8. The quidditch match was exciting.
9. Likable and unforgettable characters, especially the main characters; Harry Potter, Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger.
10. The reveal that Professor Quirrell is a Death Eater and also the vessel for Lord Voldemort's soul, and that Professor Snape was actually protecting Harry from him, is a memorable plot twist.
11. Many unforgettable moments, such as the *"Troll in the dungeon!"* moment.
12. Heartwarming moments such as Harry seeing his parents in the mirror.
13. Very original, well-delivered dialogue, such as Seamus Finnegan's *"Eye of rabbit, harp string hum, turn this water into rum!"* line.
14. Great score from John Williams.

## Bad Qualities

1. While the visual effects are stunning, the CGI hasn’t aged well by today’s standards, especially the troll.
2. Despite the book being endearing, the way the wizarding world is portrayed here is pretty in-cohesive with the rest of the series. Like the novel, the first film leans on the idea that the wizarding world is primarily made of the whimsy, with the dark backstory mainly taking a backseat. The film may throw off some newcomers with how it's shown here.
3. There are aspects that weren't established or dumbed down that were essential to the characters or plot in some way. Some of these are problems with the film adaptations themselves or even the books.
	* Ron's characterization is one of the most controversial things that was severely dumbed down and ignored in the film franchise since his inferiority complex is never brought up in the films period and is much stupider. While he does play Butt-Monkey sometimes in the books, in the movies he's more pathetic and the butt of most jokes. Many fans have theorized that screenwriter, Steve Kloves, didn't care for Ron and changed his character just to make Hermione look cooler since she was his favorite character.
	* Hermione becomes a near flawless character due to her being a clear Creator's Pet as she is socially inept in the books, however, this social ineptitude never really comes up in any of the films, where she appears to have no real trouble socializing with others, beyond having some trouble making friends in first year.
		+ In this particular film, Ron freaks out, Harry and Hermione get out fine, and Hermione saves Ron who's too busy panicking to escape. In the book, however, Ron and Harry in the book keep their heads when in the Devil's Snare. It's Hermione who freaks out, and Ron has to yell at her to do something.
4. **Plot Hole**: The trio choose to visit Hagrid at night to talk about the Philosopher's Stone. They have no reason to do so, since they can easily visit him during the day. What's more is that they don't bring the Invisibility Cloak with them. This part seemed to make more sense the book, because Harry and Hermione mistakenly left it on the Astronomy Tower and walked right into Filch.

## Reception

### Critical response

On Rotten Tomatoes the film has an approval rating of 81% based on 194 reviews, with an average rating of 7.1/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "*Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone* adapts its source material faithfully while condensing the novel's overstuffed narrative into an involving – and often downright exciting – big-screen magical caper". On Metacritic the film has a score of 64 out of 100, based on 36 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".