|
To millions of children of all ages, November 16 has been more
eagerly anticipated than Christmas, as the long-awaited film version of
J. K. Rowling's beloved novel "Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone"
hits the screen.
Each of Rowling's four Harry Potter books have been critically acclaimed
worldwide best-sellers, turning a generation of video-game playing
children into avid readers.
In translating Rowling's world of wizards and magic to the screen, the
film makers claimed to be intensely aware of the fans' high expectations
and had sworn to be faithful to the book.
"Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone" is indeed the most loyal film
adaptation of a book that this fan has ever seen.
It's the story of an orphaned boy who discovers on his eleventh birthday
that his parents were wizards and that he is in fact a famous and
powerful wizard himself.
Released from the clutches of his desperately ordinary (and non-magical)
Uncle Vernon and Aunt Petunia - and their deliciously obnoxious son
Dudley - Harry takes his place in the wizarding world as a first year
student at the venerated Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
A great deal of "Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone" is an
introduction to this fantastic and dangerous world and its richly drawn
characters. There's not only a lot of plot to cover in this film, but an
entire world to create.
At two and a half hours long (hit the restroom before it starts), the
film includes the book's most memorable scenes, bringing many of them to
life with pure cinematic wizardry.
The Quidditch match (a soccer/hockey/rugby thing played on broomsticks)
is much more exciting on the screen than on the page, as is the bathroom
battle with an enormous mountain troll and the larger-than-life game of
wizard's chess.
The frightening aspects of the book are in full force in the film, and
its PG rating (for some scary moments) should be taken seriously.
Screenwriter Steven Kloves ("Wonder Boys") has done a fine job of
streamlining Rowling's tale while maintaining its spirit. Director Chris
Columbus ("Home Alone") makes good on his promise to be faithful to the
book. But at times the film is a bit too reverent; you want the actors
to cut loose and have a bit more fun.
Columbus clearly understands that fantasy works best when it's played
most real. Across the board, his fine ensemble of actors are so
perfectly cast that they appear to have literally stepped out of
Rowling's book.
In the title role, Daniel Radcliffe pulls off the very difficult task of
playing an introverted hero who spends most of the movie reacting to the
amazing sights and events around him. He beautifully captures the deep
soul and untapped potential of Harry Potter. And when this kid smiles
the screen lights up.
Rupert Grint is delightful as Harry's sardonic buddy Ron Weasley and
Emma Watson nearly steals the film as their overachieving friend
Hermione Granger. Three cheers to the film makers for giving three
unknown child actors the top billing they deserve.
The strong cast of veteran actors includes Richard Harris as the wise
Headmaster Dumbledore and Robbie Coltrane as the lovable giant Hagrid.
Alan Rickman is wonderfully villainous as Professor Snape and Zoe
Wanamaker has just the right touch of girls gym teacher as flying
instructor Madame Hooch.
As the strict but just Professor McGonagall, Oscar winner Maggie Smith
seems born to play the role - and is ready for another Oscar.
John Cleese (as Nearly Headless Nick) and Julie Walters (as Mrs. Weasley)
have all-too-brief cameo roles, but if the next film "Harry Potter and
the Chamber of Secrets" remains true to the book, we'll be seeing more
of them.
In addition to being highly engaging, the film is a marvelous thing to
look at. From the bustling wizard street Diagon Alley to the
magnificently gothic Hogwarts School to the dark and misty Forbidden
Forest, the film breaks new ground in imaginative production design.
To paraphrase the film's tagline, let the magic (and box office records)
begin. |
