Got back from seeing it a few hours ago and I can't stop smiling! One of the better movies I've seen this year, great acting and VFX all around. While some of the story elments were cut that I liked, the film made me feel like I was reading the book again, that magical felling that can only come from a "Harry Potter" book! And this is also one of the best book to screen adaptations I've seen!

The film is now holds "the highest weekend opening", ever. It made 93.4 mill its opening weekend.

Cheers!!

--Brian

NP: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone

--Brian

It instilled brand new faith for me in Chris Columbus... until now, his best movie was Adventures in Babysitting, and as enjoyable an 80's flick as that is, it's not saying a whole lot. HP still would have been even better had Terry Gilliam directed it, but Columbus did a most impressive job.

The three lead kids gave absolutely first-rate performances. Daniel Radcliffe (Harry) was good, Emma Watson (Hermione) was really good, and Rupert Grint (Ron) was great.

I concur, Brian. Four stars!

I could argue with your points until my fingertips went numb, but as God said in the gospel of Time Bandits, "Frankly I'm too tired."

And I'm sure I wouldn't change your opinion, so there's little point. No hard feelings, I just take pity on you.

I'm an absolutely HUGE fan of James Cameron, and remember being blown away by Titanic opening weekend in the theatre. I haven't seen it since then, however, and always find it strange that the film is almost always kicked in the ass when discussed (whether it be people who have respectable opinions or morons - you know them, there's a bunch of em in this world). When it came out it was praised by critics and audiences alike, why did everybody seem to turn on it over the years???

Because I have such a positive feeling for the film, I have yet to revisit it, afraid I for some reason or another might have misjudged it the first time...

So I'll judge the film as a independent entity...after all it should be for everyone, even the three of us who haven't read the book.

Your argument has one flaw -- the parents almost love it as much as the kids! My 3 kids are already begging me for a repeat viewing, and I'll be happy to oblige

P.S. I want William's complete score to HP!

I don't know Mark, I can't see most adults braving the multiplexes more than once for this movie...

Truthfully, I hope this movie opens the door for true fantasy films...along with LOTR(which is still a superior story) I hope this is a signal of more to come.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hasta:
If I had kids and they wanted to sit through another two and a half hours of that borefest, I'd be disappointed in their taste

Then I'd go let them see a REAL movie called [b]Monsters, Inc. [/B]

---

Hehe - nice one Jason!

I enjoyed POTTER. I had fun. But I have no need/desire to see it again until the DVD. It just didn't "stick" with me. Doesn't mean other people won't see it 347 times.... just that I won't.

--Brian

quote:

---

Then I'd go let them see a REAL movie called [b]Monsters, Inc

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MarkA:
We already have seen Monsters, Inc -- another excellent movie which I thought was the best of the Pixar's so far, but my kids have been taken up more now in the fantasy world of Harry Potter.

---

Sounds like the ice cream flavor of the day.....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hasta:
If I had kids and they wanted to sit through another two and a half hours of that borefest, I'd be disappointed in their taste

Then I'd go let them see a REAL movie called [b]Monsters, Inc. [/B]

---

It opens on Thursday or Friday here in Austria (some lists say Thursday, some say Friday ). I hope to get tickets and see it within a week.

Have fun my friend!

From MattStar: Colombus tried to put too much in and as a result the movie doesn't make much sense for anyone that hasn't read the books (such as myself).
I didn't read the books, and everything made perfect sense. It's not rocket science: Harry's an orphan, and the man who killed his parents is out there somewhere. Harry, unlike everyone else mostly, is new to this wizardry thing (thus the looking around in bewilderment that you mentioned, Matt.) Personally, I'd be bewildered too, if I lived at Hogwarts. Anyway, Harry is famous because he survived Valdomort and he is destined for great things (thus the need for the Quidditch match -- it was kind of a rite of passage). And the sorcerer's stone I think wasn't the big thing: we just needed to get into Harry and his life. Whether the script cut out chapters meant nothing to me, it told a great story onscreen.

From Quill: I can't see most adults braving the multiplexes more than once for this movie...
I'll be watching it again this weekend!

A couple more points: if this does help The Lord of the Rings, then great, because very little has been done to promote what should be a movie that is just as jaw-dropping for kids and adults.

I'm thinking the opinion on Harry Potter comes from all this hype. The same happened with Titanic and Star Wars: Ep. 1. People hear everyone say how great the movie is or how cool this scene is or how real that effect looked. Then they want to jump on the opposition to look cool. Everyone on this message board has a point, including the dissenters. I agree that for some it could be a bore if they can't buy into the story. But for people like me who had no expectations, I was readily able to be taken into the film. (This is a rehashing of part of a post I made on the anti-Potter thread here.)

It is a tad disturbing for me to hear the film referred to as fantasy...it is cliched fantasy at best (But that's OK as well) Simply said, I hope that this film is not elevated as the standard by which fantasy films should be produced and judged. I for one can enjoy low-brow, imaginary tales with smile-inducing visuals, but prefer a more adult-oriented tale.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quill:
It is a tad disturbing for me to hear the film referred to as fantasy...it is cliched fantasy at best (But that's OK as well)

---

Classification: Fun, thrilling, cliched (in a good way) fantasy whodunnit. Plus, with every book, the story grows more and more complex. It does have great depth, of course not as much as Tolkien's Middle Earth, but still a lot.

Np: A Bug's Life (Randy Newman) ****/*****

Jz

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quill:
Simply said, I hope that this film is not elevated as the standard by which fantasy films should be produced and judged.

---

Then again, it ISN'T the best movie of the year, and I'd have to say I still believe you to be a bit biased... Why? Look at how you typed your post... Sounded a little 3rd grader-ish don't ya think?

Jz

As far as standards go...I don't think Potter will ever be it. Maybe for children's movies, but not fantasy. Gut feeling says that LOTR will hold that honor for some time.

Uhh...I hope that doesn't say anything about me. Oh well. Have a great holiday all.

I really liked FINAL FANTASY and if you don't believe me just check THIS link for my review
(it is in Portuguese, of course, but you can check how many stars I gave to it in the bottom).

.