Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone Reviews

Page 1 of 10
Phil Villarreal
Arizona Daily Star
November 18, 2001
The narrative is a scattershot sprint through the book's events with little regard for character motivation.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
Donald Munro
Fresno Bee
November 16, 2001
Yet for all its faithfulness to the concrete details of the book, the film is missing something when it comes to capturing the most important detail of all: its sense of magic.
Victoria Alexander
November 13, 2001
It's way too long, there's no story, no logic, no villain, all the supporting characters are more interesting than Potter, and I learned nothing about being a wizard.
Full Review
Rob Vaux
Flipside Movie Emporium
November 19, 2001
Rarely has a movie seemed more beholden to its roots, or required so much outside help to give it its spark.
Full Review | Original Score: C+
Joe Lozito
Big Picture Big Sound
July 14, 2007
Because the film is so glossy, so flippant in its presentation of the world that author J.K. Rowling has spent her sizable novels dissecting, that I still don't have a good idea what all the fuss is about.
Full Review | Original Score: 2.5/4
Jeffrey Westhoff
Northwest Herald (Crystal Lake, IL)
June 13, 2002
As directed by Chris Columbus and written by Steve Kloves, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" is a film with no personality of its own, despite being filled with many unforgettable personalities.
Full Review| Original Score: 2.5/4
Rob Blackwelder
November 15, 2001
...Columbus could have cut out the entire middle hour...and if you hadn't read the book, you'd never know the difference.
Full Review | Original Score: 2.5/4
Erik Childress
November 16, 2001
In a perpetual state of Petrificus Totalus, Columbus contributes a pedestrian direction as if he was looking for his own place in Hufflepuff "where they are just & loyal."
Full Review | Original Score: 2.5/4
Top Critic
J. Hoberman
Village Voice
November 13, 2001
Solid but uninspired, Harry lacks brio.
Top Critic
Bruce Newman
San Jose Mercury News
November 15, 2001
The effects are special, but too often they're the only thing that is. They seem to drive the story, instead of the other way around.
Top Critic
Elvis Mitchell
New York Times
November 15, 2001
This film is capable of a certain brand of magic: it may turn the faithful into Muggles.
| Original Score: 2/5
Top Critic
Richard Corliss
TIME Magazine
November 16, 2001
The picture isn't inept, just inert.
| Original Score: 2.5/5
Jules Brenner
Cinema Signals
January 7, 2002
The blame for this is a too heavy directorial hand. Originality might have flowered under a lighter touch and the original literary work better served.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
Michael W. Phillips, Jr.
Goatdog's Movies
April 20, 2003
A Xerox copy of the book, and a copy is never as good as the original.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/5
Chuck Rudolph
Matinee Magazine
November 24, 2001
Its efforts to set itself above the bar are rather admirable, if not quite charming or endearing in their eventual failures.
Full Review | Original Score: B-
Ed Gonzalez
Slant Magazine
October 29, 2001
As far as stuffy Oxford dramas go, Harry Potter has them all beat.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
Mark Palermo
The Coast (Halifax, Nova Scotia)
October 14, 2002
Like the Ewok TV movies of the mid 80s, Harry Potter meaninglessly shoestrings a new fantastical event with every scene.
Full Review
Harvey S. Karten
November 16, 2001
A series of rich CG adventures in a narrative that does not cohere.
Full Review | Original Score: 2.5/4
Jason Clark
Matinee Magazine
June 14, 2002
What director Chris Columbus hasn't brought to it is any kind of inherent wonder or more palpable reason for being
Full Review | Original Score: C+
Jimmy O
Film Snobs
June 10, 2002
Emotionally, this Harry Potter is just as inert as the popcorn-munching masses watching him.
Page 1 of 10