Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone Reviews
Upon his 11th birthday, Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), who lives in misery with an aunt and uncle that don't want him, learns from a giant named Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane) that he is the orphaned son of powerful wizards. Harry is offered a place at prestigious Hogwarts, a boarding school for wizards that exists in a realm of magic and fantasy outside the dreary existence of normal humans or "Muggles."
Before heading off for a life in another state shortly, I pushed myself to rewatch a series of films that I had been dying to see since my childhood. But I had been pushing it off in fear that the first couple of films would be really dated. Finally, I decided to put the first film into my Xbox. By my surprise, this film held up really well, and the Blu-Ray rendition actually looked really good. And I'll be honest, I had fun seeing the roots of our heroes, and I can't wait to watch them grow up through the next seven films and join their adventures.
So to start out, the beloved "Harry Potter" cast all give fine performances as young children. Daniel Radcliffe was a great lead and held a solid performance as a young child. Rupert Grint did a great job as the geeky, goofy, yet supportive best friend. Emma Watson was also fine, even if her character came off as that annoying, know-it-all friend that we've all met. Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid was also introduced as this lovable giant who will definitely be a fan favorite for years to come. It was really interesting to see the cast at a young age, especially knowing how far they would go.
The visuals and cinematography certainly wasn't as bad or dated as I expected it to be. Granted, some parts and moments definitely looked like something you'd see from the early 2000's but for the most part, this is a film that still holds up decently today. That was a real nice attribute that this film had and it really made the whole experience better for me.
In the end, this film really did feel more like a kids movie. I mean, it was made for the target audience of younger children, even if it was still entertaining for adults. There were some cheesy and goofy parts for sure, but it also was the beginning of a much more dark and deep story that's still going. Like I said, I still enjoyed this movie a lot and I had a lot more fun than I thought I would. Maybe it was the nostalgia of seeing it as a kid, or maybe it was the fun in seeing the beginning of things so iconic. Either way, this film was more than enjoyable.
In the end, I think this film holds up really well, and is a great start to a beloved franchise. I can't wait to see the rest of these films again and review them all soon. For now, I'm glad I finally rewatched this film so soon.
Think about how quickly the entire WWWIII (Wizarding-World War III) would have ended if all of the good guys had simply armed up with good ol' American hot lead.
Basilisk? Let's see how tough it is when you shoot it with a .470 Nitro Express. Worried about its Medusa-gaze? Wear night vision goggles. The image is light-amplified and re-transmitted to your eyes. You aren't looking at it--you're looking at a picture of it.
Imagine how epic the first movie would be if Harry had put a breeching charge on the bathroom wall, flash-banged the hole, and then went in wearing NVGs and a Kevlar-weave stab-vest, carrying a SPAS-12.
And have you noticed that only Europe seems to a problem with Deatheaters? Maybe it's because Americans have spent the last 200 years shooting deer, playing GTA: Vice City, and keeping an eye out for black helicopters over their compounds. Meanwhile, Brits have been cutting their steaks with spoons. Remember: gun-control means that Voldemort wins. God made wizards and God made muggles, but Samuel Colt made them equal.
Now I know what you're going to say: "But a wizard could just disarm someone with a gun!" Yeah, well they can also disarm someone with a wand (as they do many times throughout the books/movies). But which is faster: saying a spell or pulling a trigger?
Avada Kedavra, meet Avtomat Kalashnikova.
Imagine Harry out in the woods, wearing his invisibility cloak, carrying a .50bmg Barrett, turning Deatheaters into pink mist, scratching a lightning bolt into his rifle stock for each kill. I don't think Madam Pomfrey has any spells that can scrape your brains off of the trees and put you back together after something like that. Voldemort's wand may be 13.5 inches with a Phoenix-feather core, but Harry's would be 0.50 inches with a tungsten core. Let's see Voldy wave his at 3,000 feet per second. Better hope you have some Essence of Dittany for that sucking chest wound.
I can see it now...Voldemort roaring with evil laughter and boasting to Harry that he can't be killed, since he is protected by seven Horcruxes, only to have Harry give a crooked grin, flick his cigarette butt away, and deliver what would easily be the best one-liner in the entire series:
"Well then I guess it's a good thing my 1911 holds 7+1."
And that is why Harry Potter should have carried a 1911.