1. Hi there, Guest

    Only registered users can really experience what DLP has to offer. Many forums are only accessible if you have an account. Why don't you register?
    Dismiss Notice

Movie Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone (2001)

Discussion in 'DLP & Chill' started by Jon, Jul 16, 2018.

?

I give it a rating of...

  1. Troll

    1.7%
  2. Dreadful

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Poor

    1.7%
  4. Acceptable

    34.5%
  5. Exceeds Expectations

    56.9%
  6. Outstanding

    5.2%
  1. Jon

    Jon The Demon Mayor Admin DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    7,562
    Location:
    Australia
    Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone
    July 16 — July 22

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Jon

    Jon The Demon Mayor Admin DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    7,562
    Location:
    Australia
    I don't think I'll ever get over the opening scene for the movie vs the book.

    In the book we follow the Dursleys POV as they go about their 'mundane life' with the brief glimpses of strange wizarding stuff that culminates in the discussion with Dumbledore and McGonagall, whilst the movie just skips it and goes straight to the conversation. The obvious reason is that it's extraneous to the movie since so little time is really spend with the Dursleys and the visual medium conveys their 'personalities' quite quickly compared to the books, but still for people who've never read the books the Dursleys really do come across as quite comical in all their appearances.
     
  3. Scott

    Scott Professor DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2008
    Messages:
    406
    Location:
    Texas
    I remember the first time I watched it, it was hurricane season in new orleans floodwaters 3ft deep but the power didn't go off so we rented it and I liked it so much I stole the 4-book set from my school. I didn't read the first book because I figured I watched the movie so what's the difference? (I was young).

    The thing that stands out in this movie (and the second) to me is Dumbledore. That's how I pictured Dumbledore in the books.
     
  4. Taure

    Taure Magical Core Enthusiast Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,380
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    High Score:
    13,152
    To be fair, you can get away with this for the first two movies, which painstakingly included everything. To be honest I'm rather surprised that they didn't ditch the Norbert plot in PS and the Aragog plot in CoS - both of them lead nowhere, narratively. The only purpose of the Norbert plot (beyond characterisation and world building) is to get Harry into the Forbidden Forest detention, but that can be easily achieved in a more direct manner (e.g. Snape being Snape). Similarly, the spiders plot in CoS is only there for the "spiders flee before it" clue for the basilisk... but since the reader doesn't know that basilisks exist yet, nor their relationship with spiders, it's a bit of a pointless clue that only makes sense after you know the answer.

    Still, I won't criticise the first two movies for including everything. Personally I am happy with them doing so. I'm just surprised that they didn't cut something so easily removed, especially given how long the movies were.

    As for PS more generally: they keep to the original plot, the visuals are great, the world is charming. It was a perfect adaptation from the perspective of an enthusiastic fan, let down only by the painful child acting.
     
  5. Jon

    Jon The Demon Mayor Admin DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    7,562
    Location:
    Australia
    Richard Harris is my Dumbledore. It's the only way I've ever envisioned him in my mind.
     
  6. Agent One

    Agent One Seventh Year DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2016
    Messages:
    244
    High Score:
    0
    PS is a perfect introduction to the HP world. The fact that it includes everything from the books is a plus as by the end of the movie, the audience knows nearly as much as someone who'd read the first book. Sure, that means it's a little heavy on the exposition but it's done well because there's a reason for the exposition. Hagrid exposits because he can't control his tongue but also because he's introducing Harry to the magical world. Hermione exposits because she's a know-it-all. Ron exposits about Quidditch because he loves the game.

    There's just something so charming and quaint about the first movie. It feels "Cozy".
     
  7. Anarchy

    Anarchy Totally Sirius DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    3,303
    Location:
    NJ
    The thing that really makes the movie for me is the soundtrack. Hedwig's Theme is the GOAT of movie tracks.
     
  8. Zombie

    Zombie John Waynes Teeth Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,109
    High Score:
    2,094
    That, and the Leaky Cauldron scene is my favorite of the entire movie series tbh. The wizard mixing his drink with a hand and not a wand. I felt like it was true exemplification of magic in the every day life. Is the spoon enchanted to react to a person's hand? Does wandless magic exist in the movie verse? It set a clear distinction of what we saw as magic in the books (targeted examples of classroom drudgery, and Hermione doing things, and the Great Hall Scene) versus the magic we could see in the movies. Before the first movie magic in my mind was always going to be wand driven and spoken spell. Because that's all we knew, but in the movie we got to see everyone doing their own thing.

    This. So much this. I was upset with the divergence in PoA when it became more a form of art than a retelling of a story. While I like PoA as a book, the movie was a bit disappointing for me leading into it from PS and CoA. By the time PS came out, it got me back into the books again where I'd otherwise gotten bored with it waiting for the next one to come out.

    I also saw PS and CoS in theater, when the first came out. Midnight showings. I don't think I've ever made that much effort for any other movie.

    The acting wasn't so bad then, to me, but after a couple years in which I revisited the movies. Hermione's awkwardness and delivery more than anything is what I remember the most from it. I was glad to see them get further into their roles as the years progressed.

    Always. Richard Harris was the epitome of the wizened old man. I remember thinking him the best choice, the Dumbledore after the fact was alright, but I could have seen Richard Harris really owning the role.
     
  9. ChaosGuy

    ChaosGuy Auror

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    664
    Having rewatched the whole series recently, I think PS might be my favorite of them. Partially because everything is just... magical. There's this awe and a bit of childish glee throughout the whole thing, plus unlike most of the rest of them it at least tries to remain true to things. With some of the different things being better and some worse unlike latter where they're almost all just changed for the worst.
     
  10. ScottPress

    ScottPress The Horny Sovereign Prestige

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2013
    Messages:
    2,512
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Holy Moose Empire
    High Score:
    1,826
    @Zombie, the spoon wizard is from PoA. Unless there was another one in PS first. Or you meant PoA in the first place.
     
  11. Zombie

    Zombie John Waynes Teeth Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,109
    High Score:
    2,094
    Ah for some reason I remember the spoon wizard as PS.
     
  12. BTT

    BTT Headmaster

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,070
    Location:
    Cyber City Oedo
    For a movie made in 2001, I honestly expected the effects to be worse. The worst is probably McGonagall's transformation in the first ten minutes, the rest is honestly fine. Have to say though that for a movie that's 2h30 long some parts are a bit rather rushed. I also want to echo that Richard Harris is great. Top Dumbledore for sure. Also great, but so far underappreciated: both Dursleys.

    This movie did make me realize something, though: why the fuck did Hagrid bust down the door to the cottage at midnight? Not only did he scare the shit out of everyone there, but he also took Harry into a rowboat in the middle of the night while it was storming (and arrives at daylight in London, come to think of it). That's just odd, even for Hagrid. Did they not sleep? Did they find a nearby hotel? I'm honestly baffled.

    Also fuck me now I've got a real hunger for good, new HP fanfic and I know there most likely isn't any.
     
  13. Jon

    Jon The Demon Mayor Admin DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    7,562
    Location:
    Australia
    The musical score is definitely next level. I can't tell if it's just that good or if nostalgia is influencing my opinion on it though.
     
  14. pbluekan

    pbluekan Auror DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2014
    Messages:
    661
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dancing in the Mindfield
    Alright, I just finished re-watching this movie. As everyone's said, the score is goddamn phenomenal, but what really stood out to me was the casting. As @Jon said:
    The thing is, though, pretty much every character is on point in both appearance and characterization. The movie series as a whole ruined a lot of things, in my opinion, but as far as the choice of actors and their quality, they hit the nail on the head for this movie and the next.
     
  15. Rhaegar I

    Rhaegar I Order Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    842
    Location:
    Right behind You...
    I, wasn't the biggest fan of Richard Harris.

    *Dodges curses.*

    Don't get me wrong, he did a great job in the first two movies. It sucked that he died when he did. Hell, I wanted his son Richard Harris to be cast as the young Dumbledore in the Fantastic Beasts movies.

    But, am I the only one who thought he might look a bit too, well, frail? While he is supposed to be a calm, wise old wizard, he's also an extremely powerful wizard who fought against Voldemort. Harris never quite captured that deep sense of power and badassery. Say what you want about Gambon and his "DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET OF FIRE" bit, he did capture that stern and powerful side of Dumbledore.

    Personally, I really think Ian McKellen would have been ideal. His Gandalf portrayal had the perfect balance of "kindly old man" and "don't fuck with me" vibe I kind of expect from Dumbledore.
     
  16. pbluekan

    pbluekan Auror DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2014
    Messages:
    661
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dancing in the Mindfield
    Fellowship was released a month after PS, I think he likely wasn't available for the first movie. The others likely didn't want him just because of that association.
     
  17. Arthellion

    Arthellion Minister of Magic

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2017
    Messages:
    1,299
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    High Score:
    0
    I'll be honest, PS only gets an acceptable from me. Is it a fun movie? Sure, but its nothing ground breaking. In the context of HP movies and being honest to the books, I'd give it a higher rating (one of the top HP movies honestly), but as a movie standing on its own?

    Not really. Within the genre of children's fantasy, I'd point to movies (limiting to similar time period or before) that blow this out of the water both in story telling, acting and Special Effects

    The Never-Ending Story.
    Hook.
    Jumanji
    Nightmare Before Christmas
    Indian in the Cupboard
    Etc.

    Philospher's stone is a fun adventure/mystery movie, but its no where near the creme of the crop.

    In a perfect world, Sean Connery accepted the role Gandalf and Ian McKellen becomes Dumbledore.
     
  18. Rhaegar I

    Rhaegar I Order Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    842
    Location:
    Right behind You...
    Wait, Sean Connery was offered to play Gandalf?

    *One Google later*

    Holy shit, he was! And has offered a fortune if he accepted. Now I'm wondering how he would have done in the role, especially since Ian McKellen was so iconic in his portrayal.
     
  19. Scott

    Scott Professor DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2008
    Messages:
    406
    Location:
    Texas
    No. What movie was that in? The 5th. Harris might of looked a bit frail but that's how I always pictured him but when he needs to he can go all-out magic wise. Special effects could of handled that in the movies.

    Gambon just came off wrong to me, not that bad honestly but can you picture Richard coming off as the one slightly manipulating in the later movies? For the greater Good? That would of been bad ass.
     
  20. pbluekan

    pbluekan Auror DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2014
    Messages:
    661
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dancing in the Mindfield
    I really can't see it going well. It's probably just my bias with having already seen McKellen's masterful performance, but they present two very different breeds of gravitas in their acting. I just don't see Connery's brand of alternately charming and aging war vet as working well.
     
Loading...