Harry Potter Review
by Tim Wick
Why did I go see Harry Potter on opening day with just about every other
person in America? I mean, am I really that much of a slave to peer
pressure?
I could be, but the real reason is that I actually have read the books and
really enjoyed every one of them. While Harry Potter and the Sorceror's
Stone is not as well done as most of the follow up novels, it is a fine
introduction to the series and certainly seems to be easily adaptable to
film. Having read the books (admittedly in anticipation of the film), I was
truly excited to see the movie.
My excitement was heightened by the trailers for this film. They meshed
almost perfectly with the pictures I had in my mind. I was able to figure
out who each character was in the trailers and that boded well for the
movie.
The real question, however, was how the movie would read to someone who
hadn't read the book. I recognize that there are only three people in the
world who fall into that sad category, but humor me.
So once the film was over, I tried to imagine what it would be like to watch
it having no preconceptions at all.
I think I would have really enjoyed it as a popcorn film, been a bit
confused by a few things that weren't overtly said (because the fans in the
audience would fill in the blanks) and wanted to see more.
The look of the movie matches the trailers. It is a fantastical world
filled with strange people and places but given a veil of normalcy because
the only person who seems surprised by anything is the title character.
From Diagon Alley to Gringotts to Hogwarts Express to the Quidditch field,
just about everything looked as I had imagined it.
Aside from all the other reasons (which I won't go in to in case you haven't
read the book), I think it was very important to have Harry be an outsider.
Because the movie is told through his eyes, we see the world of Hogwarts as
a fantastical place. Many of the other students view shifting staircases as
an annoyance rather than something to be appreciated. We the audience are
viewing Hogwarts as he does and it is important he shares our point of view.
Newcomer Daniel Radcliffe (Harry) had what is about the most enviable role
in the history of child actors. If he pulled it off, he would have a
promising career (though a typecast one). If he tanked it, people would
stop talking about the kid from Episode I.
I'm not going to tell you that we've found the British equivalent of Haley
Joel Osment, but I am going to say that Radcliffe did a fine job with the
part. Perhaps his earnest, "gee whiz I'm playing Harry Potter" look was
just what the movie needed to work.
The rest of the cast, especially Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagle and
Alan Rickman as Professor Snape, are uniformly solid. Outstanding to the
point of scene stealing brilliance is Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid. It is as
if the character had been written with him in mind.
The movie itself is very good but falls just a bit short of great. Part of
this is due to some rather poorly done visual effects that are, I think, a
result of rushing the film to the theatres. A little more time in post
could easily have made a lot of the rather obvious CGI into something just a
bit more believable.
The other issue is the fact that this is arguably the weakest of the Potter
stories. While by no means a dud, Rowling really hit her stride around book
three (The Prisoner of Azkaban). This film is important because it
defines the universe in which far more interesting acts will be played
later.
Finally, John Williams' score is just a bit overpowering in a few places.
He's trying to do a Danny Elfman style score (which makes one wonder why
they didn't just get Danny Elfman) and it does work some of the time. The
central Harry Potter theme is quite good. Other times, he seems to be
telegraphing just a bit too much.
But these are minor quibbles for a film that is overall well worth the price
I paid for it. The length of the movie (2:33) really didn't weigh on me at
all and I found myself wishing for some extra time to flesh out what I felt
were a few points from the book that should have made it into the movie.
Had I not read the book, I think their omission might have confused me just
a little bit.
Ultimately, Harry Potter does not disappoint. The film is grounded by the
good acting and by the fact that the place is it creating is so darn
interesting that it's hard to do anything but be excited by what you are
going to see next.
|
