essay review movie harry potter

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone review – 20 years on, it’s a nostalgic spectacular

The first film in the franchise is re-released into a very different world – but it’s as entertaining and exhilarating as ever

T he very first Harry Potter film, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (or “Sorcerer’s Stone” for its release in the United States, where audiences were assumed to be unfamiliar with this alchemical term) is now re-released after 20 years, into a rather different world. Sadly, the actors who played the original Dumbledore, Snape, Uncle Vernon and Mr Ollivander – Richard Harris, Alan Rickman , Richard Griffiths and John Hurt – are no longer with us. The Harry Potter franchise itself is still a colossal commercial entity, an IP Shangri La, although its creator JK Rowling is now at the centre of an acrimonious gender politics debate – undreamed of in 2001 – and the world of children’s and YA fiction, which she almost singlehandedly revived all over the world, is strongly policed on just these issues.

It’s amazing and poignant to remember the sheer excitement of that HPATPS premiere in November 2001: I myself called it an “old-fashioned pre-September 11 news event”. Harry Potter emerged into cinemas as we were still all stunned by 9/11, but yet to see the retaliatory “war on terror”. This film, emerging four years after the original novel, marked the birth of a new consolatory pop culture myth, to rival Sherlock Holmes and James Bond, and the circumstances of its own arrival became mythic, from Rowling’s own early poverty to the snapping up of film rights.

Warner Bros had gambled on three cherubically young actors to carry the series through their own adolescence to its finale: Daniel Radcliffe as Harry, Emma Watson as Hermione and Rupert Grint as Ron. Opinions on the acting may divide here, and it was admittedly Robert Pattinson (playing Cedric Diggory in Goblet of Fire), who had the real career staying power. But I can’t think of these characters played by any other actors: the thought of the stories being remade or re-adapted with a different cast is heresy. I even grew to like Grint’s very broad, goofy acting, in which he was encouraged by director Chris Columbus at the outset. Radcliffe’s bespectacled moon face looks heartbreakingly unformed.

In the film we see Harry Potter coming to terms with his messianic purpose: he is released from his Dickensian incarceration in the Dursley household and sent for his first term at Hogwarts with its public-school/Oxbridge traditions. Harry learns how to play quidditch (like Tom Brown learning rugby) and he and his three pals are sorted into their various houses; they encounter the formidable teaching staff, including Professor McGonagall (Maggie Smith), Professor Quirrell (Ian Hart) and Professor Snape (Alan Rickman) and then meet the challenge of a deadly assault on Harry.

And it’s still a very entertaining and spectacular movie, with a rush of nostalgia to go alongside the exhilaration of fun, even though some of the “flying” effects during the big quidditch match aren’t quite what we’re used to in 2021. “Wingardium Leviosa,” says the earnest, wide-eyed Hermione … and the story is airborne again.

• Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone
• Harry Potter (Books)
• Harry Potter (Film)
• Daniel Radcliffe
• Emma Watson
• Rupert Grint

Comments (…)

Most viewed.

• Owl Post / The Quibbler

Harry Potter: A Film Analysis

by MuggleNet · Published March 6, 2012 · Updated March 9, 2023

by Jeffery Tucker

Abstract: I wrote an essay on the “Harry Potter” film series after seeing “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1.”

The Harry Potter film series will soon come to an end and what better way to acknowledge that than by analyzing the series? What are the positive and negative attributes? What are the best and worst aspects? How well do the creators perform their task of keeping the audience engaged and intrigued? Read on to find out how I, a fan of no importance, answer these inquiries.

As a fan of the novels (the last five, anyway), I no longer compare the films to what author J.K. Rowling wrote because that tends to bog down legitimate criticism. This type of criticism does not consist of nitpicks and complaints on what aspects of the books should not have been excluded. It’s preferable that a critic of the films, who also happens to be a fan of their book counterparts, only discuss what’s present on the screen to prevent the discussion from becoming off-topic with irrelevancies and disappointments of inaccurate, minute details. Therefore, no comparisons to the novels will be made on my part. I also will not go into detail on the plot and story of each film as this analysis assumes that you have seen them and know the information.

HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER’S STONE AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS

The only logical way to begin such an analysis is to start with the films that established the series, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone and the Chamber of Secrets , both directed by Christopher Columbus. I will preface the discussion of these films by stating that I loved Stone when I first saw it, but over the years began to develop a love-hate relationship. The same can be said for Chamber , but I eventually came to dislike it.

What the first entry into the film series does well is setting up and establishing the wizarding universe. The film shows us the difference between the Muggle world and the world occupied by magical beings. Harry enters the unknown and is marveled at what he is seeing and has been missing all of his life. The problem here is that that wonder, for the audience, disappears quite quickly.

The main issues with Stone (this is true for Chamber as well) are the boring visuals and the eventuality of the film losing the audience’s interest. The performances by the adult actors and the younger cast members cannot be thoroughly enjoyed when their presence is heavily accentuated and marred by a bland-looking castle with very little pop, and some of the worst visual effects from that year. As John William’s sweeping score permeates the boat ride up to Hogwarts, one cannot feel what the filmmakers intend because the experience is ruined by looking at the castle. The same feeling is replicated with each exterior shot and is experienced again, but to a lesser degree, when we view the interior. Director Christopher Columbus didn’t direct a single visually exciting shot in the film, and it’s a testament to his skills when put into the context of later directors who came to helm the series.

As for the visual effects, it’s difficult to be immersed in the world when they look quite terrible. If you compare the budget of Stone with Fellowship of the Ring (released in the same year), it’s inexcusable that the former has inferior visual effects, particularly the fight with the troll and Harry being jerked around by his seemingly possessed broom. The trend continues with the centaur Firenze, and Harry chasing flying keys to progress further into the plot with the Sorcerer’s Stone.

Stone seems to slog along after the quite-eventful Quidditch match. We see the trio struggle to put the pieces together but it just isn’t entertaining enough and it feels like your standard detective fare. There are of course some interesting moments interspersed between those scenes, like Snape’s altercation with Filch, but that doesn’t fill the void of something left to be desired: an immensely entertaining experience. Steve Kloves’ script needed to be cut down and reworked to make things more interesting.

There are of course positives, most notably everything up until where the film begins to drag, excluding the visual problems noted above. Seeing Harry learn about being a wizard and coming to the realization that he isn’t a freak is wonderful. The score is excellent and really complements the source material. Williams continues to do this with the second and third entry into the series.

For Chamber , I’m not going to delve into the visuals, as they mirror the first with the exception of superior visual effects. I will instead focus on its longevity and immensely boring nature. The film clocks in at nearly two hours and forty minutes (with credits) and you can feel every minute of it. It’s sad that everything preceding Harry’s return to Hogwarts is superior to everything taking place within it. The humor present when Harry first visits the Burrow will elicit laughs from time to time, even upon repeat viewings. The same can be said for the moments at the bookstore in Diagon Alley when the audience is treated to the first appearance of Gilderoy Lockhart.

Just like Chamber ‘s older brother, there are moments sprinkled throughout its runtime that are entertaining but do not make up for even more standard detective fare, which this time seems to go on and on. Kenneth Branagh’s portrayal of Lockhart is the highlight in these moments, along with Rickman as Snape. Kloves’ script here too needed to be cut and reworked.

Overall, the first two films range from “wholly mediocre” to “an overlong chore.” Stone creates the world for the audience, and even though it has problems, you won’t be wishing for it to end. Chamber , however, makes you wonder what happened during the creating process to disengage the audience so much throughout.

HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN

The series starts to become interesting with Prisoner of Azkaban , directed by Alfonso Cuaron. The opening scene, even with the problem of inconsistency – the “no magic outside of school” rule established in Chamber – shows that the audience is in for something different. Everything about Prisoner differs from Stone and Chamber : the direction, the cinematography, the acting, the tone, the usage of themes, the music, and even the humor.

What Prisoner excels at most is its look and Cuaron’s direction. When both are coupled, it makes for a pleasant visual experience and puts the first two films to shame. Hogwarts is no longer bland; it’s rich with shadows and actually looks like a castle. Hogwarts’ grounds have been completely redesigned and that’s for the better. Yes, it’s an inconsistency, but not a bothersome one as it improves upon Columbus’ lackluster vision. Cuaron’s stylistic choices are a welcome relief. The camera actually moves in interesting ways as opposed to the cliche movements employed in Prisoner’s predecessors. The decision to show the passing of time through seasons and how they affect the Whomping Willow, while frowned upon by many, is simply marvelous and is further evidence that there’s a lack of creative imagination in Stone and Chamber .

In regards to the acting, and this is an unpopular opinion, Michael Gambon’s portrayal as Dumbledore in Prisoner is superior to Richard Harris’. He plays calm, collective, and cool all wrapped into one, and you don’t have to listen to a grasping voice hoping to be able to discern what’s being spoken. Gary Oldman’s performance as Sirius Black never fails to disappoint.

Unfortunately, all of this glowing praise for Prisoner must come to a halt as there are problems with the film. The humor is unfunny and the slapstick portions are quite grating. The repetitious nature of the humor during the Knight Bus scene is just as annoying as it is ridiculous. Another problem presents itself with the Time Turner sequences. Time travel by definition is ridiculous in every sense of the word and it’s rarely well done on screen, but the scenes in Prisoner are great upon first viewing. Sadly, they seem to drag with each subsequent viewing because you are going through scenes that have already taken place earlier in the film, although from a different point of view. Another fault lies in the visual effects and how Buckbeak simply looks unreal. The entire rendering looks soft and the lighting is completely off, giving the feathers on the hippogriff an unnatural, and wholly unrealistic look.

The final complaint I have saved for last and it’s a fault against Daniel Radcliffe and the director. It’s simply unbearable when Harry, crying, screams that Sirius Black “was [his parent’s] friend!” The lack of emoting properly on Radcliffe’s part and Cuaron’s choice to accept the performance is unacceptable. That line takes you out of the aftermath of a great expository scene because it’s so terribly delivered.

Overall, Prisoner of Azkaban is a worthy and excellent sequel. It quashes the main faults of the first two films in the series and fixes them, while leaving the audience wondering what else is in store for the boy wizard and his companions.

HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE

Hot on the heels of the splendid Prisoner of Azkaban , director Mike Newell’s Goblet of Fire seems like a lovely film at first, but after paying close attention, it’s nothing more than mediocrity. It’s far better than Stone and Chamber , however. The opening is a great one and it, like Prisoner , promises the audience a treat in the visual department. Nothing seems visually unnatural or bland in Goblet and the only problems are the ones involving the pacing, creative decisions, and lack of exposition to inform the audience who haven’t read the novel.

One of Goblet ‘s biggest problems involves unintentional humor, which is first seen after the Quidditch World Cup when the Death Eaters arrive in outfits that border on parody. Are they supposed to look like remnants of the Ku Klux Klan? Death Eaters are apparently a ruthless bunch but their entrance suggests otherwise. More of this type of humor is present when select students from Beauxbatons and Durmstrang are introduced. The way the Beauxbatons enter the Great Hall and perform whatever those vocalizations are is ridiculous and completely laughable. It’s made even worse when magical objects flutter about near the end of the presentation. The Durmstrang entrance is doubly so as you listen to the terrible music accompanying a useless display of unimpressive acrobatics. These are some examples of terrible creative decisions by the filmmakers.

As for pacing, the film begins to suffer after the Triwizard champions are chosen; everything before it flows perfectly. We have to sit through Harry and Ron acting like stupid children when they aren’t on speaking terms, and even witness Hermione acting as an intermediary. More problems occur during the first task of the Triwizard tournament where Harry has an overlong altercation with a dragon. The entire chase is ridiculous, exaggerated, and difficult to sit through upon further viewings. How Harry manages what he did at his age, without the aid of magic (excluding his broom), is beyond me.

The best moment in the entire film happens after the third task when Lord Voldemort returns. Ralph Fiennes’ excellent acting makes sitting through what came before it completely worth it. He manages to act menacingly without being overdramatic, which can’t be said for David Tennant’s performance as Barty Crouch Jr. The duel between Harry and Voldemort is a visual feat but what happens confuses the audience who haven’t read the novel. This is where an expository scene would have been nice instead of Dumbledore simply naming the effect. The wands connected yes, but why did apparitions appear? Why did Harry’s parents appear? It’s possible that these viewers can put two and two together, but Dumbledore needed to tell Harry because he is completely confused by the phenomenon when he makes an inquiry.

Goblet of Fire is another worthy sequel in the series, even with its mediocrity. The series takes a slightly darker turn with this entry and that trend continues with the next sequel.

HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX, THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE, AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PART I

David Yates worked almost exclusively in the television medium until he helmed Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix . He did such a wonderful job, at least enough to satisfy Warner Bros., that he was asked to come back for Half-Blood Prince and eventually the rest of the series. Thank God for that.

If there’s one complaint thrown at Phoenix the most it’s that it has the shortest run time at 2 hours and 18 minutes. It works and was clearly for the best because that extra twelve minutes to make it two and a half hours could have been filled with boring, tedious moments and would have mirrored every film that came before it. The pacing in Phoenix is impeccable. There isn’t a moment where I’m checking to see how much time remains. This is because Yates’ creative decisions and the series’ new screenwriter keep your eyes glued to the screen and wanting more.

Yates employs montages during the film utilizing the unique properties of newspapers in the wizarding world: pictures on the page move. Instead of short, repeated movements, the camera moves into the images and we see full-length video. This is such an improvement over the students sitting down in the Great Hall and reading the Daily Prophet (Prisoner). Another excellent decision was the changing of the look of Prisoner’s dementors; they actually look threatening and don’t resemble the Nazgul from Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy. Sure it’s an inconsistency, but the change didn’t break a rule within the universe established in an earlier chapter.

More common complaints levied against the film include Nicholas Hooper’s score and the look of the Ministry of Magic. I couldn’t disagree more – when Hooper’s score is played over the film’s opening, we know that we won’t be hearing too many bombastic notes that the previous films have included. Instead, there are instances of subtle musical nuances that, when the time is right, erupt to complement the scene. Hooper’s cheery music is also excellent, especially Umbridge’s theme as it represents how she’s feeling after her successful attempts to take over Hogwarts. As for the Ministry of Magic, it looks stellar and makes sense when put into the context of how the new Minister of Magic operates. His ego is on display when we see the gigantic photo of him hanging in the atrium and fits with his desire for power.

The acting has also improved in Phoenix , especially Radcliffe’s. He convincingly acts like an angry teenager who feels abandoned by friends and prominent figures in his life. His performance after Sirius dies is such an improvement over that lone performance in Prisoner that I mentioned. Helena Bonham Carter’s introduction is menacingly great and her acting abilities are on display in the Ministry of Magic. She also has one of the best lines in the film, “Neville Longbottom, is it? How’s mum and dad” To say that to the child whose parents you tortured is darkly humorous.

One of the few complaints I have is that the visual effects are not always consistent. For instance, Grawp is simply not well-rendered and doesn’t fit in the scenes well with the cast. Another example of mediocre visual effects includes the centaurs taking Umbridge away after she insults and attacks them. The best effects sequence in the entire film takes place when Voldemort and Dumbledore finally duel. Seeing all of the glass in the atrium shatter after Voldemort deflects the two’s connecting spells is marvelous, and even more so when Dumbledore turns the shards into the sand as they race toward him.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is the superior sequel up to this point in the series and the high quality therein continues with its successor.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is the second-best film in the series to date. After taking a break and not scribing the screenplay for Order of the Phoenix , Steve Kloves returns and steps up his game. None of the problems that plague the first four movies are present here and it seems that the time he took off shaped his writing. The film is expertly paced and the dialogue is mostly sharp.

While Prince appears to be a tale of sexual politics, it is balanced quite well with the darker material, namely Draco Malfoy’s subplot and the plot of unraveling the Dark Lord’s past. The former is done very, very well and manages to keep you interested even during repeat viewings. Hooper’s score is perfect during those scenes, just like the rest of the film. The memory sequences are well crafted and show that Voldemort was devious as a child and a teenager like he is now, and wants to know all he can to become all-powerful.

Prince’s cinematography surpasses every film before it thanks to Bruno Delbonnel, known for his work on Amelie. He creates a dark, moody, and murky feel to the Potter universe that we haven’t seen since Prisoner . This feeling fits the film’s material perfectly, even during cheery and romantic scenes.

The acting is mostly top-notch. Actress Jesse Cave disgusts the audience with her ability to portray Ron’s creepy and obsessed love interest, Lavender Brown. Kloves and Yates respectively wrote and directed her performance to be over the top. Veteran actor Jim Broadbent makes his first appearance as the new potions professor, Horace Slughorn. Broadbent can play goofy and tragic at the drop of the hat. He has one of the most sentimental scenes in the entire movie: the recitation of a gift Lily Potter gave him before, as Aunt Petunia says in Stone , she “got herself blown up.” Tom Felton’s performance is superior to the acting of the trio. He gives off an heir of frightfulness as he scrambles to complete his assigned mission in time. Radcliffe, Watson, and Grint didn’t step up at all in their performance which is completely unfortunate. Alan Rickman leaves a sense of ambiguity to his performance throughout, which is nearly flawless. For Dumbledore, Michael Gambon continues to prove that he is better than Richard Harris.

The outstanding Half-Blood Prince paves the way for the first part in the final chapter of the series. It all comes down to these final two to determine whether or not we have spent the last decade wasting our time with the film series. Will David Yates complete his vision and leave us satisfied? For Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part I , he most certainly has.

Part one of the final chapter is indeed the best film in the entire series up to this point, in every respect. Even with its faults, it manages to engage and impress the audience. There is very little to consider negative here. Kloves and Yates have outdone themselves with this installment. They both have created the darkest movie yet and it’s a great sigh of relief.

Hallows, Part 1 finally brings an immensely dark tone to the series that has been needed since Chamber ended. The sense of the trio’s isolation is felt throughout and emphasized by the prolonged period of them camping alone in the wilderness. The altercations and interactions they have with one another exemplify that even further. Consider the verbal and slightly physical fight Harry and Ron have. While Ron’s feelings are mostly brought on by the Horcrux, remnants of those feelings are there for it to feed on. He ends up leaving, abandoning Harry and Hermione. Harry tries to cheer her up but it doesn’t work well at all.

This uneasy, gloomy feeling about the world is given more prominence when you hear the names of the numerous dead on the radio Ron has in his possession. Their world is now erupting in war and no enemy is spared. The parallels to Nazi Germany, while unfortunately not subtle, show what the wizarding world is becoming with ruthless individuals in power.

After seeing Prince , I thought that the cinematography would never be surpassed but it has. The camera work in Hallows, Part 1 is quite shaky but that effect is used artistically to show the frantic nature of the trio’s journey. A perfect example would entail the scene where the actor playing the disguised Harry enters Umbridge’s room to look for the locket. As he’s scrambling through desk drawers looking for the locket, the camera begins to sway back and forth, up and down, showing that he’s anxious to find it. The camera then becomes mostly steady as he stares at photos of enemy combatants, including the now-deceased Dumbledore. More excellent camerawork is on display when the trio is trying to escape the Snatchers on foot. Things are chaotic for the trio and the shaky camerawork is used to note this.

Yates has managed to bring out the best performances in the trio. Watson has never been better and the opening scene with Hermione wiping her parents’ memories shows that she has it in her to do more. The breaking of the trio resulting from Harry and Ron fighting is expertly performed by Radcliffe and Grint. The latter convincingly acts like the Horcrux is feeding on his negative emotions. Helena Bonham Carter increases her sadistic Bellatrix performance as she tortures Hermione.

The visual effects and the score are top-of-the-line. The best effects sequence involves Harry and Hermione in a sexually-charged embrace. While a combination of live-action and computer graphics, it’s impressive and erotic enough to enable Ron to destroy the Horcrux housing the faux couple. As for the score, it is superior to every score in the series, including Williams’, which was already beaten by Hooper’s work. The music used for the Death Eaters is simply fantastic and when Voldemort gets his hands on the Elder Wand, his score erupts to let the audience know that the trio is in danger.

The only faults against the film involve Dobby and the humor associated with him. The Malfoy Manor scene, while outstanding, is jarring when he comes into the mix with stupid humor. The inclusion of Dobby is only there for fan service because, logically, it makes no sense for him to make an appearance after being absent for four films. I personally think Dobby should have been scrapped and replaced with Kreacher.

Yates is the best director in the series. He has an eye for visuals that surpasses every other director and he managed to direct the best performances the series has seen. With the work he has done on Phoenix, Prince, and Hallows, Part 1 , I know that the final chapter in the saga will satisfy me.

Read “A Film Analysis (continued): Deathly Hallows Part Two”

• Next story  Harry Potter and the Boy Nobody Liked
• Previous story  The Final Word

MuggleNet Archive

Important dates, sat, apr 27, sun, apr 28, mon, apr 29, tue, apr 30.

Tom the Inkeeper

Scorpius Malfoy

• ☰ Harry Potter News | Essays | Crafts | and more!
• Potter News
• Potter Crafts
• Potter Essays
• Image Gallery
• Potter Parks
• About Leaky

Harry Potter and the Adaptation from Novel to Film

Submitted by: Robyn Joffe

Harry Potter and the Adaptation from Novel to Film  

By Robyn Joffe

For as long as people have been making movies, people have been making movies based on books. Films have also been adapted from several other forms such as television shows, theatrical plays and even other movies. More recently, entire book series have been adapted, such as the Lord of the Rings trilogy and the still in progress Harry Potter series . With six of the seven books written, and five films finished (four of them released), the Harry Potter franchise has a lot to offer scholars interested in the how-to's and the results of adapting books to film.

The Harry Potter films, which started with the release of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone in the year 2001, depict the events covered in the books in a more filmic fashion. The films bring Rowling's words to life; however, as is nearly always the case in adapting work of one form to another, the transitions can be less than smooth. As Deborah Cartmell, senior lecturer in English writes, "An adaptation is undeniably an appropriation of the text, and although the plot remains the same, the telling ’ or the interpreting of it ’ radically changes from one generation to the next." 1

From time constraints to a director's need for artistic expression to casting choices to how a film is promoted, the process of transforming a book to a film can be fraught with peril. Other such issues surrounding direction, characterization, pacing and chosen content (among others) can also contribute to a film's eventual success or failure. Though the resulting movie may in fact be a good film, the question that must be asked is whether it is a good film version of the book . Though most published academic works covering the adaptation of a book to a film focus on classic novels, such as those by Shakespeare or Jane Austen, adaptations are not made merely from acclaimed literary masterpieces. What the Harry Potter series lacks in academic acknowledgment, it more than makes up for in mass popular appeal.

For this reason, this essay will dissect the Harry Potter books and their resulting films, paying particular attention to what issues in the process of adaptation were most relevant to each, and see what, if any, perils were encountered in the making of them. In doing so, this essay will make use of both scholarly and amateur sources, because while authoritative texts are more often relied upon (and with good reason) in essays such as this, the opinions fueled by the unquestionable knowledge of the Harry Potter fan base (in regards to the content of both the books and films), are not necessarily any less valid than their more academically informed counterparts.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)

Graham Greene, one of the first major literary talents to show an interest in writing for films (and one who often adapted his own short stories) once described the screenwriter as "a ˜forgotten man' once the film went into production, since after that point other hands might make alterations to the screenplay." 2 In a much more recent book, the same sentiment was expressed: "Despite the excellent compensation, a Hollywood scriptwriter is a low man on the totem pole, and much of his work ’ sometimes all of his work ’ is not used." 3 However, for Harry Potter screenwriter Steve Kloves, working with director Christopher Columbus was an experience in the opposite. In fact, Columbus described their collaboration ’ which went from script development through production ’ as "something of a dream situation' 4 and Kloves further explained that "Chris has been willing to listen to any idea, and he doesn't think it's right until we both agree it's right, which is great." 5

Columbus also went a step further in welcoming the continued involvement of not just the screenwriter ’ but the original novelist as well; "My desire was to remain faithful to the story, the characters and the integrity of those characters ... I realized that I had found a solid collaborator [in Rowling]. And it was important because she knows this world better than anyone else." 6

Producer David Heyman also noted that Rowling "has been given the freedom to exert perhaps more influence on the Potter films than is usual when a book is adapted for the screen." 7 This is no doubt due to the fact that the book series is not yet completed, or as Kloves himself put it; "It's the only time I've ever been involved in a story without an ending ... And you would think [Rowling] would tell me something [about it], since I am writing it. But she won't." 8 Along with script approval, author J.K. Rowling had one other demand: that the actors playing the British characters actually be British. Thus, casting began.

Casting a film that is being adapted from a book can often become very controversial, especially if fans get wind of which actors are being considered beforehand. Because many novels that are made into films are not illustrated, the reader has created a picture of each character in their mind, according to any descriptions from the book, and accepting an actor who may not entirely fit that description or picture is something that many fans find hard to do. On the other hand, it is not always only a matter of a fan being unable to let go of his/her own interpretation of a character. At times, the decision to cast a certain actor in a certain role can be questionable no matter how good they might be.

An example of this would be the casting of Alan Rickman in the role of Professor Severus Snape. Though Rickman is a very talented actor, he was also fifty-five years old when the first movie was released, whereas at the start of the series Snape is supposedly only thirty-two years old. 9 While one might think that the age difference does not matter so long as the appearance is appropriate, the difference ’ particularly as it's more than twenty years ’ has an effect on that as well. In the book, part of Harry's perception of Snape is that "his eyes were black like Hagrid's, but they had none of Hagrid's warmth. They were cold and empty and made you think of dark tunnels." 10 Snape's youth, coupled with his demeanor, present a more tragic juxtaposition in the book than they do in the film because in the film that juxtaposition does not even exist. How can it when the embittered contempt that emanates from the character is easily understandable, rather than jarring, in the lined face of an older actor?

The choice to cast Rickman has also lead to another unforeseen side effect among Harry Potter fans: Lust.

The newfound Snapemania was sparked in part by the casting of actor Alan Rickman ’ well-established as "the thinking woman's sex symbol" ’ in the role. Rickman's feline movements and mellifluous voice give the Potions Master a sensuality absent from the page. And beyond the shoulder-length black wig and black contact lenses Rickman wears, no attempt is made to ugly him up. 11

This has even led to Rowling herself questioning whether those who profess their love of the character are talking about Snape, or Alan Rickman, and (as the same thing has occurred in the case of Harry's nemesis, Draco Malfoy) lamenting the humanizing effect that an attractive actor tends to have on the villainous characters he portrays; "Isn't this life, though? I make this hero ’ Harry, obviously ’ and there he is on screen ... but who does every girl under the age of fifteen fall in love with? Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy." 12

Aside from these and other slight deviations, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (known as Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in the United States 13 ), is remarkably faithful to its source text. In fact, BBC film reviewer Adrian Hennigan wrote that Columbus treated "J.K. Rowling's debut novel with a reverence that wasn't even accorded to the Bible." 14

However, not all deemed such devotion praise-worthy, and the film "was criticized by many as being too faithful to the book." 15 One summed the film up as "an adaptation which paradoxically undermines itself by aiming at a faithful replication of the source text' 16 while others merely declared that "a commitment to fidelity (in response to the perceived demands of readers/viewers) compromises the processes of adaptation." 17 However, on the other side of the spectrum, respected critic Roger Ebert wrote that the film had succeeded in doing "full justice to a story that was a daunting challenge ... During [the film] I was pretty sure I was watching a classic." 18

There are a couple of issues that help explain this broad range of reactions ’ aside from the obvious reality of people having different opinions. One of these issues is that this book and film are the first of a series, and so while the actual plot is one of mystery, it doesn't appear until rather late in the actual story ’ the time up to that point being taken up by Harry's introduction to (and the setting up of) the wizarding world. In fact, in the shooting script for the film, the titular Stone is only very obliquely referred to for the first time on the twenty-second page; "Hogwarts business. Very secret' 19 and once more on the forty-third; "the third floor corridor ... is out of bounds to everyone who does not wish to die a most painful death' 20 before the characters are confronted with the actual mystery on page fifty-five:

HERMIONE Didn't you see what it was standing on? [...] It was standing on a trapdoor, which means it's not there by accident. It's-

HARRY Guarding something. 21

This means that the actual plot of the first film doesn't start until fifty-five pages into the script, completely ignoring a rule that is not just for "adaptation, it's a rule of screenwriting in general. You've only got about thirty pages to set everything up. Establish your main characters ... ground the audience in the world where your story takes place, introduce the dramatic problem, and move into the second act." 22 Lagging with the opening could add to any pacing problems that might develop, as well as become the source of accusations of too much fidelity by critics. And yet, because this introduction is not just for this film but for the entire series, it's (arguably) necessary, because the plotline revolving around the Philosopher's Stone might be the focus of the first film, but Harry's place in the wizarding world remains a focus of each of the films that follow. To breeze through it would be inexcusable, making the resulting ambling movement towards the main plot of the film all but unavoidable. However, it is worth it to remember that that introduction is part of what the audience is there to see.

The other issue that must be highlighted when discussing the expectations of both fans and critics is the overwhelming, ever-growing Harry Potter phenomenon that accompanies the release of every single bit of news even remotely relating to the series. As Suman Gupta wrote in a chapter of his book entitled Movie Magic : "Very seldom have films been so preordained to be blockbusters, received so much media attention before they appeared ... been anticipated with so much informed readiness." 23

Perhaps Professor Philip Nel put it best when he wrote that "the film does no violence to readers' imagined versions of characters and events, but it does not offer its own creative vision." 24

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)

This film, like the first, was directed by Christopher Columbus and written for the screen by Steve Kloves. Because most of the creative team was the same, most of the commentary towards the process of creating this film is similar as well. However, there are some significant differences and additional issues unexplored in the topic for the previous film that warrant its own ’ albeit shorter ’ discussion.

Structurally, the second film is quite different from the first, as the introduction to the entire Harry Potter universe isn't necessary this time around. As Rowling put it; "The first one is episodic ... And Chamber is a more linear structure so it was easier to translate to screen." 25 However, it is also the longest Harry Potter film (though, to be fair, it only beats Goblet of Fire by four minutes), and the pacing suffers for it. As one critic wrote, "You get the sense that its makers have tried to film a novel instead of make a movie' 26 while another pointed out that "watching the film, I mostly felt sensory overload as one special effect was piled atop another. In fact director Chris Columbus has scrupulously avoided anything like genuine emotion." 27

To be fair, he was worrying about other things - namely, his young stars.

Casting these kids at the beginning of Sorcerer's Stone was, in a way, horrifying. I spent the first two weeks on that film trying to get them to look away from the camera, stop smiling and be able to utter one line so I could cut around it. 28

The experience (or lack of same) of his actors contributed in a large way to how Columbus was able to shoot both of the Harry Potter movies he filmed. As none of the child actors had ever done anything professional before ’ aside from Daniel Radcliffe, who had only had a few small roles ’ the movie had to be shot and edited around them. The first two Harry Potter films owe their less-than-sophisticated look to the fact that prolonged camera shots and wide angles were simply not possible in most cases involving the young stars ’ and neither was the endless repetition that can otherwise be associated with film-making. In fact, Columbus "rehearsed very little with the children since ... he didn't want to lose their spontaneity." 29

In Columbus' words; "When we wrapped on Chamber of Secrets , their performances had improved immensely, and they had become seasoned professionals. I felt my job was complete' 30 and with his job complete, so was the second film.

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)

It is in the discussion of the third film in the Harry Potter series that a more intricate and varied discussion on the pros and cons of the adaptation process can truly commence. This is not to say that discussing the first two films is without merit, but that as the books get longer (indeed, the third one is the first of the series to break 300 pages), and the plots grow more complex, the resulting portrayals on film offer more topics to debate.

Another reason that this progression reflected so obviously on the film series was that Christopher Columbus, director of the first two films, stepped back into the role of co-producer (with David Heyman and others) on this film, leading to Mexican filmmaker Alfonso Cuarón being hired to direct. Having previously brought his unique visual style to films like A Little Princess (and consequently proving he could work with children), Cuarón was drafted to lead the Harry Potter series in a new direction: "My approach was that I wanted to do a character driven piece, with cool visual effects, rather than a visual effects movie with some characters running around." 31

At the same time, Cuarón was conscious of the fact that he was stepping into an already-established universe, admitting that "it was one of [his] hesitations" before accepting the position. 32 He solved that dilemma by resolving to serve the material: "and the material meant before anything else the book, and then secondly the position of this film in the franchise of Harry Potter." 33

His overall success may be debatable, but what cannot be questioned is the dramatic change made in the look of this third film. As Columbus remembers: "Most of our sets were already built, but Alfonso had a desire ’ as did our production designer Stuart Craig ’ to open up the picture." 34 Using more wide-angle and tracking shots to heighten the sense of drama, 35 Cuarón was intent on facilitating the overall flow of the film, as well as creating lasting visual connections throughout. 36 Particular focus was paid to images relating to time (Harry spends several scenes in and around a large clock tower at Hogwarts), and identity (there are numerous scenes that start or end on a close up of a character's eye), in keeping with the themes Cuarón had chosen to highlight. The use of darker colours, more haunting music and dramatic lighting ("high contrast, more shadows") also contributed to the "very different look and feel from the previous films." 37

Perhaps the most important decision made to create this result, however, was one that was more philosophical than technical: "One of the things we decided was that in order for the magic to spring forward more naturally, it had to come from a real and honest place ... What we sought to create was a sense of reality in which the characters interact with each other." 38

Cuarón felt that choosing Michael Seresin for the film's cinematography would help to achieve that goal:

One thing that I felt was perfect for Michael was that we have this magical universe that he could really ground. Because he has got that grittiness, and that grittiness comes from the fact that he is a single-source light cinematographer. He's very naturalistic in that sense. I felt it would be a good marriage with the material. 39

And he seems to have succeeded. As Sloan de Forest, editor and contributor to Scribbulus , writes: "[In] the third film, I saw an immense, imposing Hogwarts drained of its warmth but injected with a unique style and grainy realism not present in the first two films." 40 The film was lauded by both critics and fans as being "the closest any of the films has gotten to capturing the enormously pleasing essence of the Potter books' 41 and there seemed to be a tentative collective agreement that Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban was a truly great movie. But that does not mean it was a great movie of the book , and as this is the difference that this essay seeks to highlight, more in depth examination is necessary.

The unique thing about the book, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban , is that it is arguably not a story in and of itself ’ but the story of a story, which gradually unfolds throughout the book, finally leading to its climactic reveal and the ensuing repercussions. The book covering Harry Potter's third year at Hogwarts is not about Harry Potter's third year at all, but about the events leading up to his parents' deaths twelve years before.

It is fitting, then, that with this book comes the introduction of several new characters, including two of particular importance: Defense Against the Dark Arts Professor Remus Lupin, and the escaped titular Prisoner of Azkaban, Sirius Black. One interviewer notes that their "connection with ... Harry's parents is a major factor in Azkaban's back-story' 42 but though most of that quotation is true, it is the use of the word "back-story" that is the problem.

As Amy Z wrote in her essay An Elegantly Woven Tapestry: Plotlines in Prisoner of Azkaban , "it's true that there is no single central plot in [the story], because one candidate (Quidditch) lacks gravitas, and another (Sirius [versus] Harry) proves to be an illusion." 43 Instead, in the absence of an obvious main storyline, it is the so-called "back-story" that takes centre stage; "while Harry is going about his life ... there is another drama mostly invisible to him (and to us, until the second reading): that of Lupin, Black, Snape, and, if you think about it, Pettigrew." 44 In Prisoner of Azkaban the back-story becomes the main plot, as even though the events transpired twelve years previous, they are unfolding to Harry in the present and the story's climax happens when the truth is finally revealed to all. In that way, there was no conclusion to the events in the past, instead, it was as if those involved were put on hold, held in stasis until Harry's third year at Hogwarts when they were at last able to play it out:

"Everyone thought Sirius killed Peter' said Lupin, nodding. "I believed it myself ” until I saw the map tonight. Because the Marauder's Map never lies... Peter's alive. Ron's holding him, Harry."

"If you're going to tell them the story, get a move on, Remus' said Black, who was still watching Scabbers's every desperate move. "I've waited twelve years, I'm not going to wait much longer."

"Harry' said Lupin hurriedly, "don't you see? All this time we've thought Sirius betrayed your parents, and Peter tracked him down ” but it was the other way around, don't you see? Peter betrayed your mother and father ” Sirius tracked Peter down ”" 45

As Amy Z writes: "We think the story is about Black trying to kill Harry, so the plot seems focused on that; but that's not what the story is about. It's about Sirius in a whole different way, and it's as much about Pettigrew." 46 With the misunderstandings cleared up and the truth of the events of twelve years before revealed, the climax of their story becomes the climax of the book itself ’ one which ultimately ends in near disaster, allowing the fallout to finally occur.

In discussing how she has conceptualized the third book, Harry Potter fan Kelly Parker writes:

I think the third book is more about setting up the series for later on and dealing more with the past and how it is affecting Harry and the entire wizarding world now. It's not so much about his schooling ... his schooling takes a back seat to finding out about his godfather and dealing with all of that. I personally think this is one of the most pivotal books in the series. 47

Unfortunately, Alfonso Cuarón apparently did not see it in exactly the same way: "This film is concerned with confronting [the characters'] innermost fears ... It's [also] a journey of a character's seeking his identity and accepting who he is. To step out of the shadow of his father, for instance, is one of the themes." 48 Putting aside the question of whether or not this is true, the difference of opinion as to the main focus of the story obviously resulted in the exclusion of certain things.

One of the most often cited examples of such an exclusion is the actual back-story of Harry's parents and their friends. Included in this example are several key pieces of information that are either missing from the film entirely, or mentioned in vague generalities that are easily glossed over. The most important piece of information that is introduced in this story is the betrayal of Harry's parents that led to their deaths. It is in this book that we learn that Voldemort could not just go and attack the Potters, and that they would have been safe had they not trusted the wrong person, because of the preparations they had taken before going into hiding:

"Dumbledore told them that their best chance was the Fidelius Charm."

"How does that work?" said Madam Rosmerta, breathless with interest. Professor Flitwick cleared his throat.

"An immensely complex spell' he said squeakily, "involving the magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul. The information is hidden inside the chosen person, or Secret-Keeper, and is henceforth impossible to find ” unless, of course, the Secret-Keeper chooses to divulge it. As long as the Secret-Keeper refused to speak, You-Know-Who could search the village where Lily and James were staying for years and never find them, not even if he had his nose pressed against their sitting room window!" 49

The fact that Sirius Black was thought to be the Potters' Secret-Keeper, and therefore the only person capable of betraying them, is rather central to how he became the titular Prisoner , having been sent to Azkaban without a trial. The fact that Peter Pettigrew was the actual Secret-Keeper, and therefore the only possible betrayer of the Potters: " ˜ Lily and James only made you Secret-Keeper because I suggested it,' Black hissed ... ˜I thought it was the perfect plan... a bluff... Voldemort would be sure to come after me ... It must have been the finest moment of your miserable life, telling Voldemort you could hand him the Potters,' " 50 is also central to understanding the story. However, interestingly enough, the word "Secret-Keeper" is never spoken even once during the entire film, and the importance of the role is instead glossed over, when it is referred to at all: "Well, now, years ago, when Harry Potter's parents realized that they were marked for death ’ do you remember? ’ they went into hiding. Few knew where they were. One who did, was Sirius Black ’ and he told You-Know-Who!" 51

Aside from being factually wrong, as it was Harry and not his parents who was marked for death, the use of the word "few" and the phrase "one who did" instead of " the one who did" would imply that more than one person knew where the Potters were hiding. This would, in turn, mean that more than one person would have been able to betray them, rendering Sirius Black's immediate condemnation inexplicable ’ and potentially Peter Pettigrew's later one as well.

Although it minimizes the betrayal of the Potters, the vagueness that resulted from the absence of the word "Secret-Keeper" could still have been explained had another piece of information been included:

Sirius here played a trick on [Snape] which nearly killed him ... [he] thought it would be ’ er ’ amusing, to tell Snape all he had to do was prod the knot on the tree-trunk with a long stick, and he'd be able to get in after me ... if he'd got as far as this house, he'd have met a fully grown werewolf. 52

The knowledge that Sirius Black, at sixteen, sent a fellow classmate to his death without remorse (later saying it was just a prank), would have gone a long way to explaining why of the "few" who "knew where [the Potters] were", he was the most likely suspect: " ˜ Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of sixteen,' [Snape] breathed. ˜You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me ?' " 53 And although this might be considered a deviation from the central plot, or potentially slow exposition in a genre where showing is prized above telling , film as a visual medium allows for both to happen at once. This enlightening bit of back-story could easily have been accompanied by either a flashback or a montage of images, illustrating what was being said. However, this did not happen, and unfortunately, it is not the most important piece of information left out of the final film, by far.

The fact that Remus Lupin, Peter Pettigrew, Sirius Black, and James Potter are the same Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot, and Prongs who created the map Harry is coincidentally given by his friends is never mentioned, even when ample opportunity arises ’ as seen in the following comparative examples:

Prisoner of Azkaban (the book):

"I happen to know that this map was confiscated by Mr. Filch many years ago. Yes, I know it's a map' [Lupin] said, as Harry and Ron looked amazed. 54

Prisoner of Azkaban (the film):

PROFESSOR LUPIN I don't know how this map came to be in your possession, Harry, but I'm astounded that you didn't turn it in....

Harry walks silently. 55

While this might seem a small, relatively unimportant piece of information, it would only be considered so in isolation. However, this is not so. The connection of each man to his nickname not only solidifies the reality of their once close friendship, but it also connects each to his animal form and the fact that three became Animagi for the fourth: "My three friends could hardly fail to notice that I disappeared once a month ... I was terrified they would desert me ... [but] they didn't desert me at all. ... They became Animagi ... They couldn't keep me company as humans, so they kept me company as animals. A werewolf is only a danger to people." 56

The connection to Animagi is important because of the role that each man's form plays in the overall story. Peter Pettigrew is able to fake his own death and hide for twelve years as Ron's pet rat; Sirius Black is able to both keep his sanity while in and finally escape from Azkaban as a large dog; and Harry is able to discover and reclaim a part of his father, which he finds within himself, when his Patronus takes on the form of his father's stag. And while the first two are obvious in the film without the nickname connection, the fact that James Potter was an Animagus is not, and therefore the significance of Harry's Patronus is lost. This is particularly ironic considering that it is James Potter as Prongs who is arguably the link between the opinions of the fans already stated as to the main storyline of the book, and director Alfonso Cuarón's interpretation: "It has to do with Harry coming to terms with his male energy, his father and what his father is." 57

The absence of this information is notable not only because it details exactly "what his father is", but also because the information was there in the shooting script, but still didn't make it to the final cut:

PROFESSOR LUPIN Before I go, tell me about your Patronus.

HARRY Well. At first I thought it was a horse, or perhaps a unicorn, but I think it was ’

PROFESSOR LUPIN A stag.

PROFESSOR LUPIN Your father used to transform into one. That's how he was able to keep me company when I became... sick. ... There are stories about him and your mother, you know. Some are even true. But I think it's safe to say, in the end you'll know them best by getting to know yourself. 58

As the final cut of the film is decided on by the director (and the editor, at his direction), it is particularly peculiar that none of the dialogue in this excerpt ’ all of which would go towards emphasizing Cuarón's apparent vision ’ appears in the finished version. This would not be a problem were it not for the fact that in losing these aspects of the story, the viewer is treated to a film that is incomplete ’ not only in and of itself, but also as a part of the ongoing series.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)

As with the third film, the fourth in the Harry Potter series invites a more detailed discussion on the difficulties and competing interests involved in adapting a book to a film. Fortunately for this essay, most of the issues raised in this discussion differ significantly from those presented in each previous film. One reason for this difference was the inclusion of a new director, filmmaker Mike Newell of Four Weddings and a Funeral fame, who, in his own words, had "never made a film like this before and [had] never made a film even a quarter as big as this before." 59 Unlike the other films in the series thus far, this film presented a directorial challenge even before shooting began. At 636 pages, Goblet of Fire is more than double the size of Prisoner of Azkaban (the longest of the previous three), and Warner Bros. Studio originally intended to split the story in half, shooting the two films back to back, and releasing them close together ’ similar to what had been done for the second and third films of the Matrix trilogy. 60 Mike Newell, however, thought this unnecessary: "As far as I'm concerned it's absolutely possible to do it in one. I think it would be slightly embarrassing to do it in two." 61

Aiming to avoid this, Newell pitched his conception of the story to the producers; "I said to them, I said, I can only make this if you will agree that what we're making is a thriller and we will ruthlessly take out stuff that doesn't go to that' 62 later adding that the whole point of the story was that the villain "needs one tiny, tiny little thing from the boy: three drops of blood." 63 As the first British director in the series, Mike Newell felt that he had the insider expertise necessary to bring an authenticity to the films that they were previously lacking ’ particularly in regards to the British school system: "It wasn't possible for them to get that right. They'd never been to such a school' 64 Newell said, further explaining:

I went through this sort of education. ... I wasn't at a boarding school ... but there's an enormous body of literature books ... and I had read all of those, and I'd been to a school just like it where you were beaten with a cane. I remember some of the teachers being really quite violent ... and it had a headmaster of whom one was likely terrified and then a descending order of authority figures, and then there was... and then there was us. ... I don't see how anybody who hadn't gone through that, who wasn't English, could possibly have suspected that. 65

There are two facets of this quote that require further examination, the first being Newell's view of Hogwarts as being just like all of the typical British boarding schools he never attended. Shaun Hately, author of the essay Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry in the Context of the British Public Schools , writes that "Hogwarts is not a perfect exemplar of the Public School tradition ’ while there is a substantial influence, it cannot be assumed that Hogwarts always follows Public School traditions." 66 Further on in the paper, in discussing corporal punishment, Hately demonstrates that "At Hogwarts, such methods seem to have fallen into disuse' 67 citing a quotation from the first book in the Harry Potter series; "Oh yes... Hard work and pain are the best teachers if you ask me... It's just a pity they let the old punishments die out." 68

Additional evidence presents itself in the book from which Newell made his own adaptation, when Professor Moody transfigures a student into a ferret and proceeds to bounce him up and down, catching the attention of Professor McGonagall:

"Moody, we never use Transfiguration as a punishment!" said Professor McGonagall weakly. "Surely Professor Dumbledore told you that?"

"He might've mentioned it, yeah' said Moody, scratching his chin unconcernedly, "but I thought a good sharp shock ”"

"We give detentions, Moody! Or speak to the offender's Head of House!" 69

To J.K. Rowling, the "worst, shabbiest thing you can do" as a teacher "[is] bully children' 70 and corporal punishment has no place in Harry's world. And yet Newell, who admits that even real English schools have changed now, still felt the need to "[rewrite] a scene to add a glint of schoolboy mischievousness and the corporal punishment it provokes, in which dour Professor Snape ... bonks Harry and Ron in the head with a book for goofing off during a study period." 71 Snape does not appear at all in the scene in the shooting script for the film, 72 so it is obvious that this was a directorial decision. His selection is also unfortunate for the fact that his character is not one to be considered slapstick, nor is his hatred of Harry something in which to find comic relief. However, this twisted characterization appears to be a sort of specialty of Newell's, which is the second facet of the previous long quotation in need of examination.

As with the school he runs, Newell has also assigned headmaster Albus Dumbledore to a role in the film that is not in keeping with any other information readily available about him. His idea of Dumbledore as "a headmaster of whom one [is] likely terrified' 73 is directly at odds with J.K. Rowling's assertion that Dumbledore is instead "the epitome of goodness." 74 Indeed, Hately's essay specifies how the character "as presented in the Harry Potter books seems to fit neatly into the mould of the great benevolent public school Headmaster' 75 and as James A. Morone wrote in his article Cultural Phenomena: Dumbledore's Message , "[he] practically awards bonus points for breaking the rules' 76 citing this quotation from Chamber of Secrets as proof: "I seem to remember telling you both that I would have to expel you if you broke any more school rules ... Which goes to show that the best of us must sometimes eat our words." 77

The issue of the character and characterization of Dumbledore is a difficult one for numerous reasons. The choice of actor to play the role is very much tied up in that ’ especially because it was made twice. Richard Harris, a veteran of over seventy films, was initially cast in the role, which he played for the first two films. Critics wrote that his selection "was perfection; he had that twinkle in his eye and he conveyed that Dumbledore was as solid as a rock and as wise as readers of J.K. Rowling knew him to be. There was a certainty about him." 78

However, when Richard Harris passed away shortly before principal photography was to begin on the third film, a new Dumbledore had to be found. Michael Gambon made his Dumbledore debut in Prisoner of Azkaban , and his performance in both it and Goblet of Fire has garnered several comments ’ though, unfortunately, few have been complimentary: "I have to say that I thought Gambon's performance lacked some of the warmth and humour that Harris provided." 79 Newell, on the other hand, thought he was perfect:

I think that he had not wanted to be the same figure that Richard Harris had been, a figure of enormous Olympian authority who's never caught on the hop. He wanted something to do, simply because he isn't Richard Harris, and what he found in this one is that Dumbledore is fallible, not omnipotent, and indeed is behind the game. A great deal of what he does is about being inadequate rather than super-adequate, which is obviously much more interesting to play. 80

More interesting to play, perhaps, but woefully inaccurate. Even leaving aside the fact that if Gambon did not want to be the same figure Richard Harris had been, his decision to take over the role seems suspect; Dumbledore has been known throughout the series for being the only one Voldemort has ever feared. However, as de Forest points out:

for this fear to be plausible, Dumbledore needs to appear sharp-witted and not cross the line from affable eccentric to preposterous crackpot. ... How can [Newell] expect us to believe that anyone in the wizarding world reveres a panicky, absentminded grump who ... impulsively attacks his favourite student, throttling little Harry about the shoulders and neck? 81

And to Newell's argument that a fallible, inadequate, and behind-the-game Dumbledore creates a more interesting and more humanized mentor for Harry, M.Y. Simms asks in her essay Action! Harry Potter from the Page to the Screen :

Why would the greatest wizard in the world suddenly appear to suffer from chronic anxiety? I understand that things got serious in Goblet of Fire, but consider this: would Yoda, Merlin, Gandalf or Obi-Wan have freaked out when things got serious and danger loomed? ... I think not. ... Where did the ˜magic' of Dumbledore go? 82

In fact, far from being behind-the-game, J.K. Rowling's Dumbledore continues to run steadily ahead, even at the end of Goblet of Fire , after Harry's confrontation with Voldemort has already taken place:

"He said that my blood would make him stronger than if he'd used someone else's' Harry told Dumbledore. "... And he was right ” he could touch me without hurting himself, he touched my face."

For a fleeting instant, Harry thought he saw a gleam of something like triumph in Dumbledore's eyes. 83

Unfortunately, one repercussion from Newell's decision to have Gambon portray Dumbledore in this mistaken manner ’ a decision that is proved to be directorial rather than scriptural, due to the calmer version of the character evidenced in the shooting script 84 ’ is more detrimental than having raised the ire of fans; that being the effect it will have on the next installment of the franchise.

One of the main issues that Harry must deal with in the fifth book is his relationship with Dumbledore and how it has, inexplicably (to him), become estranged. This separation, or distance, that Harry feels causes him great distress as he wonders why the headmaster doesn't seem to care about him anymore. This leads to continued misunderstandings which result in the death of a main character and the discovery of a prophecy. Unfortunately, due to the portrayal of these relationships in the fourth movie, Harry would be unlikely to wonder if the headmaster cared about him in the first place, nor would it really matter to him either way. And the revelation given to Harry at the end, that Dumbledore "cared about [him] too much" and did all he had done because he "acted exactly as Voldemort expects [the] fools who love to act' 85 would scarce be believable from Gambon's discredited caricature. Of course, as Newell has not even read the fifth book, his failure to set it up properly is unfortunately explained.

What's not as easily explained is his failure in setting up even his own film, as he did read the fourth book in preparation. 86 As one critic wrote:

If the film version of [Prisoner of Azkaban] was missing some major plot points, and therefore felt like it was missing a vital organ or two, this one was like finding a skeleton that had been stripped of every conceivable scrap of flesh, leaving only the bare bones behind. Many character motivations were fuzzy at best; my mother, who hadn't read the book, had a million questions for me after we left the theatre. 87

But perhaps this weakness can be understood in reading Newell's approach to creating the film, in his own words: "What you do is you pack it with references and suggestions and so forth which, of course, you have taken from the book. So that a reader coming to the film goes, "Oh, I see. I get it. They did it that way." 88 The idea that fans would be appeased by a few references to aspects of the book, no matter what the quality of storytelling, is problematic at best, insulting at worst, and condescending either way. "The movie ticks through critical plot points like it's checking them off a list' 89 writes Anita Burkam in the article From Page to Screen: Mike Newell's Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire ; "All that's missing is reasonably paced and plotted moviemaking." 90 That, and the so-called "human truth" that Newell apparently prized above all else: "You become more interested in [Harry's] interior processes, his emotions, than just what goes on' Newell asserts, 91 though it is difficult to understand why he is convinced of this when he, as director, seems more interested in what he can do with Harry's external world than in how to express the character's internal one. "It's one of the most powerful and dramatic scenes' 92 producer David Heyman says, in praise of Newell's work. And which scene is he talking about? The maze in the third task, which, as Dumbledore mysteriously informs each champion, changes people? The graveyard where Harry watches Voldemort's rebirth, duels with him, and comes face to face with the ghost-like shades of his long-dead parents?

No, of course not, that would make sense . Instead, as Heyman clarifies, "We departed from the book a little bit in the sense that the dragon breaks free of the chain that ties him and it leads to a dramatic chase through Hogwarts. Let's just say it doesn't necessarily meet the happiest of ends." 93 Never mind the fact that, as no one dies and Harry completes the task successfully, it does actually meet the happiest of ends, Heyman is talking about a scene in which Harry faces off with the dragon during the first task of the Triwizard Tournament. This is a scene which takes exactly two pages in the book (which includes the detailed description necessary of the medium), but in the film, it clocks in at nearly three minutes ’ a ridiculously long length of time on screen, particularly for Newell, who has said that "all of [these effects] would count for nothing if [audiences] simply didn't feel it." 94

Yet, as de Forest notes, "when a film jumps wildly from scene to scene, frantically flinging in new characters and situations willy-nilly, the seeds of authentic emotional reaction don't have time to be sown and flourish naturally ... the natural rhythm of reaction is massacred." 95 All of this leads to an ending of equal ruination, in what de Forest terms "a thrown-together mess of a conclusion. It seems unsure whether to end on a hopeful note, a tragic note, a portentous note, a humorous note or a poignant note, so it compromises by fizzling out with a flat uncertainty. ˜Everything's going to change now, isn't it?' asks Hermione. Yup. Sure is. Well. Will you sign my yearbook?" 96

While several critics enjoyed the film ’ and several film audiences, too ’ the question of whether or not Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was a good film is not the one that is asked in this essay. Instead, the question of whether or not it was a good film of the book must be considered, and while Mike Newell's Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire might be considered a fun, and even wild ride of a film, it remains on the surface, granting only a superficial and distorted glimpse into the story of Harry's fourth year. J.K. Rowling's Dumbledore warned; "You have to make a choice between what is right, and what is easy." 97 It is unfortunate that Mike Newell did not heed this advice.

Harry Potter and the End of This Essay (2007)

"Books have one of the highest ratios of conversion from development to film of any source, including original screenplays' 98 and yet the process of adapting the Harry Potter book series into films is unique in many ways. Perhaps the most important cause of its uniqueness is the fact that the seven book series is being adapted one novel after the other, and yet the seven book series is not yet complete. With the intense secrecy surrounding the story and revelations still to come from the original author, filmmakers must attempt to adapt each of these films from an incomplete overall source text. This only heightens the difficulty and the scrutiny that are already present in the adaptation process. That is why the question of fidelity, though it "cannot be considered a valid yardstick with which to judge any adaptation' 99 must figure in more heavily than it might otherwise. John Tibbetts and James Welsh wrote that "movies do not ˜ruin' books, but merely misrepresent them' 100 as "the accumulation of minor details can create a markedly different experience between a book and a film' 101 and while usually that may not create any problems, Mike Newell's Dumbledore aptly demonstrates that in an ongoing ’ and unfinished ’ series, certain changes have far-reaching effects.

Still, while fidelity holds more importance in this case than in others, "changes made by the screenwriter and director might not necessarily destroy the original. In the best adaptations, narratives are translated and effectively transformed into the medium of film." 102 With the seventh, and last, Harry Potter novel being released this summer, perhaps the remaining films will have a better chance of achieving this transformation.

Mireia Aragay writes in Reflection to Refraction: Adaptation Studies Then and Now , that the real aim of adaptation is

to trade upon the memory of the novel, a memory that can derive from actual reading, or, as is more likely with a classic of literature, a generally circulated cultural memory. The adaptation consumes this memory, aiming to efface it with the presence of its own images. The successful adaptation is the one that is able to replace the memory of the novel. 103

Although Harry Potter is not widely considered a classic of literature, the same philosophy can apply. An adaptation must be more than a filmed novel, without compromising the text it is meant to represent. A good film does not make a good adaptation, and though the Harry Potter film series had a promising start, future directors would do well to keep those words in mind. Notes 1. Cartmell, "Shakespeare on Screen' 33.

2. Tibbetts and Welsh, Novels Into Film , 279.

3. Havens, Genius Behind Buffy , 24.

4. Elrick, "Chris Columbus talks¦."

5. McNamara, "When Steve Met Harry."

6. Elrick, "Chris Columbus talks¦."

7. Hopkins, "Behind the Scenes¦."

8. McNamara, "When Steve Met Harry."

9. Vander Ark, "The Ages of Snape and the Marauders."

10. Rowling, Philosopher's Stone , 102.

11. Millman, "To Sir, With Love' 43.

12. Rowling, "Edinburgh Book Festival."

13. Scholastic editor Arthur Levine, suggested that Rowling change the title of the book for its American release as he felt it was "too esoteric' and the change would convey "more immediately the sense of magic that's in the book" (Heiberger). This, despite the fact that the Philosopher's Stone is an object of legend, often found in myth and folklore (Anderson), and referred to in many areas of study, including religion, alchemy, the occult ¦ while the Sorcerer's Stone means nothing.

14. Hennigan, "Films ¦ Philosopher's Stone ."

15. Krevolin, How to Adapt¦ , 52.

16. Aragay, "Reflection to Refraction' 20.

17. Cartmell and Whelehan, "Fidelity Debate' 37.

18. Ebert, "Sorcerer's Stone."

19. Kloves, Sorcerer's Stone, 22.

20. Ibid., 43.

21. Ibid., 55-56.

22. Krevolin, How to Adapt¦ , 54.

23. Gupta, Re-Reading Harry Potter , 143.

24. Nel, "Bewitched, Bothered, and Bored."

25. Mzimba, "Conversation with¦."

26. Nel, "Bewitched, Bothered, and Bored."

27. Butler, " Potter has the stuff¦."

28. Spelling, "Leaving School' 44.

29. Elrick, "Chris Columbus talks¦."

30. Spelling, "Leaving School' 44.

31. "Y tu Harry¦' 22.

32. Ibid, 19.

34. Spelling, "Leaving School' 44.

35. Puig, "Harry hits his teens."

36. Nazarro, "The New Magician' 39.

37. Puig, "Harry hits his teens."

38. Nazarro, "The New Magician' 38.

39. Trout, "Alfonso Cuarón Interview."

40. de Forest, "Fractured Fairy Tale."

41. Turan, "Prisoner of Azkaban."

42. Nazarro, "Alfonso Cuarón Interview."

43. Z, "Elegantly Woven Tapestry."

45. Rowling, Prisoner of Azkaban , 257-68.

46. Z, "Elegantly Woven Tapestry."

47. Kelly Parker, e-mail message to author, 12 April 2007.

48. Puig, "Harry hits his teens."

49. Rowling, Prisoner of Azkaban , 152.

50. Ibid., 271.

51. Kloves, Prisoner of Azkaban .

52. Rowling, Prisoner of Azkaban , 261.

53. Ibid., 286.

54. Ibid., 213.

55. Kloves, Prisoner of Azkaban , 80.

56. Rowling, Prisoner of Azkaban , 259-60.

57. Nazarro, "The New Magician' 38.

58. Kloves, Prisoner of Azkaban , 125.

59. Fischer, "Exclusive Interview."

61. Geri, "News: Mike Newell¦."

62. Fischer, "Exclusive Interview."

63. Ibid., "Interview: Mike Newell."

64. Associated Press, "Newell puts the Brit¦."

65. Fischer, "Exclusive Interview."

66. Hately, "Hogwarts School of¦."

68. Rowling, Philosopher's Stone , 181.

69. Ibid., Goblet of Fire , 182.

70. Fraser, Conversations with J.K. Rowling , 21.

71. Associated Press, "Newell puts the Brit¦."

72. Kloves, Goblet of Fire , 66-67.

73. Fischer, "Exclusive Interview."

74. Solomon, "J.K. Rowling Interview."

75. Hately, "Hogwarts School of¦."

76. Morone, "Cultural Phenomena."

77. Rowling, Chamber of Secrets , 243.

78. Simms, "Action! Harry Potter¦."

79. Aloi, "Grown Up Magic."

80. Whitehead, "Interview: Mike Newell¦."

81. Witherwings, "Fractured Fairy Tale."

82. Simms, "Action! Harry Potter¦."

83. Rowling, Goblet of Fire , 604.

84. Kloves, Goblet of Fire , 32.

85. Rowling, Order of the Phoenix , 739.

86. Fischer, "Exclusive Interview."

87. Moondaughter, "Under the Microscope."

88. Geri, "Newell discusses¦."

89. Burkam, "From Page to Screen."

92. Geri, "Update: Heyman talks¦."

94. Nathan, "This boy¦' 90.

95. Witherwings, "Fractured Fairy Tale."

97. Rowling, Goblet of Fire , 628.

98. Hopkins, "Behind the Scenes¦."

99. Aragay, "Reflection to Refraction' 20.

100. Tibbetts and Welsh, Novels Into Film , xvii.

101. Nel, "Bewitched, Bothered, and Bored."

102. Tibbetts and Welsh, Novels Into Film , xx.

103. Aragay, "Reflection to Refraction' 20.

Bibliography

Aloi, Peg. "Grown Up Magic." Witch Cinema 19, 5 June 2004. http://www.witchvox.com/va/dt_article.html?a=usma&id=8491 .

Anderson, Hans Christian. "The Philosopher's Stone (1859)." Hans Christian Anderson: Fairy Tales and Stories . 25 September 2006: http://hca.gilead.org.il/p_stone.html .

Aragay, Mireia. "Reflection to Refraction: Adaptation Studies Then and Now." Books in Motion: Adaptation, Intertextuality, Authorship . Ed. Mireia Aragay. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2005. 11-34.

Associated Press. "Newell puts the Brit back in Harry Potter ." MSNBC , 21 November 2005. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10054009 .

Burkam, Anita L. "From Page to Screen: Mike Newell's Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire." The Horn Book, Inc . http://www.hbook.com/resources/films/harrypotter4.asp .

Butler, Robert W. " Potter has the stuff but not the spirit." The Kansas City Star . 23 November 2001.

Cartmell, Deborah. "The Shakespeare On Screen Industry." Adaptations: From Text to Screen, Screen to Text . Eds. Deborah Cartmell and Imelda Whelehan. London: Routledge, 1999. 29-37.

Cartmell, Deborah and Whelehan, Imelda. "Harry Potter and the Fidelity Debate." Books in Motion: Adaptation, Intertextuality, Authorship . Ed. Mireia Aragay. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2005. 37-49.

Ebert, Roger. "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone." RogerEbert.com: Movie Reviews , 16 November 2001. http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20011116/REVIEWS/111160301/1023 .

Elrick, Ted. "Chris Columbus talks about directing Harry Potter ." DGA Magazine: Directors Guild of America 27:5, January 2003. http://www.dga.org/news/v27_5/feat_columbus.php3 .

Fischer, Paul. "Exclusive Interview: Mike Newell for Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire ." Dark Horizons 24, October 2005). http://www.darkhorizons.com/news05/goblet1.php .

”””. "Interview: Mike Newell for Mona Lisa Smile and Harry Potter 4 ." Dark Horizons 9, December 2003. http://www.darkhorizons.com/news03/mona2.php .

Fraser, Lindsey. Conversations with J.K. Rowling . New York: Scholastic Press, 2001.

Geri. "Newell discusses the challenges of ˜ Harry Potter '." HPANA , 30 November 2004. http://www.hpana.com/news.18430.html .

”””. "News: Mike Newell won't split ˜ Goblet of Fire '." HPANA , 30 January 2004. http://www.hpana.com/news.17863.26.html .

”””. "Update: Heyman talks about first task and Fiennes." HPANA , 11 Oct. 2005. http://www.hpana.com/news.18913.html .

Gupta, Suman. Re-Reading Harry Potter . New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2003.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets . Directed by Christopher Columbus. Burbank: Warner Bros. Pictures, 2002.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire . Directed by Mike Newell. Burbank: Warner Bros. Pictures, 2005.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone . Directed by Chris Columbus. Burbank: Warner Bros. Pictures, 2001.

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban . Directed by Alfonso Cuarón. Burbank: Warner Bros. Pictures, 2004.

Hately, Shaun. "Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry in the Context of the British Public Schools." HP InkPot , 13 December 2005. http://www.fictionalley.org/authors/shaun_hately/HSOWAWATBPS01.html .

Havens, Candace. Joss Whedon: The Genius Behind Buffy . Dallas: BenBella Books, 2003.

Heiberger, Sara. "Harry Potter and the Editor's Pen." Brown Alumni Magazine Online , November/December 2001. http://www.brownalumnimagazine.com/storydetail.cfm?ID=421 .

Harry Potter Archive

Harry Potter Essays

Review of Harry Potter

How it works

Harry Potter and friends are entering their last year of wizarding school. This time, however, the rules have changed. After the death of Albus Dumbledore, the late headmaster of Hogwarts, Harry has made it his goal to finish what Dumbledore started. He and his friends partake on a long adventure across the whole world to find what is known as Horcruxes. These contain Parts of Voldemort’s soul, and may be the key to defeating him. After tailing clues and leads about the first horcrux, they finally find it in the office of ministry official Dolores Umbridge.

They steal it and head back to their safe haven at Harry’s uncle’s house. However, they also bring a death eater back with them, and the safeguard enchantments break down. Throughout the week they are in hiding in the woods, surrounded by only what they can wield as enchantments. They do not know how to destroy the Horcrux and they seemed lost. Finally, Harry finds out that the Sword of Gryffindor can help them. After a little searching, they are able to destroy it and move on. They need to find the other horcruxes, and that they do. They find two more objects and destroy them. Harry, Ron, and Hermione are now at hogwarts. This is where the final battle will take place and is also where Harry has come to die. We find out from Snape that harry and Voldemort’s Snake are the final horcruxes. Neville Longbottom kills the snake, and Harry is presumably killed by Voldemort. However, we find out this is not the case, and it was only the Horcrux inside of Harry that was killed. In a great duel to end the book, Harry Potter finally kills Voldemort once and for all, now that all of the Horcruxes are finished. I really enjoyed this book, even more than I enjoyed watching the movie. It felt so good to know that Voldemort couldn’t come back, because after 7 years of fighting, even the final chapter of hogwarts for the kids is extremely rough. You can feel their pain and their triumph equally, and that is what I loved about this book.

Characterization:

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is full of characters. The characters that changed the most, or the round characters, were Voldemort and Harry Potter. These happen to be the Protagonist and antagonist through the whole series, including the final chapter: the Deathly Hallows. At the beginning of the book Harry believes that to kill Voldemort, he has to hunt down the horcruxes and destroy them. Even after this long in the wizarding world, he is naive to the fact that he might have to sacrifice something to finish off the dark lord. “Yeah” said Harry, “then we’ll have nothing to do but hung horcruxes… It’ll be like a holiday won’t it?” (At the end of the second act he learns that he too, is one of the horcruxes, and must die in order for Voldemort to be destroyed. HE shifts his whole mindset from ‘I have to be the hero”, to “I have to die in order for others to live”. While he doesn’t end up dying, he is willing to make that sacrifice, and therefore becomes a round character. The flat characters include people like Hermione Granger, the Dursleys, and other side characters whose motivations and alliances never change.

Some of the basic themes in this book include: “Mortality”, “Love”, and “Good vs. Evil”.

J.K. Rowling is a world renoune author from Great Britain.

This book is full of symbols. I think the most obvious ones are the deathly hallows. More specifically: the Elder wand. The elder wand is the most powerful wand in all of the Harry Potter book history. Its wielder has the power to beat everyone they face, if used right. However when you dive in to what the elder wand might actually stand for, it gets far more interesting. In the deathly hallows story, we are told that the first brother wanted absolute power. In hearing so, master death gave him the elder wand, so he could defeat all of his opponents. So in conclusion, the elder wand must symbolize power above all other, which in turn might equal death.

The point of view used in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is first Person. We are told the whole story through Harry Potter’s point of view and we only know and learn as he does. This helps us a lot, because through the story, Harry Potter finds out things that make for great plot twists. We wouldn’t have much of a story if we knew that voldemort had to kill Harry. It only turns interesting when Harry finds out this information as it’s almost too late.

The story mainly takes place in scotland at the Hogwarts. It also shifts to the woods as thats where Harry Ron and Hermione are hiding. It takes place in what would have been present day when the book was released. The setting really has little to do with the story, except for at one point or another, almost all of the wizards had passed through Hogwarts.

The center conflicts are mainly man vs man. The good vs the evil takes a dominant role in the story. However, there are some points where Harry will break out into a fight with himself, or with Ron. The fights would be considered man vs self.

An example of situational irony in Deathly Hallows is when we find out Snape was a double agent working for Dumbledore the whole time. We get to see, along with Harry after Snape dies, how much he loved Lily Potter, and how much work he did to make sure Dumbledore and Harry were set up for success.

The closest relation from the book to the real world is the theme of Power. We see all the time the mad scramble for Power, money, or a piece of both. This is also evident in the book, where it’s not just the bad guys going after full power and authority, it is some of the good people as well. It seems to be not only a shifting theme throughout the series of books, but it tends to affect the general population as well, as it does when there is a presidency change in the United States.

Cite this page

Review of Harry Potter. (2019, Nov 06). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/review-of-harry-potter/

"Review of Harry Potter." PapersOwl.com , 6 Nov 2019, https://papersowl.com/examples/review-of-harry-potter/

PapersOwl.com. (2019). Review of Harry Potter . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/review-of-harry-potter/ [Accessed: 26 Apr. 2024]

"Review of Harry Potter." PapersOwl.com, Nov 06, 2019. Accessed April 26, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/review-of-harry-potter/

"Review of Harry Potter," PapersOwl.com , 06-Nov-2019. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/review-of-harry-potter/. [Accessed: 26-Apr-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2019). Review of Harry Potter . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/review-of-harry-potter/ [Accessed: 26-Apr-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

All Your Favorite Harry Potter Movies, Ranked

W hen Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone premiered on Nov. 14, 2001, moviegoers were introduced to the visual wizarding world for the first time. Almost magically, the Harry Potter movies transferred the massive success of the novels by J.K. Rowling, some of the best fantasy books of all time, to the screen. With eight magical movies, plus three Fantastic Beasts prequels, how are the best Harry Potter movies ranked?

The uniqueness of each movie makes the rankings difficult, not to mention personal opinion. To come up with our order, we looked at critical reviews, ratings from Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic, fan favorites, box office numbers and our own personal views to put them in order from worst to best. Still, definitively ranking Harry Potter movies is even harder than coming up with the Star Wars movies ranked !

But first we must address the elephant (dragon?) in the room: Rowling's controversial and upsetting comments about gender identity. Many people disturbed by her words had previously found a safe and welcoming place in the Harry Potter universe, with its themes and hidden messages in the Harry Potter books of the positive forces of inclusion, trust, loyalty and love. We're taking the lead from Daniel Radcliffe, who wrote on The Trevor Project, "If you found anything in these stories that resonated with you and helped you at any time in your life—then that is between you and the book that you read, and it is sacred. And in my opinion nobody can touch that." In addition, the movies are the work not just of the author of the novels, but the many actors, directors, writers, special effects masters and all the other crew members who brought to life the visual Harry Potter world we know and love.

With that said, let's take a look at the films that many would consider among the best movies of all time , must-see classic family movies  and the most exciting drama movies to ever grace the big screen. Though the rankings were difficult, we solemnly swear we were up to some good.

Which Harry Potter movie did the best?

In terms of box office success, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 , the last film in the series, earned the most money, with a lifetime domestic gross of $381,011,219. But the first film, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, also did extremely well, breaking the opening weekend record of $72 million held by Jurassic Park: The Lost World by taking home more than $90 million and earning its place as the second-highest grossing movie ever at the time. The most popular movies in the series, both Deathly Hallows: Part 2 and Sorcerer's Stone, have since passed the $1 billion worldwide box-office gross.

Which Harry Potter movie is the most underrated?

Just as it would be hard to decide which Harry Potter novel belongs on the list of most underrated books , this is, of course, a completely subjective question. There's really no such thing as a bad Harry Potter movie! Personally, we love the reflective quality of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 , although for most fans it's on the bottom of the list. Another low-ranking movie, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, has a long runtime that only gives viewers more Harry Potter to enjoy. But for most fans, the most underrated is generally agreed to be Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince , which is gorgeously shot, well acted and sprinkles in bits of humor missing from some of the earlier films.

Can you watch all eight Harry Potter movies in a day?

If you're talking about just the eight films in the main Harry Potter series, then technically, yes—if you're up for a 24-hour movie marathon. All the Harry Potter films clock in with a total runtime of 19 hours and 39 minutes, so you'd have just over four hours left for pee breaks, trips to the fridge and maybe a little sleep. But adding in the three Fantastic Beasts movies puts it over the 24-hour mark, as they'd add on another nearly seven hours combined. Only the most die-hard fans would attempt this feat—probably the same ones who could ace any Harry Potter quiz .

And now, on to the Harry Potter movie rankings!

11. Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

The second Fantastic Beasts ranked lowest among critics and audiences alike, even with a script from J.K. Rowling herself. Among the positives, though, is a return to a more familiar wizarding world after the first Fantastic Beasts movie took viewers to America and added brand-new characters to the universe. In this 2018 film from longtime Harry Potter director David Yates, we return to Hogwarts and a very young professor Dumbledore (Jude Law) as he plans to take on the evil wizard Grindelwald (Johnny Depp). We even find out the origin story of Voldemort's snake, Nagini.

Critics, though, thought bringing back familiar characters and settings didn't allow Fantastic Beasts to exist as a stand-alone series. Even hard-core Harry Potter fans thought the flick was too heavy on the world-building setup for future films and confusing sub-plots, and too light on character development and satisfying plot conclusions. But still, the world of Harry Potter lives on—there's even a new Harry Potter theme park opening.

Available on: HBO Max

10. Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore

This 2022 film debuted to no small amount of controversy. Alongside Rowling's statements about the trans community, actor Mads Mikkelsen also replaced Johnny Depp as Grindelwald in this installment, following Depp's abuse allegations. In the months since its release, actor Ezra Miller, who plays Credence Barebone/Aurelius Dumbledore (spoiler!), has come under fire for extremely erratic behavior, several arrests and allegations of grooming a minor.

Despite the shadow of controversy that only seems to grow more complicated as the film ages, Secrets of Dumbledore  was generally considered a better movie than its previous installment. Though it earned nearly $250 million less at the box office, it tried to course-correct from the unfocused Crimes of Grindelwald  and saw an uptick in critical and audience ratings. Despite suffering from the predictability and heavy-handedness that has plagued the Fantastic Beasts franchise, impactful action sequences and a strong performance from Jude Law as young Dumbledore in love with Grindelwald made this movie more satisfying than its second effort. However, it's unclear if that will be enough to justify the filming of the previously planned fourth and fifth installments, which have yet to be confirmed.

9. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

Based on the fictional book Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them by Newt Scamander, a magical text mentioned in the Harry Potter novels that Rowling then turned into an actual book, this 2016 film directed by David Yates is the first prequel to the main film series. It's a little jarring to be out of the world of Hogwarts—and indeed out of England—as our main character, a gentle soul and "magizoologist" who's good with magical creatures, travels to New York in the 1920s.

But Eddie Redmayne touches our hearts as Newt, and the supporting cast, including a sly Colin Farrell, helps bolster the movie, written by first-time screenwriter Rowling herself. Eventually, we find a connection with the Harry Potter world we know in the dark wizard Grindelwald, who we recognize as the thief who stole the Elder Wand, one of the Deathly Hallows, and who we know Dumbledore defeated in 1945. The film is notable for winning the series's only Academy Award, for its wonderful costume design. But although we like the movie and all its adorable magical creatures, it can't touch the main series when it comes to Harry Potter movies ranked.

8. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets 2

With the longest runtime of any Harry Potter movie (2 hours and 41 minutes) and one of the lowest worldwide box office grosses of the main series, the second film , from 2002, does show the series hitting a sophomore slump. Although there are some standout moments—the flying car, Harry battling the basilisk, getting to see a young Tom Riddle (aka Voldemort)—much of the second movie seems a bit overloaded. Many of the other films trimmed down and adjusted the book content for the screen, but on his second outing, director Chris Columbus seemed determined not to miss a moment in Harry's search for the legendary secret chamber in Hogwarts and its terrible monster. The resulting film just may be too much of a good thing, although it might allow you to look for the Harry Potter details you missed the first time you read the book.

Available on:  Peacock ; HBO Max

7. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1

When it comes to ranking Harry Potter movies, some fans like the pensive and suspense-building nature of the second-to-last film in the franchise, which covers half of the final novel in the book series. But because it leaves the entire climax for the second Deathly Hallows , much of this 2010 film feels like the setup that it is, as Harry, Ron and Hermione go on the run to find Horcruxes, the objects in which Voldemort has hidden parts of his soul to make himself harder to kill.

In a lovely, if creepy, animated sequence, we also learn the story of the Deathly Hallows, three treasures that make one a "master of death," which Voldemort is also after. Although there are some heart-pounding scenes, such as our three heroes acting as spies in the Ministry of Magic and escaping from evil wizards in the heart of London—not to mention a heartwarming dancing scene between Harry and Hermione—many fans deemed this contemplative movie from director David Yates too slow-paced.

6. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

The only Harry Potter movie that scored an Oscar nomination for cinematography, this beautifully filmed 2009 movie focuses on teenage love (maybe using some Harry Potter pickup lines ?) as much as on finding the identity of the title character. But even more important, in this second outing from director David Yates, Dumbledore recruits a new Hogwarts teacher, Professor Slughorn (Jim Broadbent), and tasks Harry with retrieving a memory from him that may hold the key to Voldemort's evil plan.

Harry also starts hunting Horcruxes with Dumbledore, who, in one of the most heartbreaking moments in the entire series, meets a tragic fate. The movie is a bit meandering, but besides the first and last films, it earned the highest domestic box office gross, which means it's still a success on our list of Harry Potter movies ranked. The sixth film in the series also marks a return to a PG rating after two PG-13 films (all subsequent films are PG-13 as well).

5. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

In this 2007 flick , Harry and his friends form a secret club to learn how to fight dark magic, mirroring the grownup resistance group the Order of the Phoenix, which includes the amazing Gary Oldman as Harry's godfather, Sirius. The fifth Harry Potter movie, which also lands at No. 5 on our list of Harry Potter movies ranked, is the most political, as it features the subversive actions the rebels take against a corrupt regime. We also see Harry's first kiss, the brilliantly wicked Bellatrix Lestrange (Helena Bonham Carter) and the most eerie villain ever to wear pink, Dolores Umbridge (Imelda Staunton, also known as Queen Elizabeth in Season 5 of The Crown ). A thrilling duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort caps off the first installment from director David Yates.

4. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

Directed by Mike Newell, 2005's Goblet of Fire marks the series's turn to darker, more grown-up fare—largely due to the death of a fellow student at the end of the film, and Voldemort's return in a snake-like human form, chillingly played by Ralph Fiennes. The fourth movie in the series also serves to expand the wizarding world: The opening sequences take place at the Quidditch World Cup, and Hogwarts plays host to students from other wizarding schools as they compete in the Tri-Wizard Tournament. With several riveting challenges in the tournament, and the Yule Ball thrown in for good measure, this flick is a fan favorite. Nice touches show the characters' transition into teenage-dom, including the boys' shaggy haircuts and the students' disheveled uniforms, creating plenty of fodder for Harry Potter jokes —like Ron's frilly Yule Ball robe.

3. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone

Ranking Harry Potter movies proves to be difficult at the top of the list: The best three Harry Potter movies ranked come down to personal opinion! Although its special effects haven't all held up over the years, 2001's Sorcerer's Stone belongs at the top of the list because it set the stage for all the movies that followed: the look and feel of Hogwarts, the soaring theme music by legendary film composer John Williams and the brilliant casting of three fresh-faced child actors.

Seeing the Harry Potter world come to life for the first time truly is magical, and director Chris Columbus accomplished this daunting feat with seeming ease. For sheer nostalgia, this movie ranks in the top three. It also stands as the second-highest box-office grossing flick of the bunch—and you can even listen to Daniel Radcliffe read the book aloud.

2. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2

The highest-grossing of all the Harry Potter movies, the 2011 finale of the main series, directed by David Yates, is almost all action after the slower-paced, reflective feel of Deathly Hallows: Part 1 . The first action sequence involves freeing a dragon and a thrilling escape from Gringotts Wizarding Bank, with most of the movie focusing on the Battle of Hogwarts and Harry's final showdown with Voldemort. But a break in the action gives viewers one of the best scenes in the film, as Harry talks to Dumbledore in the place in between life and death. Emotional and thrilling to its climax, the film is a satisfying conclusion to the hugely successful series.

1. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

The lowest-grossing Harry Potter film, and the third in the series, is also widely regarded as the best by fans and critics. Director Alfonso Cuarón changed the look and feel of the Harry Potter world created by Chris Columbus in the first two films—enough to update it as the characters and the storylines mature, but not enough to turn off viewers. New faces in the 2004 flick include David Thewlis as one of the best teachers Harry ever has, Professor Lupin, plus the introduction of Gary Oldman as wrongfully convicted Sirius Black. Add in a werewolf, an escaped prisoner, time travel, Harry's flight on a Hippogriff, a thrilling ride on the Knight Bus and the Marauder's Map, and you've got a recipe for a fun-filled outing that Cuarón keeps moving at a quick pace for the best film in the franchise. The flick also contains one of the most memorable Harry Potter quotes : "I solemnly swear that I am up to no good."

• The Trevor Project : "Daniel Radcliffe Responds to J.K. Rowling's Tweets on Gender Identity"
• Rotten Tomatoes : "All Harry Potter Movies Ranked by Tomatometer"
• Metacritic : "Every Harry Potter Movie, Ranked from Worst to Best"
• Forbes : "Every 'Harry Potter' Movie Ranked by Worldwide Box Office"
• The Numbers : "Box Office History for Harry Potter Movies"
• Box Office Mojo : "Franchise: Harry Potter"
• The Hollywood Reporter : "'Fantastic Beasts' Wins First Oscar for 'Harry Potter' Franchise"
• Variety : "'Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone' Crosses $1 Billion Box Office Milestone After China Rerelease"

The post All Your Favorite Harry Potter Movies, Ranked appeared first on Reader's Digest .

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone

By j.k. rowling.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone is one of the most popular children's books ever written. It is a story about the triumph of love and bravery over evil.

About the Book

Article written by Mohandas Alva

M.A. Degree in English Literature from Manipal University, India.

‘ Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone ‘ is a very engaging read for children and adults alike. Since it is the first book in this series, we are introduced to an entirely new world in this book. The world of magic slowly builds itself as we read through the book. The genius of this book is using the protagonist Harry’s discovery of this world to parallel the readers’.

Furthermore, despite several hardships and literally being an orphan who never knew love, Harry still recognizes love and affection when he sees it. While this book is memorable for a plethora of reasons, some elements of Rowling’s writing triumph as winners.

Discovering the Story World and Magic as a Metaphor

J. K. Rowling does a great job writing this story with an omniscient third-person narrative but still keeping the narrator wherever Harry is for a major part of this book. This makes the reader’s fascination and interest in the world of magic as new and real as Harry’s. We are introduced to several facts and significant peculiarities of the world of magic, all of which seem very consistently developed, adding authenticity to it. 

While there are a lot of similarities between the real world and the world of magic, the differences are usually peculiar and downright funny at times. Platform nine and three-quarters, running through a brick wall, ghosts roaming freely and talking to living people, and many other peculiarities add to the charm of creating an interesting story world. One could go on to theorize that calling non-magic people muggles and portraying the Dursleys as ordinary people who hate things like magic has a metaphorical purpose. 

It furthers the cause and appeals to the readers to be more imaginative and creative. Magic is a metaphor for imagination in this case. The Dursleys are scared of anything out of the ordinary. They spend their entire day doing mundane tasks they assign meaning to and criticize almost anything and anyone that doesn’t fit their design.

On the contrary, Harry, despite being ill-treated and not loved by the Dursleys, has a flair for imagination and creativity. It didn’t take very long for him to get used to the wizarding ways, and he very clearly had the potential to do great things after all. This book is, in its essence, an inspiration for readers to make dreams come true and bravely follow their dreams despite obstacles. It is an apt narrative for children who, at their age, tend to discover new things and ideas to develop. 

Good vs Evil and Heroism

The trope of a savior standing up to the tyrant is not new. However, ‘ Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone ‘ being a children’s book, delves into this slowly. When Harry is unaware of magic and thinks that his parents died in an accident, he is a normal child with very little to think about good, evil, and the need for heroism.

However, once he is informed of the actual circumstances of his parents’ death and after discovering magic, he gains new insights, and his worldview significantly changes. His sense of responsibility and the need to stop Voldemort at any cost from getting to the Philosopher’s Stone set the path for his heroism. This transition happens slowly, yet it feels very natural. He doesn’t know what he will do if he faces Voldemort. Despite this naive understanding of the consequences, he still chooses to face Voldemort. 

This portrayal of heroism is quite commendable as it appeals to the very cause of wanting to stop the wrongdoing. The fact that an eleven-year-old boy and his two friends thwart a feared dark wizard from stealing the Philosopher’s Stone in a school that has so many adults who are way more experienced and well-equipped to do it portrays heroism in its purest form. Heroism is more the choice to take action against evil than the ability to stop evil. This book does a good job illustrating this subtlety.

Sacrifice in Harry Potter

Sacrifice is an essential part of this novel. The story of ‘ Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone ‘ uses sacrifice to define both friendship and love. Harry’s parents die because they sacrifice themselves to protect Harry. Ron sacrifices himself while playing Wizard chess. Several people who fought in the war against Voldemort sacrificed themselves for the well-being of the collective community. 

The trope of sacrifice plays a major role in setting up differences in morality between the good and the evil. As Dumbledore points out to Harry, Voldemort does not understand love. The fact that Harry understands love and values it, sets a specific difference in the choices that Harry and Lord Voldemort make.

Harry is willing to sacrifice himself when he takes over the task of protecting the Philosopher’s Stone. On the contrary, Voldemort uses others for his selfish motives. This stark difference between willing to sacrifice oneself and using others as a shield to protect oneself makes all the difference and definitively separates good and evil in this book.

Why was Harry Potter banned?

Harry Potter was banned in a catholic school in Nashville, Tennessee, because of fear of evil spirits. Some other places have also banned Harry Potter books for similar religious fears. Some religious leaders were concerned that the spells and enchantments mentioned in the book were real and that they could summon evil spirits and dark magic.

Is  Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone  worth reading for an adult?

‘ Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone ‘ is definitely worth reading for an adult. While it was written as a children’s book, it has outlived this label, and there are people of all ages who not only read these books but also engage in community discussions and have fun playing games inspired by these books. Many people have found reading this book a very rewarding experience, as is evident from the sales and fame this book has garnered across all demographics.

Should I read  Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone  or watch the movie? 

While the movie is undoubtedly well-made and a thrill to watch, the books are far more detailed and a very thrilling read. Most people who have both read the books and watched the movies always choose the former as a better experience. Furthermore, there are several interesting and amusing characters and scenes in the book that the movie couldn’t incorporate. So, one would be missing out on a lot if one doesn’t read ‘ Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. ‘

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone Review - A Thrilling Read

• Writing Style
• Lasting effect on the reader

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone Book Review

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone by J K Rowling is a thrilling read that hooks the reader from page one. Published in the year 1997, it is one of the highest grossing novels ever written. Some elements of the novel like its elaborate yet accessible world-building makes it a very entertaining read for children and adults alike. It follows the story of an orphan boy named Harry Potter who realizes he is a wizard and the rest of the book records his journey as a young wizard in Hogwarts, a school of magic. This book, and the series as a whole have been a definitive part of an entire generation’s childhood and have garnered very high praise as an entertaining read.

• The plot is entertaining and is a very immersive read.
• Has a lot of early lessons for children on morality.
• The characters are well developed and the story world is well structured and interesting.
• The writing style may be a bit rudimentary for adult avid readers.
• Several instances of Deux Ex Machina make the protagonist’s position very safe and lacking any real danger.
• Some mild instances of body shaming exist within the novel.

Summon your wit and wisdom—our Harry Potter Trivia Quiz awaits you! Do you have the knowledge to claim the title of Master Witch or Wizard? Take the challenge now!

1) What creature is Aragog?

2) What was the last Horcrux to be destroyed?

3) What are the dying words of Severus Snape in both the book and the film "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows"?

4) What is the core ingredient of the wand owned by Harry Potter?

5) Which creature can transform into a person's worst fear?

6) In which Harry Potter book does Harry first speak Parseltongue?

7) Who teaches Herbology at Hogwarts?

8) Who originally owned the Elder Wand before Dumbledore won it?

9) What animal represents Hufflepuff house?

10) Which object is NOT one of the Deathly Hallows?

11) What is the name of the goblin-made object that is supposed to bring its owner prosperity, but also brings them into conflict with goblins?

12) In the "Order of the Phoenix," who is NOT a member of the original Order of the Phoenix shown in the old photograph that Moody shows Harry?

13) What is the name of the train that takes students to Hogwarts?

14) What does the incantation "Obliviate" do?

15) What form does Hermione Granger's Patronus take?

16) What is the name of Harry Potter's pet owl?

17) Which potion did Hermione brew in her second year that allowed her, Ron, and Harry to assume the identities of Slytherins?

18) Which character is killed by Bellatrix Lestrange in the Battle of Hogwarts?

19) What is the effect of the Cheering Charm?

20) Who was the Peverell brother that owned the invisibility cloak?

21) What is Dumbledore's full name?

22) Who is the Half-Blood Prince?

23) What is the name of the book Hermione gives to Harry before his first ever Quidditch match?

24) What potion is known as "Liquid Luck"?

25) What specific type of dragon does Harry face during the Triwizard Tournament?

26) Which spell is used to open the Marauder's Map?

27) What does the Mirror of Erised show?

28) What is the name of the goblin who helps Harry, Ron, and Hermione break into Gringotts?

Your score is

Restart quiz

About Mohandas Alva

Mohandas is very passionate about deciphering the nature of language and its role as a sole medium of storytelling in literature. His interests sometimes digress from literature to philosophy and the sciences but eventually, the art and craft of narrating a significant story never fail to thrill him.

Join Our Free Community

Engage in Literary Forums

Create and Join Groups

Create your own profile

See fewer ads

Save and bookmark articles

The Harry Potter section of Book Analysis analyzes and explorers the Harry Potter series. The characters, names, terminology, and all related indicia are trademarks of Warner Bros ©. The content on Book Analysis was created by Harry Potter fans, with the aim of providing a thorough in-depth analysis and commentary to complement and provide an additional perspective to the Wizarding World of Harry Potter.

Discover literature and connect with others just like yourself!

Start the Conversation. Join the Chat.

There was a problem reporting this post.

Block Member?

Please confirm you want to block this member.

You will no longer be able to:

• See blocked member's posts
• Mention this member in posts
• Invite this member to groups

Please allow a few minutes for this process to complete.

Home — Essay Samples — Entertainment — Film Analysis — The Description Of The Movie “Harry Potter And The Sorcerer’s Stone”

The Description of The Movie "Harry Potter and The Sorcerer's Stone"

• Categories: Film Analysis Harry Potter and The Sorcerer'S Stone Movie Review

About this sample

Words: 1167 |

Published: Mar 3, 2020

Words: 1167 | Pages: 3 | 6 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Entertainment Literature

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 1165 words

4 pages / 1842 words

4 pages / 2001 words

7.5 pages / 3441 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Film Analysis

The movie Coco is a film full of Mexican Culture and takes place during the Día de Muertos, Day of the Dead celebration. It’s directed by Lee Unkrich and released in 2017. The main character, Miguel Rivera loves music and [...]

The Titanic tells the dramatic, prosperous yet love story of Jack Dawson played by Leonardo Dicaprio and Rose DeWitt Bukater played by Kate Winslet through a journey taken place in 1912 on their voyage from Southampton to New [...]

Spotlight is directed by Tom McCarthy and stars Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams, and Liev Schreiber. It’s the true story of the Boston news reporters who work for the Boston Globe who uncovered a very disturbing [...]

The 2004 film, Crash, directed by Paul Haggis is a drama which fundamentally concerns the underlying racial tensions present in society and its effects on various people in Los Angeles post the September 11th terrorist attacks. [...]

This article is about very interesting movie named girl interrupted. I am happy to write this article, because this movie inspired me a lot when I first watched it. Being psychologists this movie is a must watch as it holds many [...]

After eternally transforming the science fiction scene with his groundbreaking film Alien, Ridley Scott returns to his home turf years later with an implied prequel, Prometheus. Though the potential of the new film sent devoted [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

We use cookies

to give you the best experience possible.

By continuing we’ll assume you are on board with our cookie policy

• Annotated Bibliography
• Argumentative Essay
• Research Proposal
• Book Report
• Book Review
• Article Review
• Literature Review
• Literary Analysis
• PowerPoint Presentation
• Research Paper
• Discussion Board Post
• PhD Dissertation
• Term Papers
• Excel Homework
• Editing and Proofreading Services
• Thesis Proposal
• Movie Critique Paper
• Reaction Paper
• Poem Writing Paper
• Scholarship Essay
• Questions-Answers
• Resume Paper
• Marketing Plan Paper
• Article Writing
• White Paper
• Letter Writing
• Business Letter Writing Service
• Motivation Letter
• LOR Writing Service
• Grant Proposal
• Healthcare White Paper
• Article Critique
• Film Review
• Synopsis Writing
• Speech Writing
• Business Plan
• Our Affiliate Program
• Interview Writing Help
• IB Extended Essay
• Blog Article Writing
• Article Rewriting
• Essay Outline Writing
• Capstone Project
• Business Report Writing
• Formatting Service
• Online Revision
• Write My Questionnaire
• Report Writing Service
• Math Problems
• Problem Solution Essay
• Rate My College Essay
• Nursing Concept Map
• Personal Statement
• Management Essay
• Multiple Choice Questions and Quiz
• Psychology Essay
• Linguistics Essay Writing Service
• Technology Essay Writing Service
• Economics Homework Help
• Summary Writing Service
• Brochure Content Writing Services
• Graduate Essay
• Graduate Papers
• Buy Expository Essay
• Engineering Assignment Writing
• SOP Writing Services
• Free Essays

Toll free: 1(888)813-7462 Toll free: 1(888)603-0097

Film Review: Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone

The Movie Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone is the first book in a series of history about a young boy named Harry Potter. The author of the book is an English writer J. K. Rowling . The book was first published on June 26, 1997, by the London publishing house Bloomsbury. The book became the basis for the film of the same name. The movie was directed by Chris Columbus in 2001. The main roles were played by 13-year-old Rupert Grint , 12-year-old Daniel Radcliffe , and 11-year-old Emma Watson (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). Many adult roles were performed by the leading British actors such as Maggie Smith, Alan Rickman, John Cleese, and others. The film was nominated for three Oscar awards in technical nominations, at the same time did not win any of them. It can be watched by children of almost any age (PG rating from MAP) (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). The paper is a film review , it describes the film Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone as one of the most successful films in the style of fantasy. In spite of the style of fantasy and fairy tales, there are many everyday, ordinary, and exciting episodes in the film the audience loves.

The plot of the film draws the viewer’s attention during the first minutes of the film. The film begins with the holiday in the magical world, the death of Lord Voldemort, a powerful dark wizard. After the murder of Lily and James Potter, Voldemort had to kill Harry Potter, who was only one a one-year-old. Professors Dumbledore and McGonnell and Key-keeper Rubes Hagrid leave Harry on the threshold of his aunts and uncles’ house (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). His aunt is the sister of Harry Potters’s mother. The whole Dorsey family hates Harry and everything about magic. Their son, Dudley, tortures Harry. In addition, they hide from Potter his origin and do not tell him that he is a magician. Dorsey’s family said to Harry that his parents crashed in a car accident. All 10 years he lives in the dressing room under the steps, not knowing the truth (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). At midnight, when Harry turns 11, the giant, Hagrid, enters into the hut to deliver a personal letter to Harry Potter that says that Harry Potter is enrolled in the School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, Hogwarts. In school, Harry Potter finds new friends, such as Ron Weasley, Hermione Granger, and Neville Longbottom, and gets a sniffer of the unit of Quidditch Gryffindor (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). At the same time, in Hogwarts, Harry learns about the existence of magic and wizards.

AI-content Free

Harry Potter, in addition to acquiring friends, also gets enemies in school, Draco Malfoy and his comrades. He learns that the Philosopher’s Stone is stored in Hogwarts, a stone that can make gold and its owner immortal. It turns out that Professor Dumbledore hid this stone in Hogwarts, especially when he learned that someone wanted to take hold of it. Harry and his friends believe that Professor Snape wants to possess this stone, at the same time, in the end, he realizes that he was wrong when he met Skvirells teacher in the storage room (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). Squirrel tries to kill Harry but he does not succeed after he touches Harry Potter, his body collapses and the soul of Lord Voldemort, who parasitized it, comes out of the body. It turns out Lord Voldemort is alive and wants to get a stone to regain his flesh.

At the end of the movie, Dumbledore tells Harry that he destroyed the stone, that Voldemort would not try to capture it. Dumbledore tells Potter why he could not kill Squierell, it turns out Harry is guarded by ancient magic, the magic of Love, the curse of which was imposed on him by his mother (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). At the same time, Dumbledore replies that he cannot tell the truth until he gets older. Going on vacation, home to the Dursleys, Harry on the platform receives a gift from Hagrid, a photo album with photos of his parents.

It should be noted that the film has everything that the audience needs, why it loves such movies like fantasy, magic, the struggle between good and evil, adventures, bright characters, and a fascinating plot. The world represented in the film is magical, invented. At the same time, it is very similar to the ordinary world in which every spectator lives and the actions that take place in modern times (Fowkes, 2010). Just like in ordinary life, children go to school, do homework, they have favorite and unloved teachers, and, importantly, even in a magical world, they need to make efforts to succeed. Everything looks like in the ordinary world, at the same time with an admixture of magic, and, therefore, children simply identify themselves with the characters (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). The world invented by the writer J. K. Rowling is realistic, thought out, which in general is a hallmark of good fantasy (Fowkes, 2010). It is worth noting that the fantasy world can be not only a refuge but also an internal point of equilibrium, a source of mental strength for every spectator.

Book The Best Top Expert at Top- papers. com

Your order will be assigned to the most experienced writer in the relevant discipline. The highly demanded expert, one of our top-10 writers with the highest rate among the customers

The investigation of the phenomenon of fantasy necessarily touches upon the question of the reasons for its relevance. J. R. R. Tolkien sees a special functional significance in fantasy. The main task of the genre of fantasy is the satisfaction of certain ancient desires of a person. One such desire is to explore the depths of space and time (Fowkes, 2010). The authors of the fantasy have different ideas about religion and mythology; their own worldview can often be expressed in the works directly (Fowkes, 2010). However, this genre allows authors to present serious ideas in an accessible and fascinating way; the fantasy raises problems and themes that somehow intersect with mythological discourse.

The film Harry Potter is a film in the style of fantasy because it has the main features of this genre. In the film, magic is one of the bright elements of this style, which interests both children and adults. Magic is a good way to attract the viewer’s audience with unusual adventures and events that do not happen in everyday life (Fowkes, 2010). The magic in the world of Harry Potter is associated not only with the concentration of the wizard but also with the feelings he experiences at the time of magic creation. Some light spells, for example, Patronus, work out only when the wizard feels strong positive emotions (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). Fantasy movies are a combination of history and myths.

Harry Potters’s film is a fantasy story about the magic school and mythical elements, such as a magic wand and invisible objects. In ordinary life, it is impossible to meet children with magical powers. However, the watcher can see the magic in the movie Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone . According to J. R. R. Tolkien, fantasy is a style of hope (Fowkes, 2010). In the film, the viewer actively watches and co-operates with the events that occur in the life of the main character and expects a happy end. When the film finishes, the audience sees an end, however, there is also a hint that the happy story has a continuation and the audience should wait for many more magical surprises.

1 page is 300 words on our site

Please note, 1 page is 300 word on our site, while most of the services write 275 words only. Save your money with every ordered page!

Analyzing the film, it should be noted that the history of Harry Potter is an intertwining of genres of a fairy tale (magic) and fantasy (fiction). At the same time, we can talk about the overall wonderful atmosphere of a fairy tale, which encompasses fairy-tale characters, fabulous time, and space (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). From the genre of fantasy works, J. K. Rowling inherited the epic narrative and some initial tragedy. In the very beginning, Harry Potter remains an orphan; he is forced to suffer, living in the house of his aunt (Fowkes, 2010). The hero of fantasy must fulfill his/her mission, whatever it costs them; however, he is given the right to choose, which generates contradictory, living human images. For example, the mission of the main character, Harry Potter, is to destroy a dangerous and evil wizard. Until he does it, people will remain in a constant state of threat to their lives (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). However, as mentioned above, the main hero can stay away and do not realize what he was destined for; at the same time can choose another way and fight against evil. In the work about Harry Potter, the viewer can observe one of the features of the fantasy genre, such as the possession of honor, courage, and justice by the main character. He even studies at the faculty known for his brave disciples. J. K. Rowling mixed reality and fiction through the fairy-tale veil of real countries, places (Fowkes, 2010). However due to the fantasy distortion, they acquire a kind of mysterious color. For example, the entrance to the magical Lane is in the center of London in the backyard of a small bar, and to enter the Ministry of Magic one needs to use an ordinary, unremarkable phone booth that functions as an underground elevator (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). The diversity of the world of fantastic creatures that occur throughout the narrative is the last thing that the genre of fantasy combines with the work of J. K. Rowling. There are elves, centaurs, winged horses, hippogriffs, grind slow, and snouts in the film (Heyman & Columbus, 2001). People love to observe unusual events they cannot meet in everyday life.

The film about Harry Potter, as already mentioned earlier, is not only a fantasy; at the same time, it is also a fairy tale. The existence of the differentiated magic wonders performed by the marvelous objects and activity of the main hero is a typical characteristic of a fairy tale, and according to the examples already given, fantastic objects are an integral part of the history of Harry Potter. Therefore, the movie is a combination of the elements of the real world and a fairy rale, which makes it a perfect fantasy, the genre which covers all the elements mentioned above. The movie Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone is one of the best fantasy movies around the world. Spectators like to watch a film in the style of fantasy, especially with unusual stories and fairy-tale characters, which are very close to real life. The film became popular due to the combination of its light and exciting story, in which magic and fantasy have become closely interconnected with a real story of ordinary people which took place in real geographical places. After the release of the film Harry Potter, such a style as fantasy became a more popular genre.

Just place an order with us and make sure we provide qualified help

Harry Potter Books and Movies Compare & Contrast Essay

One of things that make life fascinating is the diversity and variance that different people and things exhibit. These differences may be obvious or deeply disguised requiring one to take a critical look at the item in order to notice them.

In this paper, I shall set out to compare two items; J. K. Rowling’s “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban” the Book and its movie adaptation. By so doing, I shall demonstrate that there do exist significant differences as well as similarities between the two items despite them appearing to be wholly similar.

A Comparative Analysis

Both the book and its film adaptation share the character set. The lead character is the hero Harry Potter, a famous wizard whose adventures are the central focus of the book and the movie. In the wizard world, Harry Potter is engaged in a prolonged fight to defeat the immensely powerful and evil wizard Lord Voldemort. Harry potter is assisted in his noble quest by his two best friends Ron and Hermione. These two characters play significant roles in the plot development of both the movie and the book.

The magical school that Harry and his friends attend so as to learn about wizardry is represented in an identical manner in both the book and the movie. The school building is a gigantic and daunting castle which is inaccessible to non-magical people. According to the book, the castle has a lake, extensive grounds and a forest.

The Movie properly depicts this as a lake can be seen as the students arrive at the school by use of a train. The imposing nature of the castle is evident and in many scenes from the movie, Harry Potter and his friends venture out into the fields and forests that are part of the school grounds.

However, the representation of one of the lead characters Hermione in the movie is not a true depiction of what she is in the book. In the book, Hermione is described as a brightest girl in the school. Her know-it-all attitude alienates her from the rest of the students.

Nothing to the book indicates that Hermione is an attractive girl and she is in fact describe as having large protruding teach and bushy brown hair. However, the movie presents Hermione as a physically attractive and likable character. This is inconsistent with the image that one builds form reading the novel.

In the book, the prisoner of Azkaban, the character Sirius Black who is Harry’s godfather, plays a minor role despite him being central to the plot of the book. His appearances in the book are relatively few considering that he is the focal point of the book.

The book instead focuses on developing the story around Sirius and therefore, despite his not being mentioned every now and then, one can sense his involvement throughout the book. In the movie, Sirius plays a more predominant role and he is afforded relatively more screen time than one would expect from the book.

The movie adaptation contains numerous omissions of events that are recorded in the book. This is to be expected considering the relatively small length of the movie compared to the size of the book. Harry Potter’s exchanges with his uncle’s family are left out and one can therefore not correctly gauge the nature of the relationship from watching the film. From the book, it is clear that Harry Potter hates staying with his relatives who despise him.

In this paper, I set out to compare two items so as to highlight their similarities and differences. From my comparison of the book “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban” and its movie adaptation, it is clear that there are a lot of similarities and differences between the two. Nevertheless, both the movie and the book prove to be equally entertaining despite their differences.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, October 31). Harry Potter Books and Movies. https://ivypanda.com/essays/a-comparison-of-j-k-rowlings-book-harry-potter-and-the-prisoner-of-azkaban-and-its-movie-adaptation/

"Harry Potter Books and Movies." IvyPanda , 31 Oct. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/a-comparison-of-j-k-rowlings-book-harry-potter-and-the-prisoner-of-azkaban-and-its-movie-adaptation/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Harry Potter Books and Movies'. 31 October.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Harry Potter Books and Movies." October 31, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/a-comparison-of-j-k-rowlings-book-harry-potter-and-the-prisoner-of-azkaban-and-its-movie-adaptation/.

1. IvyPanda . "Harry Potter Books and Movies." October 31, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/a-comparison-of-j-k-rowlings-book-harry-potter-and-the-prisoner-of-azkaban-and-its-movie-adaptation/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Harry Potter Books and Movies." October 31, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/a-comparison-of-j-k-rowlings-book-harry-potter-and-the-prisoner-of-azkaban-and-its-movie-adaptation/.

• Adaptation of Prisoner of Azkaban From Book to Film
• "Harry Potter" Movie and Novel: Plot Changes
• Sirius XM Radio
• Enslavement in “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” by J. K. Rowling
• Media Interpretation of Harry Potter and Sexuality
• Sirius XM Holdings' Product vs. Terrestrial Radio
• Literary Values of Harry Potter Novels by Rowling
• "The Winter`s Tale" by William Shakespeare
• Investing in Amazon, Sirius XM, FedEx, Sprint and USAA
• Gender Role in Harry Potter Books and Movies
• "Genghis Khan" by Richard P. Lister
• Alice in Wonderland: Theory and Post-Structuralism Examples
• Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare
• Innocence of Frankenstein's Monster
• The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time

Movie Reviews

Tv/streaming, collections, great movies, chaz's journal, contributors, harry potter and the chamber of secrets.

Now streaming on:

The first movie was the setup, and this one is the payoff. "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" leaves all of the explanations of wizardry behind and plunges quickly into an adventure that's darker and scarier than anything in the first Harry Potter movie. It's also richer: The second in a planned series of seven Potter films is brimming with invention and new ideas, and its Hogwarts School seems to expand and deepen before our very eyes into a world large enough to conceal unguessable secrets.

What's developing here, it's clear, is one of the most important franchises in movie history, a series of films that consolidate all of the advances in computer-aided animation, linked to the extraordinary creative work of J.K. Rowling, who has created a mythological world as grand as "Star Wars," but filled with more wit and humanity. Although the young wizard Harry Potter is nominally the hero, the film remembers the golden age of moviemaking, when vivid supporting characters crowded the canvas. The story is about personalities, personal histories and eccentricity, not about a superstar superman crushing the narrative with his egotistical weight.

In the new movie, Harry ( Daniel Radcliffe , a little taller and deeper-voiced) returns with his friends Ron Weasley ( Rupert Grint ) and Hermione Granger ( Emma Watson , in the early stages of babehood). They sometimes seem to stand alone amid the alarming mysteries of Hogwarts, where even the teachers, even the august headmaster Albus Dumbledore ( Richard Harris ), even the learned professors Snape ( Alan Rickman ) and McGonagall ( Maggie Smith ), even the stalwart Hagrid the Giant ( Robbie Coltrane ) seem mystified and a little frightened by the school's dread secrets.

Is there indeed a Chamber of Secrets hidden somewhere in the vast pile of Hogwarts? Can it only be opened by a descendent of Salazar Slytherin, the more sinister of the school's co-founders? Does it contain a monster? Has the monster already escaped, and is it responsible for paralyzing some of the students, whose petrified bodies are found in the corridors, and whose bodies are carried to the infirmary still frozen in a moment of time? Do the answers to these questions originate in events many years ago, when even the ancient Dumbledore was (marginally) younger? And does a diary by a former student named Tom Marvolo Riddle--a book with nothing written in it, but whose pages answer questions in a ghostly handwriting--provide the clues that Harry and his friends need? (Answer to all of the above: Probably.) This puzzle could be solved in a drab and routine movie with characters wandering down old stone corridors, but one of the pleasures of Chris Columbus' direction of "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" is how visually alive it is. This is a movie that answers any objection to computer animation with glorious or creepy sights that blend convincingly with the action. Hogwarts itself seems to have grown since the first movie, from a largish sort of country house into a thing of spires and turrets, vast rooms and endlessly convoluted passageways, lecture halls and science labs, with as much hidden below the ground as visible above it. Even the Quiddich game is held in a larger stadium (maybe rich alumni were generous?). There are times, indeed, when the scope of Hogwarts seems to approach that of Gormenghast, the limitless edifice in the trilogy by Mervyn Peake that was perhaps one of Rowling's inspirations.

The production designer is Stuart Craig, returning from "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone." He has created (there is no other way to put it) a world here, a fully realized world with all the details crowded in, so that even the corners of the screen are intriguing. This is one of the rare recent movies you could happily watch with the sound turned off, just for the joy of his sets, the costumes by Judianna Makovsky and Lindy Hemming, and the visual effects (the Quiddich match seems even more three-dimensional, the characters swooping across the vast field, as Harry finds himself seriously threatened by the odious Malfoy).

There are three new characters this time, one delightful, one conceited, one malevolent. Professor Sprout ( Miriam Margolyes ) is on the biology faculty, and teaches a class on the peculiar properties of the mandrake plant, made all the most amusing by students of John Donne who are familiar with the additional symbolism of the mandrake only hinted at in class. The more you know about mandrakes, the funnier Sprout's class is.

She is the delightful addition. The conceited new faculty member, deliciously cast, is Gilderoy Lockhart ( Kenneth Branagh ), author of the autobiography Magical Me, who thinks of himself as a consummate magician but whose spell to heal Harry's broken arm has unfortunate results. And then there is Lucius Malfoy ( Jason Isaacs ), father of the supercilious Draco, who skulks about as if he should be hated just on general principles.

These characters and plot elements draw together in late action sequences of genuine power, which may be too intense for younger viewers. There is a most alarming confrontation with spiders and a scary late duel with a dragon, and these are handled not as jolly family movie episodes, but with the excitement of a mainstream thriller. While I am usually in despair when a movie abandons its plot for a third act given over entirely to action, I have no problem with the way "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" ends, because it has been pointing toward this ending, hinting about it, preparing us for it, all the way through. What a glorious movie.

Roger Ebert

Roger Ebert was the film critic of the Chicago Sun-Times from 1967 until his death in 2013. In 1975, he won the Pulitzer Prize for distinguished criticism.

Now playing

Asphalt City

Glenn kenny.

Remembering Gene Wilder

Matt zoller seitz.

Steve! (Martin): A Documentary in Two Pieces

Brian tallerico.

Monica Castillo

The Listener

Film credits.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)

Rated PG For Scary Moments Some Creature Violence and Mild Language

161 minutes

Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter

Rupert Grint as Ron Weasley

Emma Watson as Hermione Granger

Jason Isaacs as Lucius Malfoy

Alan Rickman as Prof. Snape

Maggie Smith as Prof. McGonagal

Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid The Giant

Richard Harris as Prof. Albus Dumbledore

Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy

Directed by

• Chris Columbus
• Steve Kloves

Based on the novel by

• J.K. Rowling

Latest blog posts

Joanna Arnow Made Her BDSM Comedy for You

The Movies That Underwent Major Changes After Their Festival Premiere

Netflix's Dead Boy Detectives Is A Spinoff Stuck In Limbo

Preview of Tributes at the 58th Karlovy Vary International Film Festival

'Breathe' Review: Jennifer Hudson and Milla Jovovich Suffocate in Sci-Fi Thriller

If you thought 'Rebel Moon' was the worst sci-fi movie to come out this year, you've got another thing coming.

The Big Picture

• Breathe fails to create an emotional impact, proving to be a shallow work of science fiction.
• The film's hollow narrative, paper-thin relationships, and lackluster visuals make it an entirely empty experience.
• The clunky escalations grow increasingly tiresome, dragging us to a conclusion that echoes into nothingness.

Brooklyn, New York 2039. Two masked men, a father and son, wander around an ugly orange-tinted world where we are informed via unnecessary onscreen text that oxygen is now in short supply. This is an early sign of how little director Stefon Bristol’ s Breathe , a self-serious, yet superficial sci-fi movie constantly in search of something more , trusts its audience. Whereas other recent works of cinema have offered interesting reflections on the urgency of a collapsing climate , this one wallows around in the vague aftermath of it. An accident leads to a death and Darius ( Common ) holds his father in his arms as he dies. It’s a promising start that proceeds to get immediately undercut as the film then becomes about him setting out on a journey, all of which takes place both offscreen and months in the past, while we remain behind. It's more interesting to imagine Common wandered into the stellar sci-fi series Silo , itself about being locked away from an inhospitable world, than anything here.

Breathe (2024)

Air-supply is scarce in the near future, forcing a mother and daughter to fight to survive when two strangers arrive desperate for an oxygenated haven.

Before he leaves, Darius returns home to his wife Maya ( Jennifer Hudson ) and daughter Zora ( Quvenzhané Wallis ). Some rather forced and awkward dialogue establishes the characters' relationships with each other. Then he leaves. Zora narrates all of how we got here, spelling out what we can already see with our own eyes in the orange CGI dystopia that is now New York, before staring directly into the camera after saying how they were not prepared emotionally for the future to come. She does so by speaking into a radio like her father can hear her, a tired gimmick that, like the rest of the experience, never carries the emotional impact the film is desperately reaching for. It all just continually slips through its fingers .

'Breathe' Is a Shallow Work of Science Fiction

That future Zora is discussing initially feels like it wants to be something like The Road , the underrated adaptation of the shattering Cormac McCarthy novel, though the film is never even remotely subtle or thoughtful enough to achieve this. Some of this comes down to the central relationship between Maya and Zora being painfully paper-thin , defined mostly by failed attempts at bittersweet familial comedy as they go through the daily tasks of living. When they’re hiding out inside, everything moves too quickly and without any sense of the rhythms of the characters. The only positive thing about this is that we aren’t having to observe the ugly visual style that dominates the outside world. The trouble is that they’re instead trapped in the shadow of the loss of a patriarch which writer Doug Simon uses as a blunt cudgel to create a split between the two of them. After an argument over dinner where Zora says she wants to go look for her father, Maya says in exasperation, “We cannot keep fighting like this.” So don’t? Add another dimension to the characters besides the stock characteristics of a rebellious daughter and an overbearing mother. Maybe then, when everything starts moving, we’d have actually gotten to know them beyond their archetypes.

Quite quickly, Maya and Zora run into Tess ( Milla Jovovich ) and Lucas ( Sam Worthington ), who attempt to plead for their help. They say they’re with a group of people elsewhere and that they need to talk to Darius to replicate their O2 generator. Maya doesn’t trust them and asks how she is supposed to know they won’t pull a fast one on them. With the most absurdly faux sincerity , Jovovich’s Tess says that she “Has her word.” This and some slight convincing from Zora is apparently all it takes as they then come outside to talk with them. Of course, things go awry, and a scattered battle for the refuge the family has created begins to unfold.

Watching this all play out, with paranoia and distrust taking hold, the story Breathe most feels like it is attempting to mimic is one that was already done far better in It Comes at Night . Bristol’s depiction of this hellscape is too safe in terms of its tone, never fully grappling with the dark and heavy ideas that surround its end of the world. There are even several moments where it seems like Hudson is being censored from swearing too much, with the dubbed “motherfreaking” being the most ridiculous moment in the entire movie. Worse than that, each escalation is so clunky that it is hard to take the whole thing even remotely seriously. You don’t feel any tension when it then becomes about defending the sanctuary as Tess and Lucas try to break their way in with a drill. Instead, it is painfully tiresome and strained .

'Breathe' Completely Runs Out Of Narrative Oxygen

A week ago, the worst sci-fi movie of the year thus far would have been Zack Snyder ’s Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver . Not to be outdone, Breathe gives that disaster of a film a run for its money. Whenever it tries to be a thriller, it’s not even remotely thrilling. Any more dramatic beat it goes for falls completely flat. The entire visual style is an eyesore that never feels right. It is small in scope in a way that could have been interesting, but that means you have to do the basics right. Each escalating development, especially one particularly obnoxious one about midway through that sends two characters out on the road for some reason, is all built on a hollow house of cards. It’s like you can see the exact moment where the film ran out of ideas , something it already had shockingly few of, and had to come up with a contrived reason to throw in more conflict before tying everything up in a bizarrely nice bow.

The cast gets left stranded in a narrative wasteland, none of them able to deliver any of the already lackluster lines with the necessary gusto to salvage them. When everything then falls apart, it has nothing to hold together. It's like an approximation of a sci-fi thriller without any of the necessary energy behind it to work. In the end, Breathe is empty bluster and nothing more . It’s like a vacuum of where a movie should be, sucking all the air out of the room until nothing is left. As it drags itself to a conclusion where you’ve long stopped caring about anything that’s happening, even its last desperate gasps echo out into utter nothingness.

A shallow sci-fi movie in search of something more, Breathe is like a vacuum of where a movie should be.

• The movie begins in slightly intriguing fashion.
• The movie immediately undercuts its promising start, relying on a tired gimmick of narration with no emotional impact.
• From the jump, the relationship between mother and daughter is paper-thin with nothing more beyond their archetypes.
• Each escalation is forced and there is even a moment where it feels like you can see where it all ran out of ideas.
• The ending is just one more last gasp that echoes out into absolute nothingness.

Breathe is now available to stream on VOD in the U.S.

WATCH ON VOD

Screen Rant

Next year's wizarding world release will ease the wait for hbo's harry potter tv remake.

HBO's Harry Potter remake won't premiere until 2026, but, lucky for us, another Wizarding World release in 2025 will make this long wait a lot easier.

• Audible's full-cast Harry Potter audio production offers a more detailed and immersive experience than traditional audiobooks, bringing the beloved story to life in a whole new way.
• Warner Bros' upcoming Harry Potter TV remake promises to fill the gaps left by the original movies, creating a more faithful adaptation with a deeper exploration of key moments and characters.
• While the Harry Potter TV remake won't be completed until 2036, Audible's audio production is set to release much faster, providing fans with a quicker and nearly as exciting way to experience the magical world of Harry Potter.

We still have a long wait before HBO's Harry Potter remake premieres, but a new Wizarding World release will make the time go by a little faster. Following the announcement that Warner Bros and HBO's TV remake would be coming sometime in 2026, Pottermore Publishing announced an unexpected addition to the franchise that would be arriving first. Though the project isn't quite as large in scale as a TV show, this Harry Potter adaptation can satisfy our need for a more book-faithful version of Harry's story a little sooner than expected.

Warner Bros' original Harry Potter movies concluded back in 2011, but the franchise as a whole didn't end with it. The Wizarding World is more significant than ever, with new generations discovering the magical story year after year. Unfortunately, the Fantastic Beasts movies didn't perform quite as well as their predecessors, revealing a need for new installments that are more faithful to the beloved Harry Potter books . The answer to this seemed to be HBO's remake, which is meant to be a far more in-depth screen adaptation than the movies. Still, there's more to come than just this.

HBO's Harry Potter TV Show: Updates & Everything We Know

Audible is producing a full-cast audio production of the harry potter books in 2025, amazon's audible & pottermore publishing are coming together to adapt all the harry potter books into audio productions.

Amazon's Audible and Pottermore Publishing announced in April 2024 that a new full-cast audio production of all seven Harry Potter books was in the works, with the first installment expected to be released near the end of 2025 . The dramatized audiobooks will feature over 100 voice actors, each portraying characters like Harry Potter, Hermione Granger, Ron Weasley, Rubeus Hagrid, and much, much more. They will also come to life through quality sound through Dolby Atmos, with a full musical score and "real-world sound capture." In all, this Harry Potter production will have everything aside from the visual element .

Of course, traditional Harry Potter audiobooks are already available on Audible. These were recorded with narrators Jim Dale and Steven Fry beginning in 1999 and, according to Audible, have garnered over 1.4 billion global listening hours. As beloved as these versions of J.K. Rowling's books are, the upcoming full-cast audio productions will be far more dramatized and will lack the traditional narration of a book. In this way, Harry's story will be told at a level in which it never has before , without any of the pesky omissions of Warner Bros Harry Potter movies.

The Harry Potter audiobooks narrated by Jim Dale and Steven Fry will still be available on Audible after the 2025 audio productions are released.

Audible's Harry Potter Production Can Contain All The Moments The Harry Potter Movies Missed

Audible will adapt missed harry potter moments before hbo has a chance.

The primary draw of HBO's Harry Potter remake is the chance to finally see the plotlines , characters, and key moments that the Warner Bros movies cut. There are significant limitations to film, and a TV show adaptation of the books will have a lot more time to include every layer of Harry's story. Things like the Marauders' story, the Quidditch World Cup, SPEW, Barty Crouch Jr's story, Harry's day-to-day at Hogwarts, and much much more can finally be brought to life, with full episodes available to cover each. Of course, we have quite a long way to go before this becomes a reality.

Each installment can go several hours long, and with such an extensive cast and excellent sound quality, listeners can be fully immersed in scenes that have thus far never made it off the page.

Though the full-cast Harry Potter audio production can't bring these moments to a screen, it will still be free of the limitations that held back Warner Bros' movies. Each installment can go several hours long, and with such an extensive cast and excellent sound quality, listeners can be fully immersed in scenes that have thus far never made it off the page. Everything from Peeves heckling Mr. Filch to Percy crying over Fred Weasley's death at the Battle of Hogwarts can finally play out in more than just our imaginations. It's the book-faithful adaptation everyone has been begging for , just in an unexpected format.

A Harry Potter Audio Production Will Be Far Less Divisive Than HBO's Remake

Hbo's harry potter remake is already facing heavy criticism.

In some ways, an audio production of Harry Potter will go over better than HBO's 2026 TV remake. The upcoming series has been divisive for an array of reasons. Though many are excited for a chance to see a book-faithful adaptation, others find that it competes too much with the already beloved Harry Potter movies. The idea of recasting actors like Alan Rickman, Michael Gambon, and Robbie Coltrane is uncomfortable , and J.K. Rowling's controversial involvement with the HBO TV show adds further fuel to the fire. No matter how the series is approached, it's sure to be criticized heavily.

Additionally, after the shortcomings of the Fantastic Beasts movies, Warner Bros has been accused of using the Harry Potter remake as a money grab, capitalizing on the ongoing fandom without putting thought into extending the franchise. This is supported by the fact that the Harry Potter movies concluded only just over a decade ago, so the remake is coming surprisingly early. In comparison, an audio production of the Harry Potter books is a far more honest and logical endeavor and is far less likely to cause controversy within the Wizarding World fandom. As an entirely different medium, it won't step on any toes.

The Full Harry Potter Audio Production Will Release Much Faster Than The Harry Potter TV Remake

Hbo's harry potter remake won't be finished until about 2036.

Another benefit of Audible's audio production over the Harry Potter remake is that it won't take nearly as long to produce. Warner Bros and HBO made 2026 the release window for Harry Potter season 1 , which is three years after the series was announced. From there, the release window will vary between one and two years between seasons, with the installment depicting Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows not expected until 2036. Therefore, even after the Harry Potter remake has started, it will be a pretty long time before we see moments like the true final battle between Harry and Voldemort brought to the small screen.

Though the audio production of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone won't be released on Audible until 2025, the subsequent installments will likely fit within a much smaller timeline. Without the need for visual effects, these dramatizations will be far quicker to produce. It's probable that the entire series will be completed and available to the public before we are even halfway through HBO's remake . So, while there is a lot to look forward to with the Harry Potter TV show, the Audible production is a far shorter-term (and nearly as good) option. It's at least enough to hold everyone over until the bigger production premieres.

Harry Potter

Harry Potter is HBO's remake of the iconic Wizarding World film series that consisted of eight films between 2001 and 2011. Each season adapts a book from JK Rowling's popular series and provides more book-accurate details than the movies did. Upon the announcement of the Harry Potter TV show, the series received harsh criticism for the involvement of Rowling and for many thinking a reboot was unnecessary.