The BigScreen Cinema Guide Now Showing The Marquee Gift Shop Search Help
Have an Account? E-Mail Address Passcode
| Register Now


Remove ads with our VIP Service
Opened in Theaters: Friday, November 16th, 2001

Directed by Chris Columbus
Genre: SciFi/Fantasy
Running Time: 2:33

Share This Page

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
Academy Award® Nominee
A big-screen interpretation of the first book in the most popular children's fantasy series since The Hobbit. Young Harry Potter realizes that his adventures are about to begin as he is invited to...  View more >

some scary moments and mild language

Starring Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint...  View more >

Check out the Harry...
View more information about this movie >

Reviews Summary

Rating # %  
See Now!  79 58 See Now! Percent
Good  35 26 Good Percent
Wait for Rental  14 10 Wait Percent
Stay Away!  9 7 Stay Away! Percent
137 Total Reviews

Please Note: Reader Reviews are submitted by the readers of The BigScreen Cinema Guide and represent their own personal opinions regarding this movie, and do not represent the views of The BigScreen Cinema Guide, or any of its associated entities.

[--- Stay Away! ---]by   Nov 17, 2001
Dumb ass movie. I thought that this movie would be good from the scenes. But it was the stupidist movie i have ever seen. I have to agree with the critics that the movie was way too faithful to the book that it didn't have have any sort of dramatic element (of movies.) The Harry Potter movie is a proof that why a movie shouldn't be too faithful to the original book.

If you've read the book you've seen the movie.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 18, 2001
I give this movie 3 stars, here is my summary

Harry Potter is a likeable 11 year old boy living in England.. He lives with his Aunt and Uncle and a Cousin. Harry's room is under a stairwell. He is not treated with kindness or respect by these relatives...

Harry's Mom was a witch who married a Mr. Potter but they both were killed by an Evil Wizard named Voldemort... Harry was suppose to been killed too but was only left with a Z shaped scare on his forhead...On Harry's 11th birthday he is brought to this train station. At the train station Harry has to walk up to the platform called the 9 3/4 platform and walk through this wall to enter this Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry...

Harry meets 3 friends at this School of Wizardry.. They are assigned the same house at this School. They will have to 'compete' with other students for POINTS.

Each student is given a wand. Soon they learn to levitate feathers and ride broomsticks through the air, make potions, etc.

At this School 100 candles hang suspended from a high ceiling and people in pictures come alive and stairwells move.....They are warned not to go to the dark forest or to the 3rd floor of this school....

Harry and his 3 friends soon learn about the Sorcerer's Stone and how it can transform metal and make you immortal.... BUT this Stone is under a trap door on the 3rd floor! There is a 3 headed dog and snakes, etc to get past. (I can't tell you what happened....but I can say this; (this movie has wonderful special effects and great acting and I liked the moral of this story)
[--- Good ---]by   Nov 18, 2001
Ok, here's the deal. The movie was great. It had wonderful effects, especially the scenes with Quidditch ( wizard sport on broomsticks ).

If you are a die hard fan willing to stand in line at bookstores waiting for the latest release of Harry Potter books you might be slightly disappointed. I think Chris Columbus did the best job he could though given the circumstances. Harry Potter has millions of fans worldwide, there is no way he could construct a movie and have the same rhythms as the book.

I could have sat through four hours of Harry Potter but unfortunately it is a short 2 1/2 hours. The best character in the movie was Rubeus Hagrid. Robby Coltrane did an excellent job of portraying him. The kids did a good job too, Emma made for an excellent Hermione, and Rupert was great as Ron. Daniel also did a good job with Harry.

All in all it was a good movie, and I will see it again, plus whatever sequels they come out with. But, I erised the books more.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 18, 2001
Absolutely spectacular. I want to see it again. If you love the books, you will love the movie. If you haven't read the books, you will want to after seeing this movie. The movie stayed true to the story in every sense of the way. The casting was perfect - the characters in the movie looked exactly like how I would have pictured them from the books.

This is truly a fun movie. It does not matter if you are 4 years old or 94 years old - it is great for all ages!!!
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 19, 2001
great movie. don't know what aaron was talking about but the movie was worth the trip!
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 19, 2001
My son has been waiting for this movie for a long time and it was well worth the wait. I might have enjoyed it even more than he did!

A truly enjoying 2 and a half hours of fantasy and fun. If you enjoyed the book, you will love the movie. I can't wait to see it again.
[--- See Now! ---]by VIP Member Nov 21, 2001
The film is "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" and despite the hype that surround this film, it did quite well.

I saw the film on the fourth night so that I don't want crews from television station to stick their mikes into my face, asking about the movie. Conservative christians who protested the books, never ever read the book, not even one page.

I never read the books either, I know that a good number of kids are big fans of the books. After seeing the movie, I wish I was reading the books too.

The film featuring the hero Harry Potter who was raised by mean spirted step-pareants, along with a half-brther who didn't like him at all. One day he was appointed to study witchcraft at a castle, and from there the magic lighted up the movie.

I love this movie because the film is loyal to the book and the kids are fun to watch. Lots of special effects and a great music score by John Williams helped the movie along. This movie has plenty of stuff to see.

I recommend that you see a second time because at 2 hours and 22 minutes, this film is huge and full of ideas. "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" is a must see.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 21, 2001
This movie was like taking a tour of everything about the first "Harry Potter" book in just under two and a half hours.

Given as how I couldn't get enough of the book, I loved the whole experience from beginning to end. Seeing settings from the book that I'd imagined a hundred times while reading was really incredible. All the actors were perfect, and the movie doesn't take itself seriously at all. All the settings and special effects have a certain amount of fantasy about them, giving you the feeling that you really are in the book.

The movie may get a bit too scary for younger kids, especially in the last twenty minutes or so.

All in all, if you liked the book, you'll love the movie.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 24, 2001
A very fine movie. A movie that is actually fun with some adventure too. Can't beat that.

It's been a terrible year for movies but this one movie just might help turn the tide the other way. Go see it and have fun!
[--- Stay Away! ---]by   Nov 25, 2001
waste of money! GO LOTR
[--- Good ---]by VIP Member Nov 26, 2001
The core audience for this movie will be the millions of people who have read and enjoyed the very popular book series, of which "Harry Potter & the Sorcerer's Stone" is the first installment.

That's a good thing, because as a film companion to the book, it works well. As a movie by itself, I believe that it falls short of telling the complete story with a style that is to be expected in 2001.

I read the book before seeing the movie, part out of curiousity of what all the fuss was about, and part to enjoy the movie even more if large portions were removed for the sake of flow and overall length. I have to say, the book was more enjoyable, but that is the case with 99% of the book-then-movie combinations out there.

The movie flows like a greatest hits montage, making sure you get the high points of the story and the cool scenes that allowed the ILM team to have some fun. The visuals were excellent, and matched my mental images of the various characters and scenes perfectly. Few deviations from the book were made, which will surely please die-hard "I've read the book a dozen times" fans.

I found the transitions between scenes jarring at times, where you would be thrown from one part of the story to the next (a few pages ahead, in a book paradigm) without an appropriate segue to lead the way. I fear that anyone who has not read the book will find the movie somewhat disjointed at times, and that may hurt their ability to fully enjoy the film.

The performances of the child actors were pivotal to the success of the film, and the actors who played Harry, Ron, and Hermione were certainly up to the task. They are in virtually every scene of the movie, and they do an excellent job!

Perhaps it was the theater I visited, but the film exhibited a grainy look that is similar to my camcorder in low light conditions. This was distracting at first, and then I just accepted it as part of the look the director must have intended. It will be interesting to view the film in another theater, and when it comes out on DVD to see if the grain is purposeful or a byproduct of poor projection.

It goes without saying that if you enjoyed the Harry Potter books, this movie is a must-see. If you have not, be prepared to come out of the theater wondering if you've missed something, for what you missed is surely on a cutting room floor somewhere, waiting for the 3.5 hour extended version on DVD.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 26, 2001
Very good it's a must see.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 28, 2001
This is a wonderful fantasy which matches the book. Young and old alike will be able to follow the movie to a "T". I believe that is one reason the movie is so well received.

It isn't a "confusing" movie, it's straight forward and fits the book and nothing "messed with." My children and I enjoyed this very very much. It isn't an "evil" movie as some obsessed fundamentalist christians are calling it and it will not turn little children into occult worshipping teenagers. That's what peers and parents who don't care are for.

I can't wait for the 5th book and for the next movie!!!
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 29, 2001
I'm a 37 year old non-fan, and I thoroughly enjoyed this movie.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Dec 5, 2001
Again, I am an adult and have never read the Books. I really enjoyed this movie, and I felt I followed it completely. My wife isn't into "Fantasy" movies, but enjoyed it as well. Our 5 yr old son had a good time, but got restless in the last 1/2 hour (of a 2:20 flick). Personally, I wished it had been longer - The movie never had a lag, never seemed stretched out, never got dull. I highly recommend it

5 stars out of a possible 5
[--- See Now! ---]by   Dec 7, 2001
This is a wonderful movie! We saw it twice and it keeps getting better! I give it 4 stars!
[--- Stay Away! ---]by   Dec 25, 2001
OK I haven't read any of the Harry Potter books, and after this movie I do not think I will. The story of a wizard in training has many possibilities, but the slow pace the plot takes allows the viewer to lose interest. Aficionados of the books tell me that like the first novel, which was also slow-moving, the film is laying the foundations for the future works. This is a rather presumptious attitude from both author and producer. There is nothing in this film that would attract me to see a sequel.

Additionally one would expect the young wizard to break out of the humdrum life he was being forced to live with a few pranks. But these are hardly comparable to the cruelty he has been forced to live. Life at Hogwart is boring. Even the the "first years" who do try their stuff are very tame.

The special effects, especially in the game the houses play, do not measure up to other films. These special effects look fake.

A very boring movie.
[--- Good ---]by   Dec 27, 2001
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is a good adaptation of the book. I have read all the books in the series, and the book is much better than the film. the film was a little slow at points, but was pleasing overall and entertaining.

It was interesting to see how they would bring the book to life, and it was a job well done. If you would like to see a good adaptation of this book or have little kids, go see Harry Potter. Otherwise, I would say to go see Lord of the Rings.
[--- Good ---]by   Dec 29, 2001
I would have put my ratings as "see now" but I feel this movie is aimed for kids and even though I am adult in my thirties I did enjoy the movie very much.

I feel if you are going to see this movie that you should go see it while it is on the big screen. It might loose some of its affect on video, on a small tv screen.
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Dec 31, 2001
The actors of the main characters (Harry, Ron & Herminoe) seemed like they were just reading their lines, not acting them. That's what Chris Columbus gets for using amateurs instead of professional actors.

The movie dragged on and on for me. I think I read the book faster! I guess the hype and promo's made me expect more than I actually got from the movie.

Oh well, it will play well on the small screen.
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Apr 7, 2002
The movie was made good, but the movie didn't follow the book. The director cut out some of the best chapters. I should know because I have read the book like 3 times! The movie was really poorly made at the end because the director totally screwed it up. He didn't even add the good parts of the end.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Apr 17, 2002
I loved this movie.

After reading the books (Before my son finished the first one :D ) I was a little concerned that they would drift too far away from the original storyline and characters. But all due congratulations to Chris Columbus for sticking to the book.

For those who have read the book, this movie will bring it to life. For those who haven't, it will give you a good idea as to why the books are so popular.

Looking forward to the 6? sequals.


Anyone wanting to comment on my comments can reach me via
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Nov 16, 2002
Harry Potter disappoints -- not because of actors, special effects, or story line but because of film editing: Small things left in too long or simple things left out.

In an attempt to capture every scene from the book, the movie fails to capture its spirit -- discovery of a new and complex world, growing up and growing independent, and a sense that behind each character are plausable reasons and a hidden history. Characters and circumstances that seemed real in the books and first movie, are forced to fit a formula too often -- You can almost hear a tired director's helper talk from the side -- "applaud the hero now -- supporting character #3 walk thru the door now and get a hug -- character #2 repeatably look comically in terror -- young bad guy just act mean don't ask me why"

Harry Potter, though watchable and with great sets and special effects, becomes irritating for it seems only a problem of editing -- chosing what scene to leave in or out -- when to cut a scene shorter -- when to stop explaining the punchline before it happens. The movie would be great with slight changes made by someone who understood and liked the books more than blindless commiting to a checklist of things to do. This is definitely a 2 and a half star.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 17, 2002
Although you may not be able to tell it from the previews, this movie is very different from the first. Sure, it has the same actors, characters, and general look, but "Chamber" is much darker than its predecessor.

I'm sure if you've seen anything about this movie, then you've been told this already, but allow me to elaborate a little. Giant spiders (that look quite real) chase two characters through a dark forest and try to eat them (and get very very close). A giant serpent that looks vaguely like Godzilla from that godawful American version is dealt with in a spectacular, and surprisingly gory manner. There's some very violent stuff going on here, so much so that at times I thought the movie was edging into PG-13 territory.

That said, the new dark tone worked very well for me. It was more exciting, and the characters were much funnier this time around. Also, it didn't quite feel like we were watching individual chapters of a book fold out onscreen. In the last movie, the scenes were more like individual adventures that lead toward one conclusion where everything is sort of brought together. In this movie, the disjointed feeling is still there, but each chapter is connected to the others better and has more relevance, making it seem like this sort of stuff should happen, rather than just happening because that's what happened in the book.

All in all, this movie has some moments that may scare any child much younger than 10, but most good kids' movies have some scary parts. The wicked witch and flying monkeys scared me when I was a kid, so maybe the giant spiders and Godzilla-snake aren't too bad. Still, it's a must-see for Potter fans and anyone looking for a carefree time at the theater.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 17, 2002
I've just gotten home from the movie Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. Please do not wait to see this at home. You must see this on the big screen, it is phenomenal.

Much better than the first movie, more cohesive. Everyone is more comfortable.

I loved it. Hope you love it too.
[--- See Now! ---]by VIP Member Nov 19, 2002
Harry Potter is back for his sophmore year in "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets." Watching this film is a total joy for me. This franchaise which was launched by Warner Brothers keeps surprising me with first-rate special effects and smart writing.

I was overwhemed by the music score by John Williams. So the second film is darker, it is an indication that the series continues to reinvent itself, and dosen't repeat itself like it did with "Men in Black 2." In the second film, the chamber of secrets is reopen, theatening the students at Hogwart school.

I like this sequel a lot. It's just as good as the first film. To me and especially to the kids who are reading the Harry Potter books, he's a hero. And by today's standard, we need as many heroes we can get. Gee, I wish I was a kid again so I can go to Hogwart school. What a wonderful school to go to.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Dec 10, 2002
Great Movie! I can't wait for the next installment. My only disappointment was the material cut from the book. Granted the movie was 2:40, and if less was cut it could have tipped the clock at 4:00.

Fun for the entire family! A bit scarier than the first movie, but still a family film

4 out of 5 stars!
[--- Stay Away! ---]by   Dec 14, 2002
im only 10 and my dad lets me write these. i love harry potter books and so far the first movie stunk on ice and the second movie actually put me to sleep until the fat basiculus hissed at harry and harry ran like a chicken the movie stunk i hated it my rating 0 out of 4
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Jan 7, 2003
Dobby the house elf warns Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) not to return to Hogwarts for his second year of magical lessons soon after the audience receives a taste of Harry's miserable existence with the Dursley family in the opening sequence of director Chris Columbus' Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. Dobby, a computer generated character and one of the special effects that keeps this film moderately entertaining from start to finish, remains ambiguous in his warning but stresses that `terrible things are about to happen!' Many audience members exit the theater wondering if Dobby spoke of the dangers awaiting Harry at Hogwarts or the trite and threadbare story awaiting theatergoers for nearly three hours of the film's duration.

Screeching mandrakes, the howler Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) receives from his mother (Bonnie Wright), a conversational diary, the phoenix, the ghostly Moaning Myrtle (Shirley Henderson), and other special effects including a cinematically superior game of Quidditch make the second Harry Potter film better than the first installment and superficially enjoyable, but spectacle alone cannot sustain a film even in this magical world. Kenneth Branagh wins the hearts of his female students and audience members in the role of Professor Gilderoy Lockhart, Jason Isaacs is notably cold and cruel as Lucius Malfoy, and the late Richard Harris as Headmaster Albus Dumbledore creates depth for his character amidst the other one-dimensional characters of the film, but these three veterans along with Maggie Smith as Professor Minerva McGonagall cannot tap their wands and make magic out of Steve Kloves' lackluster script that includes the most exciting events from J.K. Rowling's novel but fails to support these events with other necessary plot points making much of the film random and nonsensical.

The young actors including Radcliffe, Grint, Emma Watson as Hermione Granger, and Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy generally showcase improved performances from their first attempts in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, but they all lack the versatility and subtlety of accomplished actors. None of these amateurish actors attempt to find believable persons within their characters, and consequently each character emerges as a dull caricature. Harry is the unsuspecting hero. Ron is the pathetically helpless and bewildered sidekick. Hermione is the brain of the operation. Draco is the representation of evil. The script provides only one-dimensional characters, and none of these actors has the ability to create something out of nothing as more skilled performers can do, which adds to the banality of the film.

Columbus' first priority for the next film in this series should be to find a screenwriter with a vivid imagination and the creative ability to bring Rowling's world to life. The cast will miss Harris as Dumbledore and the young actors need a few more lessons in their craft before shooting begins, but with a decent blueprint this cast has the potential to rival anything the imagination could possibly create. Improvement is a step in the right direction and the film is almost worthy of some acclaim, but as Ron discovered in Professor McGonagall's class, almost is far from perfect and never quite good enough.
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Feb 24, 2003
[--- Good ---]by VIP Member Jul 21, 2003
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Jun 4, 2004
I wasn't as overwhelmed with this film as the press releases and public relations firm wanted me to be. Granted, there is immense difficulty in condensing a tomb the size of "Prisoner" into a 2 hour movie. The brevity and absence of scenes was unavoidable. However, this might be all the more reason to try to hold other anchor points as constant.

I think the director, in an effort to "start over with a new vision" took many steps that will alienate the faithful HP fan. Why the need to change Hagrid's cabin? Why the need to alter the set-back angles for the castle interior shots? Most of all, why the steadfast insistence to strip the characters of their fantasy shroud by putting them in street clothes? I don't expect to see Bilbo in a sweatshirt and jeans. I don't expect to see Williow in a Nike sweatsuit. Why rob the aura of the mystical persona. This isn't SpyKids, it is mystical fantasy.

I won't see it again at the theatre and I really don't know if I will buy the DVD.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jun 4, 2004
I don't know anything about "anchor points", and I don't think I could have directed it better in fewer steps , but I do know I liked the film.

I am not trying to live out a fantasy life as a movie critic, or know enough to correct a directors misteaks. I just know if the popcorn is good and if I feel I got my bucks worth of entertainment, it's all that counts.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jun 5, 2004
My biggest problem with the first two "Potter" movies was their ridiculous faithfulness to the books. It wasn't so much that their wasn't much for origininality; as far as I'm concerned Rowling's books have more than enough originality to go around. It was the fact that the books are written in chapters, each of which has a very distinct event. The result was that movies felt as though they were written in chapters; they seemed very segmented and not very cohesive.

This third movie puts all that to rest. "Prisoner of Azkaban" feels like a movie and not a televised book. The story is also a lot darker this time around, but also quieter; this movie has far less spectacle than the other two and it's much more character-driven. This means that the younger Potter fans may squirm a bit in their seats during the somewhat drawn-out conversations about Harry's parents, etc.

In terms of summer movie magic, this movie has plenty of special effects, and they are easily the best in the "Harry Potter" movies yet. Buckbeak the Hippogriff, in particular, looked stunning.

All in all, what we have here is a step up for an already great series of movies, and I look forward more than ever to the fourth adaptation. ***1/2 out of 4.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jun 6, 2004
This is THE BEST Harry Potter movie so far! Darker in tone, and the effects have improved 150%!!! The cinematography is brilliant and thankfully a brand new score was done by John Williams (not just rehashed music like the last movie).

Any fan of the book with enjoy this movie. Parents, I suggest going with your kids if they are under 12 - there are scary and graphic moments in the movie.
[--- See Now! ---]by VIP Member Jun 6, 2004
One of the rare times a movie rivals the book. It was excellent; the special effects were superb, the story moved well, and you were definitely gripped by it. It is a little different in style than the other movies -- it is a bit more gritty and dark, which matches the story. Our entire group agreed: the best Harry Potter yet.
[--- See Now! ---]by VIP Member Jun 8, 2004
Harry, You done It Again! The third film in the series has left me with a smile on my face. Despite a new director and a dark vision, the series has not missed a beat. Every scene, every emotion is first rate. Gary Oldman gave a great performance. Watching him gave 110% is a joy.

Harry Potter is the reason why we go to the movies. Harry Potter is the reason that a lot of kids are reading the books. 2 1/2 hours of pure fun that is right on! The next Potter movie wont come out until November 2005. Already, I looking forward in going back to Hogwarth.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jun 9, 2004
[--- Stay Away! ---]by   Jun 10, 2004
It was horrible:( It just was terrible i can't explain it.
[--- Good ---]by   Jun 10, 2004
I am not a Harry Potter fan in general, but my son and I enjoyed the movie.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jun 10, 2004
Just as good as the last two, maybe even better.
[--- Good ---]by   Jun 10, 2004
It was good - the time went by so quickly! Kept your interest, Ron was funny in a dumb sort of way. The new animal was very cool! I want one! See it, it's good.
[--- Good ---]by   Jun 11, 2004
I found this movie to be much more watchable than the other two. You can definitely tell that the focus has become to make a good movie, not just include every detail from the books. I hadn't read the book for a while before hand, which helped because I didn't remember as many of the omissions. The street clothes did annoy me a bit, and is it just me or was the attic classroom a lot smaller than that? But I do recommend the movie to all!
[--- Good ---]by   Jun 11, 2004
It was a LONG movie. I didn't enjoy this movie as much as the other two, but the effects in the movie were pretty cool! If you haven't read the book, some parts of the movie will be hard to follow. I respect the part that this movie doesn't exactly come from the book.

I can't wait for the next movie to come out in November 2005. I will most likely be owning this movie when it comes out.(This is a 14 year olds opinion of the movie, not a parent or adult's view)
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jun 13, 2004
Fun, enjoyable movie.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jun 15, 2004
Better then thr first two. They kept all the basic plot points of the book and put them together in a way that makes a good movie.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jun 18, 2004
I do not know why people are being so critical of this movie. It was great. They may not have gone exactly by the book, but forget that. Just look at the movie. It is much more grown up than the first two. It gets deeper into to Harry and how he is dealing with the death of his family.

No matter what people say, it was a great movie. I agree that Chris Colombus should have stayed as director, even though he was worn out from directing the first two. I can not wait for this movie to come out on DVD.
[--- Good ---]by   Jun 19, 2004
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jun 22, 2004
The best of the three! The new director gave a new feel. I agree with previous posters about the street clothes.

The cinematography was excellent. The scene changes were really good. John Williams' score was superb! Listen for the nuances of "Something Wicked This Way Comes" throughout the movie.

Watch the credits at the end. The footprints are hilarious!

My only gripe is the lack of explanation of the Maurader's Map and who the author's were. Book fans will understand.

We're going to go see it again!
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jun 22, 2004
Definitely the best so far, but for me itís because of the acting of the principal characters not solely for the direction or the production values which were also both excellent. The young cast has matured nicely and this is shown in their much stronger performances than in the first two installments.

I donít know about it being better because the Director made it Ďdarkerí as the books get a little more sinister at this stage anyway which should, and has been, reflected in the movie. It will be interesting to see what a third director will do with the franchise when making the fourth one.

Any disappointments? A few I suppose but only minor ones that I might be pedantic about because Iíve read the books.

Overall a fine film well worth watching and collecting.

[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 3, 2004
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban ensnares each viewer into a world of magic. It is the best Harry Potter film yet seeing as the plot moves quicker and it follows not so closely to the books, but closely to a good format for a movie.
[--- Stay Away! ---]by   Jul 21, 2004
CRAP! CRAP! MEGACRAP! go see dodgeball or spiderman instead! this movie sucked, they skipped from scene to scene and the ending sucked, everything was flipped around and differed from the book, they dont even play quidditch...... IT SUCKS! i give it a .5/100 because the book itself is very good
[--- Stay Away! ---]by   Jul 26, 2004
I fell asleep as this movie plodded on and on and on! It felt like I was seeing two or three movies at once too. The plot just got lost somewhere in one of the movies! Dressing the main characters in modern clothing was unbelievable! The only redeeming factor was some of the scenery shown. It was beautiful. However if I wanted to see a travelog, I could have stayed home and watched the Travel channel.

This movie just didn't cut it as a Harry Potter movie.
[--- Good ---]by   Jul 30, 2004
Could have been better if they hadn't left out so many pertinent details.
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Jul 31, 2004
Disappointing. I was ready to leave before the halfway point. The change in wardrobe, special effects, scenery, and actors, made the whole movie more "muggle" like. I didn't get lost in the magic and fantasy like in movies 1 & 2.

It was choppy and could have followed the storyline more (I don't think anyone would mind a longer movie if it's worth watching). Please bring back the old director for the next parts (at least get rid of the current one). If not, I won't be in such a rush to watch them.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Aug 14, 2004
This movie is own of my favorite movies! it is GREAT!
[--- See Now! ---]by   Aug 18, 2004
Can't say enough about it!!
[--- See Now! ---]by   Aug 19, 2004
[--- Good ---]by   Nov 27, 2004
Very funny!
[--- Good ---]by   Jan 9, 2005
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Jul 1, 2005
The problem with this movie is that it missed so many events for example, the part where Harry wins the Quidditch Cup for the Griffindor House! I mean, common, it's one of the biggest event of the book and should be for the movie as well!

The graphics were wonderful but I'd have to say that they could've worked on the werewolf's looks.

I'm giving it a 3 1/2 stars but still wait for a rental.

P.S. Read the book first!
[--- Good ---]by VIP Member Jul 20, 2005
A good continuation of the series, but a little unremarkable.

The tone and style of this installment is very different from the earlier two, most likely a result of the new director at the wheel.

Fans of the series need no reason to see this movie, and if you haven't read the book, it helps if you know someone who has so they can fill in the blanks for you and explain some things that get glossed over.

Worth renting, but not worth owning.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 16, 2005
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 18, 2005
Great movie!! It is better though if you have put off reading the book. I normally do not see a movie twice but would consider going again.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 18, 2005
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 18, 2005
Excellent movie!! It lives up to its reputation. I would most defiantly see this one again in theaters. I wish they could have added more things from the book (GOF is my favorite book). This movie may be a little hard for younger children to grasp (for those of you who have read the book I am referring to the end, I don't want to spoil anything for those of you on only have seen the movies. I loved it and hope the following movies are just as good!
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 19, 2005
The first two "Harry Potter" movies were plagued by their slavishly faithful interpretations of the novels, making them seems more like very expensive books on tape than actuall movies. The third movie moved away from this trend, cutting a lot of filler and mkaing for a leaner, faster-moving interpretation. THe fourth film in the series goes even one step further and pretty much cuts out anything we've seen before. No Quidditch, no Dursleys, no moving staircases, very few talking pictures. The result is perhaps the fastest-paced two and a half hour long movie I have ever seen.

Several major characters are relegated to backseat roles in favor of better pacing: Alan Rickman does little but glower and sneer as Snape, Draco Malfoy has only one major scene in the whole movie, and Robbie Coltrane's Hagrid doesn't fare much better. Given expanded roles are Dumbledore, played with righteous authority by Michael Gambon, and the hilarious Weasley twins, who provide a good amount of the comic relief in the film.
Making their debuts here are the throwaway comic character Rita Skeeter (Miranda Richardson), Mad-Eye Moody, played by Brendan Gleeson, who steals every single scene he's in, and Ralph Fiennes as Lord Voldemort. Voldemort is being touted by some as the cinematic heir apparent to Darth Vader, and for good reason. His scene is one of the creepiest I've seen in awhile, and Fiennes plays him with a slithery, whispery menace. At one point Voldemort says something that completely convinced me that he believed he has a righteous cause and Harry was only standing in the way of greatness.

The pace of "Goblet of Fire" never flags from beginning to end. The acting, especially that of the three lead kids, only improves with every movie. The special effects are absolutely beautiful, often taking the Peter Jackson route of not even trying to look realistic, merely beautiful (or frightening).

Walking out of the theatre, I found I couldn't wait to see movie #5, and the showdown between Dumbledore and Voldemort. **** out of 4
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 20, 2005
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 23, 2005
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 23, 2005
Movie was really good but did not follow the book as much as I would have liked. I hate the new Dumbledore, and Krum wasn't what I would have picked. All and all it was a good movie.
[--- Good ---]by   Nov 24, 2005
Really Impressive display in every scene of the Movie
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 24, 2005
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 25, 2005
Very good movie. The only complaint is that I really miss Richard Harris, Micheal Gambon is a good actor, but he's just not Dumbledore. But, its a small complaint, and doesn't hurt the movie too bad. The movies just keep getting better.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 27, 2005
[--- Stay Away! ---]by   Nov 29, 2005
[--- See Now! ---]by VIP Member Nov 30, 2005
Harry Potter did it again. "Harry Potter and the Gobiet of Fire" had me wanting for more and I got. I though the thrid film was dark, well, the fourth one just got darker. I notice the change of tyhe classmantes, especailly Emma Watson who is get more beautiful by each passing movie. In the fourth film, Harry has entered into the Tri-Wizard Tournment. I can't say no more, youn just going to have to watch to outcome youself. The fourth Harry Potter movie is fun to watch despite to dark formant. I haven't read the books yet, but hopefully I shall take time from my busy schudule to read them from the beginning. the fifth movie will be out in June 2007 and I can't wait to go back to Hogwarth again.
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Dec 1, 2005
I have never been a big Harry Potter fan and I felt like this movie was just like the other 3. Nothing that great about it except for the special effects, but if you are a H P fan then you will probably love it because all of my friends who are big H P fans loved this new one.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Dec 9, 2005
I think the movie would be confusing at points if you haven't read the book. Still worth seeing.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Dec 11, 2005
Don't miss seeing it on the big screen.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Dec 11, 2005
I loved this movie. It had great effects, this was my favorite of all the books so far. I wish there could have been more of the book in the movie. I love seeing Dan, Emma, and Rupert growing up into such amazing actors. Go and see the movie if you enjoyed the others. You will not be disappointed!
[--- Good ---]by   Dec 28, 2005
Probably my favorite of the Potter movies so far. Whomever rates this as a "STAY AWAY" should not be allowed to rate movies because this film was action-packed, had awesome visual effects, and had me on the edge my seat the entire time. Again, this one might be hard to follow for non-readers, but I'd love to see it again.
[--- Good ---]by   Jan 4, 2006
I didn't feel this was as good as the previous three movies. It was solid but there was a noticeable drop off in charm. Maybe part of that is due to the kids growing up.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jan 5, 2006
I loved it was great and harry looked preey good in black
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jan 7, 2006
Loved the movie but sure wish they would have turned on the sub-titles whenever any of the three kid principals started talking. After this many movies you would think they could speak english without that dreadful accent the three of them have. Other than that, the film was super. I'm gonna rent a copy as soon as it comes out so that I can actually find out what they said.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jan 10, 2006
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jan 24, 2006
I for one liked this movie and would go and see it again because it is that good.

Can't wait until the dvd comes out with all the extra things on it.
If your kidss like the first three then they will love this one....
Even Adults can sit there and enjoy this movie......
I would give it 8 12 out off 10..
[--- Good ---]by VIP Member Jul 12, 2007
After four movies, the series is beginning to show it's age as the kids are growing up. It was yesterday that the kids are fighting for the house cup. Now the same group of kids are figting for their lives. In the MTV Movie Awards, I voted "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" as the best move I haven't seen. Well I saw it and I glad that I voted for that movie. In the fifth installment, Harry Potter is having a hard time convincing everyone that Voldemont is back. but he's isn't the only villain in the movie. A teacher comes to Hogwart and shortly afterward has taken over the school, and issue so many strick rulkes that you have to have a broomstick to read some of the rules. I like Voldmont. He's a better villain than that Dr. Doom from "Fantastic Four:The Rise of the Silver Surfer." The old cast is back. And I'm glad. Although the fifth movie is not as good as any of the four movies, My heart is still with Harry and the Hogwart students. I'm looking forward for the last two movies. I had fun with those movies. As for the books, I still going though the first book in the series. The series is still high flying.
[--- Good ---]by   Jul 13, 2007
As always another great Potter movie. I really loved the movie, but I couldn't quite give it a see now. This movie is defiantly darker, and I doubt that smaller children will understand it. I was a little disappointed only because one of my favorite characters die and it was not played as sad as it should have been. Take the time to see the movie while it is still on the big screen.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 13, 2007
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Jul 14, 2007
While acknowledging that the entire book cannot be represented in the movie, Order of the Phoenix barely resembled the book. It didn't even match the hype of the trailers. (If you saw the trailers, you've seen the movie.) If I were JK Rowling, I'd be pitching a fit!! Scenes were out of story timeline, essential backstory was not present, liberties were taken by expanding parts of scenes that don't occur in the book. I was almost rooting for the Ministry of Magic to prevail.

It wasn't worth the price of the ticket to see this distorted version of what to date has been an exciting series. Another example of why the book is always so much better than the movie. Let's hope that Half Blood Prince resembles the book more closely than this poor excuse...although that's unlikely since several of the pieces of backstory needed to understand Half Blood Prince weren't present in Order of the Phoenix.
[--- Good ---]by   Jul 15, 2007
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 15, 2007
great movie u won't be able to tear your eyes from the screen til the end
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 28, 2007
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 29, 2007
This is one of the better book to movie transformations in the series.
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Jul 31, 2007
This one was not as good as all the other ones. I was honestly a little dissappointed.
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Aug 13, 2007
[--- Good ---]by   Aug 14, 2007
It was a dark book so naturally it was a dark movie. Not the typical fun type movie as in the past with Harry Potter but it held true to the story line. True Harry Potter fans will appreciate this movie.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Aug 31, 2007
[--- See Now! ---]by   Oct 26, 2007
Loved it and so did my 12 year old. We love all the Harry Potters.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Dec 27, 2007
Just fantastic!!! Great film with brilliant actors and actresses that match every part. J.K. Rowling won't be disappointed and neither will anyone who sees this film!
[--- See Now! ---]by   Dec 27, 2007
Absolutely fantastic, rivals any film I've seen! The book and the movie should be on the top of any list!
[--- See Now! ---]by   Dec 27, 2007
Excellent!!! Continuing the phenomenal Harry Potter series, nothing in the film is below extraordinary! Another top-notch Potter film.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 15, 2009
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 15, 2009
"Bloody brilliant!" As always the book is way to rich to be able to put every delicious detail/plot point on screen but what does make it to the screen makes for a satisfying 2 hours and 33 minutes for readers and non-readers alike. Acting is pitch perfect by all with plenty of light moments balanced by the darker. This muggle plans to view again in IMAX 3-D!
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 15, 2009
The movie is great!!!!!!!!
[--- Good ---]by VIP Member Jul 16, 2009
It's great to see Harry Potter return to the big screen after a two-year wait. I miss the series very much. I miss the castle and I miss the kids and the teachers at Hogwart. Man, it's nice to be back in front of the screen again to see the new Harry Potter movie. And that makers the latest Harry Potter movie, "Harry Potter and the Half-blood Price a welcome relief for me and for the fans who love him and the books they read. I only read one of the seven books and I'll probaby read the books later. It's also nice to see the kids growing up. when the first movie opened in the fall of 2001 they're were little kids. Now, they're growing up and with that the problems that come with it. so I'm glad that a portion of the movie is dealing with dating. The plot of the movie is Harry must know the true identity of the Half-blood prince. I won't give away the ending, but you will be shocked, just like me. I saw it on opening day, so I can tell you how much I love the movie. I only give it a "Good" rating. I'm a tough grader. I can live with that. Only two more Harry Potter movies to go. I'll be sad to see the series end.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 16, 2009
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 19, 2009
it is a good movie to see
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 19, 2009
Parts of the book are not followed, but still a great movie to see
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 21, 2009
You're never going to be able to completely film the book. Its just not something that;s possible for books as long as the Harry Potter books are. The best you can do is translate the material to a movie format, and this movie does that very well. These movie keep getting better. Excellent movie, and very worth seeing.
[--- Good ---]by   Jul 27, 2009
Love the series and the book...let me start off saying that.

The movie was good,but disappointing.

Cant put my finger on was a little wrong...was defiantly much darker this time.
Acting was so so...some people looked as if they were just walking through their lines.

Is worth seeing...will probably see again just to be sure,but was very disappointed....could have been much better...enjoyed the previous movies 100% better.

My opinion.
[--- Good ---]by   Jul 27, 2009
What a great series, this film was so different from the previous films but still excellent, it adds depth to the series and to the characters. The music didn't reach the same caliber as the other soundtracks, the melodies, whatever they were, just don't stick in your mind like the others have in mine. Lots of excitement, lots of action, it's fun to see the kids growing up, poor Harry gets stretched past his limts again,... The death of an important character was depressing, especially ending on such a somber and depressing note the way it did,... With that said, it will be hard to wait a year to see the next installment. It was hard to decide if I should rate this a "See Now!" or a "Good", if it didn't end on such a depressing note, it would have a "See Now!".
[--- Good ---]by   Jul 29, 2009
Almost a see now but I thought the acting was so so by some of the characters. I loved all the movies in this series and will get it on disc when it comes out.
[--- Stay Away! ---]by   Aug 8, 2009
the movie was so far from the book it wasnt even funny
[--- See Now! ---]by   Aug 9, 2009
great movie, there's a lot of romance, adventure, i didn't like the ending because is unfair, but no one live forever, not even a great wizard.
[--- Good ---]by   Aug 16, 2009
I liked the movie, as I've liked all the movies of this series. I enjoyed the way the kids are shown to be maturing and making some hard choices. And I didn't mind the few things they had to cut from the book. But, I do wish they would have shown the funeral. To me, that was a pivotal part of the book - it gave a finality to the death and made Harry's decision more understandable.
[--- Good ---]by   Aug 27, 2009
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 7, 2009
Very good!
[--- Good ---]by VIP Member Jan 12, 2010
I went into this movie primarily with the expectations set by the previous movies. I've only read the first book, preferring to watch and enjoy the movie versions of the story instead. I enjoyed the previous movies, with perhaps "The Goblet of Fire" being the best of the bunch (#1 was good in its own right because everything was fresh).

The students at Hogwarts are getting older, and their issues are changing along with them. Gone is the wide-eyed wonder of the first installment, and front-and-center is the darkness that has been building ever since. The teen issues that were first covered in "Goblet of Fire" are very prevalent here, where one could make a drinking game from each time "snogging" is mentioned or undertaken!

Since it had been some time since I had seen "Order of the Phoenix" it took me some time to recall what happened at the end of that movie, and the implications those events had on everyone involved.

More than any of the other installments, "The Half Blood Prince" has the feel of an "in-between" movie. Many of the storylines seem intended primarily to move characters and plotlines between the previous installments and those that follow.

While I knew of the "surprise" ending, I was not aware of the other characters involved in the event, so it left me with all kinds of questions about the motivations of the various characters involved, and what's going to happen next, etc. I can't help but think that's exactly what the filmmakers intended, so that the next installment can't come quickly enough!

If you're not a huge Harry Potter fan, this one is a rental not a purchase.
[--- Good ---]by   Nov 19, 2010
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Nov 21, 2010
[--- Good ---]by VIP Member Nov 23, 2010
It's a good thing that "Harry Potter and the Deadly Hollows" are broken into two parts; otherwise I could've sat though a six-hour movie. As the next to the last Harry Potter movie opens, Harry and his frinds are on the run from Voldemort who wants to kill Potter in order to restore his true power. I can't reveal the ending, but it's a set-up for the final movie of the series, which will be release in July 2011. I'm already there. .
[--- See Now! ---]by   Nov 23, 2010
[--- Good ---]by   Dec 1, 2010
I am a big fan of the series but I will have to say that this one was a bit slow and at times boring. I know it is the lead in to the final chapter but still it should have been better. A lot of wasted space.
[--- See Now! ---]by   Dec 9, 2010
This is the best one yet! It sticks the closest to the book because they've given themselves enough time to tell the story with the second part coming out soon.
[--- Good ---]by VIP Member Dec 23, 2010
I admit to feeling a little lost when it comes to this installment and the previous one (Half-Blood Prince).

Perhaps ardent fans are rewarded by knowing what's going on without it all being explained on-screen, but in these last two movies, I feel that those of us that have only seen the movies are at a disadvantage. Maybe I'm in a distinct minority because I've only read the first book, but a movie shouldn't require the viewer to have knowledge of other material to make sense.

That aside, this was an enjoyable movie. The sense of dread and near sorrow that is part of the first scenes with the three primary characters is palpable. It drags a little due to the exposition necessary to explain plot points from earlier installment, but I wasn't bothered by it.

Since it's the first part of a two-part finale to the series, it doesn't end with any closure, but at least they didn't say "to be continued..." as the last scene faded to black. Part 1 will only be able to be evaluated properly once Part 2 has been released, so the two can make the whole.

If you're a die-hard fan, you've already seen this, and probably more than once. If you're not a die-hard fan and you haven't yet seen it, you might be better off waiting until late spring when the home video release happens, and the wait for Part 2 on July 15th won't be so long.
[--- See Now! ---]by VIP Member Jul 19, 2011
The new Harry Potter movie, "Harry Potter and the Deadly Hallows, Part 2" has left me a little sad. This is the last movie and there woin't be any more Harry Potter. It's like watching the series finale of a TV series. If you follow that TV series for many years and when it ended forever. You feel sad. I was sad. I watch the Harry Potter series from day one. I watch the three kids grew up before our eyes. Yesterday, they were kids, now they have grown up and they must movie on. The final movie is the conclusion of a two parter, but the end of a series that define motion picture history. In Part 2, thge kids return to Hogwart to fend their school against Voltment and the final battle between the two is the climax, not only to the movie, but to the series. The film's running time is 2 hours and 10 minutes, the shortest movie of the series. I wish the movie could've been a little longer. I may be one of a few Reader Reviewers who review all eight Harry Potter movies. Put all eight Harry Potter movies together and you can call it a thesis. I love the series. it's a great series. It's better than any other series in motion picture history. I'm proud of the series. Harry Potter makes me smile. What a ride!
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 19, 2011
[--- See Now! ---]by   Jul 22, 2011
[--- Good ---]by   Jul 31, 2011
[--- See Now! ---]by   Aug 24, 2011
[--- Good ---]by   Oct 13, 2012
[--- Good ---]by   Oct 13, 2012
[--- See Now! ---]by   Oct 13, 2012
[--- Wait for Rental ---]by   Oct 13, 2012
[--- See Now! ---]by VIP Member Jul 24, 2013
I thought this movie was a very fitting end to the series. The first part was necessarily unsatisfying (given that it was the first of two parts), but this finale redeemed that frustration easily.

I haven't read any of the books past the first, so I don't know how true to the book the last two movies were, but the rabid fans I know were quite happy.

If you're interested I seeing this movie, you've likely seen the rest and maybe also read the books, so if you're into the series so far, there's not much that could dissuade you. Fortunately, this movie will provide a satisfying conclusion to the Harry Potter story.
[--- See Now! ---]by VIP Member Aug 20, 2013
I am a huge fan of the books, and I loved this movie as well. It is perfect for people who like a movie with mystery and suspense, and also like to have a somewhat scary ending but not scary enough to keep you up at night (like me).

The special effects in this movie were very cool, especially in the Quidditch, Great Hall and first-sight-of-Hogwarts scenes.The actors did very well in really conveying the characters' attitudes and views.

The movie stuck to the book's storyline, which can be both a good and bad thing. A movie does need to have some independence and add in a few details, which I think that the people producing the movie did. Sticking to the storyline, though keeps fans of the Harry Potter books happy and gives a new interpretation of the visuals.

Overall, the movie was a great first debut and set the stage for the many wonderful movies based off of the books to come.

Reader VoiceMake Your Voice Heard!

How would you rate this movie?
[--- See Now! ---] [--- Good ---] [--- Wait for Rental ---] [--- Stay Away! ---]

Looking for more opinions?

Check out our Featured Movie Reviews for Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone.

Home - About Us - Ad Info - Feedback
Journal/Blog - The Marquee - Movie Links - News and Events - Now Showing - Reader Reviews
Customize - VIP Service

The BigScreen Cinema Guide is a service of SVJ Designs LLC. All graphics, layout, and structure of this service (unless otherwise specified) are Copyright © 1995-2015, SVJ Designs. The BigScreen Cinema Guide is a trademark of SVJ Designs. All rights reserved.

'ACADEMY AWARDS®' and 'OSCAR®' are the registered trademarks and service marks of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.
Find Us on Facebook