Back to Hustonian Institute
Back to Movie Reviews
It Is Written
When a book is made into a movie, I usually like to read the book before seeing the movie, and in this case, am glad I did. However, it does affect my perception of the quality of the film, perhaps rightly, and so I must admit to my judgement being biased by how I perceived Rowling’s world. If I ignore that perception, the film does work better, though not significantly, as most of my quibbles with it have to do not with its faithfulness to the story and characters, but with the filmmaking itself. So, while I may note many instances where the movie was “worse” than the book (again, in my perception of the book) to express my satisfaction or lack thereof with the adaptation it is merely to distinguish my subjective satisfaction with the movie from my more objective assessment of the movie’s quality.
How could something so right be so wrong?
From all appearances, this movie should be four stars, a grade-A movie. Director Chris Columbus (Home Alone, Mrs. Doubtfire), Oscar-winning cinematographer John Seale (The English Patient, The Talented Mr. Ripley, Rain Man, Witness, Dead Poets Society…he is one of my favorite D.P.s working today), composer John Williams (do I really have to list this guy’s credits? and, for some reason, I feel silly putting “Oscar-winning” in front of his name, as if you didn’t know or couldn’t guess), Oscar-winning production designer Stuart Craig (The English Patient, Dangerous Liaisons, The Mission, Gandhi), award-winning and Oscar-nominated writer Steve Kloves (Wonder Boys, The Fabulous Baker Boys) and scores of other people among the best in their fields came to town to bring Harry to life for the millions of enchanted fans already in love with him. I can’t say Columbus has really given us a four star work yet, but, with Home Alone and Mrs. Doubtfire, suggested that, with the right material, he might be capable. The stage is set with a charming tale by J.K. Rowling which is a proven crowd-pleaser. But…
I thought the movie “failed” in many respects that made it less than a classic when it had all the potential of being one. Considering that, it is fair, for me, to call this movie, even though much of it immensely enjoyable, a minor disappointment.
Directing: B-
I don’t know why I was so excited to find out Chris Columbus would be directing this movie when I haven’t really liked anything else he’s done except Mrs. Doubtfire. I wasn’t a Home Alone fan, and everything else he’s done has been C-grade material, to me, at best. There was a lot here that left me flat that made it seem a novice was at the helm. The Quidditch match lacked a compelling and believable quality, which came to a head in the way Harry catches the Golden Snitch and the ensuing “celebration”. The gameplay and the crowd involvement and reaction at the outcome were remarkably lifeless. There were also several other instances where the reaction for the situations seemed curiously subdued considering the outlandishly wonderful things occurring. Driving home from the theater, I tried to imagine who would have been better for the job, and, corny as it may sound, predictable as it may seem, I couldn’t get around Spielberg as the clearest choice. This is his territory: kids, fantasy, a world of wonder. After E.T. and Hook, whom else would you suggest? Too bad he didn't want to do it. I will concede that these are, largely, Columbus waters, too, but this movie called for more than someone who could do the job well, it called for a master, and there is no one directing now better suited to this project than Spielberg. For me, it was this and the editing that were the two most significant weaknesses of the film keeping it from being fantastic. Any charm and enjoyment in this movie has more to do with the individual elements than how they were put together and steered.
Screenwriting: B
Kloves stayed pretty true to the story and with a better director and editor could probably have fit more of the story in, and the mild degradation in characterization is as much due to the directing, casting and even time constraint as it is to Kloves. As it stands, it’s a fair adaptation of Rowling’s work, though not quite spot on.
Cinematography: A-
John Seale might be the most gifted D.P. today at making a picture look beautiful. His work on Dead Poets Society and The Mosquito Coast is some of my favorite. It is the best part of this film apart from some of the cast members.
Production and Art Design: B+
The environment and trappings are quite magical, but not as imaginative as one would have hoped. The Quidditch match, as an example, seems a bit plain and lacks enthusiasm and the design, as much as the directing, has a lot to do with that feel, especially after remembering stuff like the pod race in The Phantom Menace. A lot of potential here, and in many ways realized, but not enough to make it evolutionary, let alone revolutionary, landmark, or classic.
Music: B+
The very first bars that drift into the room as it begins are immensely promising, and though he finds those moments once in awhile throughout the movie, it isn’t (the orchestrations hindering it further) among the best in recent memory and certainly not on par with his best. He also sounds like he’s recycling a bit in places like the end (Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade) and the main theme (a friend had flashbacks to Witches of Eastwick). Though I’m sure there’s a reason that will make me feel stupid for asking this, but why is there no Harry’s Theme? And why is that main memorable theme Hedwig’s and not Harry’s? High standards aside, the score works, even if it is largely unexhilirating (in comparison to some of his other work), and it gives us a few magical moments with Hedwig’s Theme and other motifs that make it enjoyable; and, truly, I can’t imagine anyone else I would want for the job.
Editing: C-
I can’t remember the last movie I saw where I noticed the editing. Shots not cut away from soon enough, rhythm and pacing noticeably uncomfortable hurried or dragging in spots. Hey, Radcliffe has a great smile, but there is such a thing as holding a shot too long: we get the idea already. Choices like that didn’t plague the whole movie, but enough to make it detract from the entire experience significantly.
Acting and Casting: B+
Many roles were a bit disappointing. In almost every case I attribute the disappointment to casting, as the performances, almost across the board, were at least adequate and usually good to wonderful. This is an aspect where my experience with the book colors my perception almost beyond objectivity. But I do have some remnants of an unbiased opinion lurking even here. The big three roles of the movie were…well, magic:
- Emma Watson is bewitchingly cute and endearing as Hermione Granger. Never has a self-important book-worm been so adorable and charming. Watson instills worlds of sensitivity into Hermione and handles her with impressive insight.
- Rupert Grint, for me, steals the show as Ron Weasley. His quizzical and surprised looks are worth coming back to, and his vocal interpretations are beyond spot on.
- Daniel Radcliffe, Mr. Potter himself, handles the role well and looks the part smashingly. However, in the finale with You-Know-Who he seems to show his lack of film experience as his portrayal gets a bit stagy. Though, in fairness, the directing here doesn’t give him much room for a lot else. It's unfortunate that almost every aspect of that scene (directing, blocking, Hart's performance, production and art design, even the cinematography) conspired against itself to make it seem staged, "filmed", if you will, so Radcliffe shouldn't feel singled out by any means. He, in fact, is the only one with an excuse for a slip in performance with very little experience on film trying to navigate the aforementioned problems with the scene. Other than that he generally has the role wrapped around his finger. His smile, as I’ve said, is definitely worth half a dozen long close-ups of him. A little charmer, that one.
- Alan Rickman! He is going in my Bad Guy Hall… check that, he and Darth Vader are the best two reasons for starting a Bad Guy Hall of Fame. Although, here, he isn’t really a bad guy. His demeanor is at once chilling and fun. Rickman knows exactly how to handle the camera and makes his seemingly bad Snape work as a good guy when we find out that he is one.
- Perhaps I was spoiled by the stunning hints of Ian McKellan in the Lord of the Rings trailers, but Richard Harris wasn’t the Dumbeldore I thought should be. Granted, he is given precious little in dialogue to make a distinguished almighty wizard, and he doesn’t do a bad job by any means (his work in a close-up with baby Harry at the beginning is particularly enjoyable), but, overall, he doesn’t work for me.
- Maggie Smith was a grand pick! Defintiely loved her Professor McGonagall.
- Though Robbie Coltrane was enjoyable as Hagrid, he wasn’t as child-like and eager as he seemed in the book where he seemed like he would break your best china trying too hard to help you set the table and then be effusively apologetic and almost make things worse trying to fix it. A good-hearted, energetic, simple, and lovable giant. Coltrane’s Hagrid seemed (as crazy as this sounds) too intelligent and composed.
- While it was uncomfortable to see Radcliffe get a bit awkward in the final showdown, it was downright embarrassing to watch Ian Hart fall to theatrical pieces after playing the quivering Quirrell with decent inspiration and candor for most of the film. In Radcliffe, it’s understandable and more forgivable, in Hart it’s belief-suspension shatteringly perplexing.
- I thought the entire Dursley family was miscast. This is due almost exclusively to how they seemed to me in the book. Decent performances, just the wrong actors, and misinterpreted in directing.
G’on, then! “Watch it.” – Ron Weasley to Harry Potter on the train to Hogwarts.
Even though it doesn’t add up to a classic and isn’t the best movie adaptation of a book, it does catch much of Rowling’s charming characters and story to make it worth your 2 1/2 hours and the $8-12 you might spend on a ticket. And, actually, that’s saying a lot, even if it isn’t perfect. It’s definitely worth seeing in the theater if you want to see it at all. Don’t wait for video, hop on your broomstick and head to Platform 9 ¾, destination – Hogwarts. You might just find, like Harry, that you’ll want to go back.
Best Points: the three lead roles, Maggie Smith, Alan Rickman, cinematography, and production design.
Honorable Mentions: music and the trailers.
Worst Points: directing and editing.
Final Score: 85.
2001 copyright Christopher Ryan Huston
All pictures ©Warner Bros. All rights reserved.
