Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)
Studio: Warner Brothers Pictures
Director: Chris Columbus
Screenplay: Steve Kloves
Main Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Richard Harris, Alan Rickman, Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane, Tom Felton, Ian Hart, Richard Griffiths
Grade: C
We're reaching the end of the largest grossing film franchise of all time. And we're starting from the beginning.
I was in close to the ground floor with Harry Potter. We had a copy of The Philosopher's Stone before Chamer of Secrets came out. The sign of how early an edition of Philosopher's Stone you had was down to which character was ont he back cover. If you have Dumbledore you've got a later edition - we had one with a short brown beard which I've never been entirely sure who he was meant to be - I thought Quirrell but if he lacked the purple turban with the big secret.
I enjoyed Philosopher's Stone. I enjoyed all of the Potter books. I remember reading Chamber of Secrets through to the early morning sunrise because I couldn't put it down. But I was already a little bit older than the target audience when the first book came out and as the gap between publications increased I came further detached. JK Rowling is a good writer but not a great writer. I'm sure her legions of fans and massive bank account means me writing that is hardly going to make reappraise her approach to her craft but it became increasingly obvious that with the growing stature of the franchise she created the more fearful any editor at the publishers were to even suggest trimming the fat.
It was everyone's fear when the first film adaptation became an inevitability that we'd be condemned to Haley Joel Osment worrying he won't get a date in time for the prom at Hogwarts High. At least it was the fear of every self-important British snob. At the premiere of Deathly Hallows Part II Rowling noted how proud she was that it was a 'ninety-nine percet British' production from start to finish. Sure the box office billions went Stateside but at least people around the globe got to see the acting of Roger Lloyd-Pack at least once in their miserable lives.
In fact so fearful were Warner Brothers of angering fans either side of the Atlantic that they made sure to release two versions of the first film with characters referring to the Philosopher's Stone for the Brits and the Sorcerer's Stone for the Yanks. The only other American influence was in the choice of writer and director. Rowling's choice had been American-born Anglophile - and Monty Python member - Terry Gilliam but he was not the studio's choice as the safe option was made for Chris Columbus.
Columbus was a proven commodity with the early 90s successes of Home Alone, Home Alone 2 and Mrs. Doubtfire. That he followed that up with Nine Months, Stepmom and Bicentennial Man certainly was not cause for hope of a film that would match the Spielbergian wonder that Rowling's work had created in children's imagination.
In truth Philosopher's Stone is not particularly well directed. There isn't a creative shot and it's slavish devotion to putting as much of the book on screen as possible leaves an uneven feel to the pacing. However, given the more unusual and darker avenues the series travels in later films the relative lightness of touch The Philosopher's Stone in particular gives allows a real sense of 'how things change' when you watch the whole story from start-to-finish.
The Philosopher's Stone also has a definitive start to it. Only Deathly Hallows: Part 2 also has a definitive point at the end. All other six films are the middle. As such there's a certain responsibilty of scene-setting and character introduction that none of the other films need.
Rowling's greatest strength is her creativity. Individual ideas such as moving photos and paintings or every flavour sweets really capture a child's imagination and is something they can really hook themselves into the action. Rowling can also lay out a mystery and clues at a steady pace before hitting you with the surprise twist at the end. Unfortunately much like an M. Night Shyamalan film you soon find yourself spending the entire story trying to second guess what each revelation actually means which will obviously prevent you enjoying the present moment.
When first seeing The Philosopher's Stone I came to the conclusion that I'd seen the most expensive school play to ever be produced and I stand by that assessment. Radcliffe, Grint and Watson are all actors with little range at this point. Watson is all posh-girl enunciations, Grint relies on scrunching his face up to portray all sense of confusion, embarassment, anger or amusement and Radcliffe barely shifts facial expression outside of slight wonder. That's not meant as a knock - these are young actors and in the heightened world of fantasy even fine actors can struggle to sound or look as if they're in anything other than a special effects showcase. Look at how much Ewan MacGregor and Liam Neeson struggled throughout The Phantom Menace to make it clear that an inexperienced pre-teen had no chance of being anything better than passable. Watson is probably the most defined in her character as her cut-glass words and affected bookish manner is in-line with the standard elocution class acting of English stage schoolers. One thing that is clear though is that a chemistry between Harry, Ron and Hermione is already there and it is perhaps that came across in the audition and led to the casting choices made.
Philosopher's Stone is about the wonder of magic. Everything is through Harry's eyes and everything is a new lesson. All rooms, adults and older-year students seem huge and the magic itself is all a first-time experience. Even the final fight scene with Quirrell and a semi-spectral Voldemort doesn't seem particularly perilous compared to future final-act conflicts. Harry's victory does not come through wits or abilities
As a children's film Philosopher's Stone is the equal to Home Alone and I'm sure I were nine seeing this for the first time as I would hold Harry, Ron and Hermione's first year adventures as much as I do when I remember first watching Macaulay Culkin fend off Joe Pesci and Daniel Stern with nothing to rely on other than paint cans, Christmas decorations and a young boy's natural tendency towards extreme sadism.
Philosopher's Stone is almost certainly going to be the weakest of all the films in this series - it is from memory of watching them all when they were first released - but it has an innocence and charm that makes it hard to hate. It's a gateway drug of sorts to the world of fantasy for both Harry and the reader. On that level it pretty much succeeds. The question was do they keep this up?
Coming up: Yes, they keep it up. Just about...
No comments:
Post a Comment