I can't remember exactly when I watched "Harry Potter", or even the novel or movie I watched first.
I just know that when I see the warm yellow lighting in the movie and the magical world of magic for the first time, I will naturally think of my childhood full of fantasy.
Yes, "childhood" is the best word I can think of to describe "Sorcerer's Stone".
Diagon Alley, Gringotts, Owl, Hogwarts Express, Bibidou, Chocolate Frog, College Ghost, Quidditch, Forbidden Forest, Horseman, Three-headed Dog, Wizard Chess, etc., are familiar in the original books. The elements have been very meticulously restored.
If you look at the part of the original work, I would like to score 9.5 points for the Sorcerer's Stone. It's just that some details can't be fully revealed due to the length of the movie. It's a pity, but it doesn't hurt. It can be seen that that magnificent magical world has been successfully built on the big screen, and the main storyline is also clear. It has taken care of the non-original party and can attract them to read novels at the same time. (The deletions and deletions of the following parts will not be made here)
To rank the Harry Potter movie series as a personal favorite, I tangled between "The Sorcerer's Stone" and "The Prisoner" and decided whether to put "The Prisoner" first.
Prisoner of Azkaban>Sorcerer's Stone>Goblet of Fire>Secret Chamber>Death Hallows Lower>Death Hallows Part 1>The Half-Blood Prince>The Order of the Phoenix
How should I put it, the Philosopher’s Stone is indeed very beautiful, but I personally feel that Rowling’s halo for Harry’s protagonist is too strong, and all the plots go too smoothly. Of course, the original is also like this, which is indeed normal in fairy tales.
Harry in the prisoner is portrayed more three-dimensionally, and he can see Harry's struggle and growth. In the end, Harry also successfully rescued the godfather but still buried the thunder in the subsequent plot. The prisoner's plot rhythm is also very tight, there are almost no extra shots, the atmosphere of the scene is rendered very well, and it is also the peak of the appearance of a group of young actors. Of course, the prisoner also has many problems, such as the actors don't wear robes, and the plot of Quidditch has been deleted, but its excellence is still the first level of the series in my opinion.
Speaking of the Philosopher’s Stone, the little actors at this time are still immature and cute. In the protagonist group, the egg girl who plays Harry can still see the traces of very hard acting at this time. Emma "Hermione" also has this problem but can Seeing that it is more in line with the character of the academic hegemony that is more in line with the role of fighting for the best and not admitting to losing, the acting skills of "Ron" Rupert and "Malfoy" Tom Felton are more natural than those of the next.
As for Richard Harris who played Dumbledore, the acting skills of "Professor McGonagall" Maggie Smith, "Snape" Alan Rickman and so on are naturally impeccable. I have seen a comment that probably means that the British national treasure actors surrounded a group of childish actors to finish "Harry Potter".
It’s worth mentioning that many people don’t seem to know that the actors from School Deng in the first and second films are different from the actors in the next few films, hhh. Personally, I really like Richard's performance. It has the calm, wise, strategizing, and naughty temperament of the original Deng Xiaoping. Such an image is indeed very suitable for Dumbledore in the first few movies, but as the main storyline gradually moves towards a heavier story, Deng Xiaoping showed more wit and decisive decision-making ability and leadership in the later period. Looking at it like this, Mr. Ganben is an interpretation. More appropriate.
Regarding the Quidditch event, the first and second installments are also the most exciting ones. The latter ones are all deleted, and the third most important Quidditch Cup contest was not shot! ! (Okay, I admit that I just want to see Wood Senior Lala) Last year, when I revisited it the year before last year, I discovered that Wood's actor Sean was so handsome, and the good guy went directly into the state of love (no). Although the image is relatively small, tall and strong, the movie's Wood is more delicate and quiet (after all, this shouldn't be Cedric's configuration, hey).
I am still very grateful to Rowling. Although there are intricate struggles and games in her pen, there are cold and ruthless black magic, and there are sentimental and helpless parting scenes. But the "Harry Potter" series has always adhered to the theme of "love". It tells us that true love leaves an indelible mark and can overcome all evil. And those who love us never leave, do not perish due to death.
View more about Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone reviews
