Reviews (1789)

Video Excellentus!
In 2001, two fall blockbusters involving witchcraft and wizards reached the theatres. Unfortunately, I don't have a wand with which to say "Review autoscriptus!" or some snowy owls on one-day delivery standby so I have to do this with my fingers (sigh) and create words of wonder on the movie I liked better.

While I haven't read J.K. Rowling's books, it must have been chock full of detail I don't know of the movie:book accuracy ratio, but for director Chris Columbus to fit it in two and-a-half hours, it must have been a book spectacularis.

Witches and wizards were persecuted throughout the ages, regarded as threats more than freaks as Harry's aunt did her sister, and more often than not, burned at the stake. With Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, the song remains the same, only this time, his uncle, aunt, and obnoxious cousin treat him contemptuously, as if he's an unwanted burden. Who knows how his life would have been without the flurry of invitations to Hogwarts School courtesy of one-day owl delivery? Fortunately, giant Rubeas Hagrid comes crashing to the rescue. The real adventure begins from there.

Daniel Radcliffe gives a performance competentus and credibilis as the totally likeable title character. Of the troika of main characters, he's the most human. However, Emma Watson as the resourceful and well-read Hermione Granger steals the show wands aloft. Despite being snooty and knowing who she is, she proves herself to be a cut above others in classes (see her frantically waving on Professor Snape to call on her, and her proficient wand handling). She does have feelings, though, as she angrily stomps past through Weasley, who fed up with her conceit, was verbally cutting her down a peg to Harry, finishing with "No wonder she doesn't have any friends." If Hermione's character leads more children to flip pages instead of flipping bad guys on their PS2's or X-Box's, so much the better. Rupert Grint, as Ron Weasley, makes a good foil for both his counterparts, being a fellow explorer and Christmas holiday companion with Harry or someone for Hermione to impart knowledge.

The other performer to whom this show belongs to is veteran actor Robbie Coltrane as the friendly giant gameskeeper Rubeas Hagrid. After Krull, Nuns On The Run, two James Bond movies, and From Hell among others, he has finally become a recognizable face on American shores. American audiences should have warmed up to this talented performer earlier, and that's something I should've said.

As for other veteran actors, Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, and Zoe Wanamaker do wonders as the professors of Hogwarts, but Alan Rickman turns in a solid performance as the sinister Professor Snape, who doesn't seem to like Harry all that much.

People, (or should that be muggles?) this is one movie specialus. The special effects, while spectacular, do not detract from the character development or dialogue, like certain films I'm not going to name. They merely support the magic whether it's the entrance to the square or the action scenes, such as the Quidditch match.

Well, review terminatus, and see you at the theatres for the Chamber of Secrets

I didn't want it to end!
Though by no means the only example of the subject, Joanne Rowling's imaginative book about an eleven year old boy discovering his new-found talent for magic, reintroduced the age-old genre of the fairy story to modern children. "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" benefits enormously from modern CGI effects to bring to life a film which will entertain everyone. The basic story concerns an orphaned boy living with his appalling cousins who are determined that he should not find out that he was actually born a wizard. Through outside help from the magical community, he finds himself enrolled at Hogwart's School of Witchcraft and Wizardry and the fun starts.

Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane and Alan Rickman help to back up the principal child stars and give this film some real presence. Daniel Radcliffe is rather flat as Harry Potter and Emma Watson, as the precocious Hermione Granger, is excessively theatrical and both are shaded by Rupert Grint who is excellent in the role of their cynical friend, Ron Weazley. No doubt all the child actors will improve with time, given that they stay with the series. At the moment they are still finding their feet.

There are plenty of special effects to amaze and amuse and I can't imagine how such a film could have been made without them. The cinematography by John Seale, ACS, is excellent and the whole film has a very pleasing look. The two-disc DVD set has many extras, some of which seem to require an intimate knowledge of magic to access.

On the whole, I thoroughly enjoyed this film and I wait with baited breath for the sequels. It is not a five star film; I did not expect it to be, but it certainly rates considerable merit. I have yet to figure out why WB chose to release it as anything other than "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone", since that is both the title of the original book and the title of the film in any other market than the US. Apart from a few little blemishes, an excellent movie. Kids will give it five stars; parents will enjoy it, too. Thoroughly recommended.

"A rather BIG surprise"
When Harry Potter came to the big screen, I did NOT go to see it. I was of firm standing that it was kidd stuff. Then, a few weeks ago, the people on abc2 news had it on as a "movie event". I figured since it was free, why not watch it? Needless to say, I was realllyyy surprised. I sat, spellbound through ALL commercial breaks, so I would'ent miss any of the story. I've never read a single book in the series, so I can say with out them, this movie still can stand on it's own. P.S. John Williams' score is amazeing!!!! P.S.S. Still, I will say that "The Lord of the Rings" are much better movies, and if you LIKE Harry Potter, You'll LOVE them.

The Best Movie of 2001
Harry Potter is a great movie that the whole family can sit down and enjoy. And the Harry Potter series has a big future. This is the first one in the series that introduced the school of withcraft and wizardry that Harry Potter would be going to. It's called Hogwartz. It introduces many characters such as Harry himself, Ron Weasley who becomes Harry's friend, Hermione Granger who also becomes Harry's friend, Draco Malfoy who is Harry's enemy, Albus Dumbledore who is the headmaster of Hogwartz and many more. Get your kids, get this movie and watch it. Trust me your going to love it. It's great fun really. Then when your done this one go to the store and get Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and then see Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban in theatres.
10/10
Rated PG for Some Scary Moments and Mild Language.

helloo! its the best!
harry potter is the BEST series in the world and kj rowling is sooo talented!!! there's a reason why harry potter's so popular! get THEM ALL ... Read more

Description

The next installment in the Harry Potter series finds young wizard Harry Potter (DANIEL RADCLIFFE) and his friends Ron Weasley (RUPERT GRINT) and Hermione Granger (EMMA WATSON) facing new challenges during their second year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry as they try to uncover a dark force that is terrorizing the school. ... Read more

Reviews (649)

Fascinatingly enchanting as it is entertaining
Summer vacation is a dreaded time for Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) as it means having to endure the histronics of his mean aunt and uncle. Returning back to his Hogwarts School of Witchcraft would seem a much wiser option but Dobby the House Elf warns him of "a plot to make most terrible things" is in the brewing. With disregard of the warning, the boy wizard begins his sophomore year at the school of magic - and things happen - when his schoolmates are 'petrified' into statues. In fact this is only the beginning when he later takes on gigantic spiders, screeching mandrakes, Fawkes the phoenix and the fearsome Basilisk.

The second entry adapted from J.K Rowling's legacy has neither the epic sweep of the fourth book (The Goblet of fire) nor the mystery of the third (The Prisoner of Azkaban) but is nonetheless an engaging adventure and a riveting story. What's more with director Chris Colombus at the helm who shows more precision and familiarity after his first attempt, Harry Potter and the Chamber of secrets is a majestic adventure filled with visionary sets and fluid CGI effects that astonishingly enhance the darker fantasy tale and adventure. The soaring adventure thrills with its enshrouding perils, awesome moments of wonder and enlightening morality and friendship.

It thus resembles more of an awkward adolescence stage in this saga for the three main casts. Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grinch as Harry, Hermoine and Ron reprises their role with the loss of their innocence along with veterans Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall, the late Richard Harris as the benevolent headmaster Dumbledore, Robbie Coltrane as giant Hagrid and Alan Rickman as Professor Snape. The new interlopers are equally scene-grabbing in their own rights: Kenneth Branagh does a rib-tickling interpretation of braggadocio Gilderoy Lockheart as well as Jason Issacs as the wicked Lucius Malfoy.

With a solidly ensembled cast and sumptuous sets, the second installment is fascinatingly entertaining as it is enchanting enough to sustain its 3 long hours without any misgivings.

Just as good if not better!
This DVD gives you a great movie, lots of special features, and great commentary from the stars and people behind the scenes. Just as good a movie as the first Harry Potter installment, this is definitely a great addition to anyone's DVD collection!

Not as goood as the book
This film is not as good as the book, but still a very good film. There are a few scenes from the book that I wish had made the final cut. It does drag a little after the climax, but those scenes are need to tie up loose plot lines as well as items that might have an impact in future editions.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets-Widescreen Edition
This movie was definately a great work of theatre and art alike. The entire movie was captivating, and while the director, Christopher Columbus, could of done better on some parts, this movie does what most do not, and it stayed true to the book. I loved this, and I watched it about 3 times before I was satisfied with it! Go get the movie and see it, and you'll see what I mean!!! The scenes with the Chammber of Secrets were beautifully detailed, giving you a clearer picture than even the book did! So buy this, sit back and be amazed by the production of Harry Potter's second year at Hogwarts school of Withcraft and Wizardry! Enjoy!

Harry Does It Again! Better Than The First!
"Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" pulls off something that only "The Empire Strikes Back" has done. It's better than the first film! Not only is the story more interesting(though the first was tops as well), it's packed with even more wonder and imagination than the first as well. The castmembers of the first flick return, as well as Kenneth Branagh in a superb performance as Lockhart, the bumbling, vain writer of "Magical Me."

I'm sure the naysayers had a wonderful time bashing this sequel for its evil undertones. Students get "petrified" and the basilisk takes shots at Harry, but all in all, Harry prevails. He makes the right choices, does the good deeds and fights a good fight. How dare he promote such horrible values!

Please folks, I used up a lot of space harping on how kids need to have fun in my review of the first film. The same applies to this movie as well. Don't worry about your kid becoming a warlock or praying to Satan, just let them have a little fun. If you raise them right, you won't have to worry about any of that anyway.

The "Potter" books encourage kids to read and use their imagination. That's a good thing in my book. The movies encourage kids to use their imaginations as well.

You've just got to love something that promotes so many good things. We need more heroes like Harry. He's a good character to let your kids read about and watch on the big screen. He's caring to others, takes his studies reasonably serious(you might want to promote Hermione's study habits to your kids, though) and he always tries to do the right thing.

Overall this movie is fun and enjoyable for the whole family. Some of the scenes might scare the little ones, but this movie is worth explaining those scenes in order to get the message across.

Watch this one and have a ton of fun. It's great for everybody. Highly recommended. ... Read more

Reviews (48)

Amusing Story. Bland Movie.
"Calendar Girls" is a fictionalized account of the events surrounding the publication, in 1999, of a nude calendar featuring the ladies of the Rylstone Women's Institute of North Yorkshire, England. The calendar caused a media sensation in Great Britain and the United States on account of its photographs of women of a certain age performing quaint everyday tasks in the buff. In the film, Chris (Helen Mirren) organizes the calendar to raise money on behalf of her best friend Annie's (Julie Waters) husband, who is dying of leukemia. "Calendar Girls" dramatizes the challenges of convincing a group of middle-aged and older women to pose nude, garnering support for the project, and coping with the resulting flood of international publicity.

The cast is well-suited to their roles. The characters are all appealing. But "Calendar Girls" takes too much time to get off the ground and moves very slowly once it does. This "dramedy" isn't nearly as funny as it should be. It's just bland. The story of the WI calendar is really more interesting than this film.

As for "Calendar Girls" accuracy, this really is a fictionalized account. The characters do not represent real people specifically, except for Chris and Annie, who are based loosely on real women. Any strife between characters in the film is dramatic license. The calendar's photographer was not a stranger, but one of the ladies' husbands. The calendar was indeed intended to raise money for a local hospital's cancer ward on behalf of Angela Baker's husband, John Baker, to whose memory "Calendar Girls" is dedicated. And a similar 2004 calendar featuring the actresses in this film has been released as a further fund-raiser for charity.

The DVD: Bonus features include two mini-documentaries and four deleted scenes. "The Naked Truth" is a 15-minute documentary about the real story behind the infamous calendar. It features interviews with the women who organized and graced the pages of the calendar and its photographer, following the calendar's story from its genesis to this film's premiere. "Creating the Calendar" is a 6-minute short about filming the nude scenes and photographing the calendar for the movie. Captions are available in English, subtitles in Spanish. And dubbing is available in French.

Quiet and Likeable! Also (gasp) kinda sexy!
I went into watching CALENDAR GIRLS dreading it might be a female rip-off of THE FULL MONTY. No need to fear, because the movie is about a lot more than aping a successful indie formula. The movie centers on a group of women of Rylstone Women's Institute in North Yorkshire, England who through a tragedy decide to raise money for a hospital with their annual calendar. The only catch? These well-aged women are going to pose in the buff with strategically placed items of household drudgery hiding the naughty bits and pieces. And when the calendar comes out? They all have to deal with the infamy that comes along with posing nude. And deal with success as well! Or new found confidence.

It is a story rich dramatically and still just plain funny. The nudity is tasteful, and not all that revealing. Think Dianne Keaton's SOMETHINGS GOT TO GIVE flash, and you get the idea. And Helen Mirren and a STRONG cast give it all a dignified English air that plays well. I really loved this movie. It made me smile widely! And hammered home the message that beauty is in ALL forms. Everybody has a shine to them, and the 50 MOST BEAUTIFUL PEOPLE are the ones with the courage to make fun of themselves and smile all the while. No body doubles here either! Yea for them! Brave women with "bigger buns!".

The DVD is a special treat. You get a documentary on the real life CALENDAR GIRLS who look a lot like their film counterparts. You also get to see the movie cast MAKING the calendar! Okay, maybe just TALKING about making it. Also you get some deleted scenes, and assorted trailers.

I'm getting sunflowers for my house just to remind me of people that always reach for the sun! Very nice image. We need more movies like this -- celebrating wisdom and friendship. And hey - it's just simple fun.

a smart, lovely comedy!!
This movie is inspired by a true story where these middle aged women go in the nude posing for their calendar which becomes a huge success! I really loved this movie for its wonderful acting and it was hilarious!! The whole way I felt like cheering the women on! This movie made me laugh out loud and its a great change from some other funny movies that all they offer is bathroom jokes and other stupid humor. This is a one of a kind smart hilarious movie!!

Marginal, at best
This is one of those small budget Britcoms that is supposed to be hilarious and all the trailer clips suggest that. Problem is it's not very funny, well-acted, or even mildly engaging. It's flat out boring. It is not a female "The Full Monty," as the ad campaign leads you to think. If that were the case I would have loved it. Others can re-tell the plot, but there isn't really much beyond these ordinary women in a small English town do a nude calendar to raise money and all the hinjinx prevail. Except there really are no hijinx. Just the usual stereotypical disapproving neighbors and officials, combined with the always surprising support from the most unlikely (wink-wink) circles. Been there--seen that over and over. It's as if every cliche in these types of movies were rehashed over and over.

Save your money. Frankly, I think the positive reviews on this are the true comedy.

a joyous comedy
One of the most delightful films of recent years, "Calendar Girls," a distaff version of "The Full Monty," is the true story of a group of middle-aged English women who became international celebrities when they designed and posed for a nude fundraising calendar that sold millions of copies worldwide. Julie Walters and Helen Mirren head a wonderful cast, with Walters as a woman whose husband dies of leukemia and Mirren as her best friend who comes up with the idea of the calendar as a way of both honoring his memory and raising money for the local hospital.

The risk for any "feel good" comedy is that it will become cloying, coy or cutesy. Luckily, "Calendar Girls" boasts an enormously witty screenplay and first-rate performances by its highly gifted cast. Each of the "girls" is given her own unique personality so that we see them not just as a group, united in this inspiring endeavor, but as individuals working through their own personal demons on the rode to the project's completion. The women face the expected roadblocks and snafus in the form of "shocked," disapproving voices in the community, but their belief in the rightness of their cause brushes all such problems aside.

This charming film provides more genuine, out-and-out laughs than almost any comedy of recent times. "Calendar Girls" is heartwarming, touching and inspiring - and what more could one ask from a "feel-good" film than that? ... Read more

Reviews (200)

It's all about being able to express yourself.
Beginning with an exuberant title sequence, this charming, offbeat, coming-of-age story revolves around Billy Elliot (Jamie Bell), the younger of two sons of a widower coal miner (Gary Lewis) near Newcastle in Northern England. It's 1984, and the National Union of Mine Workers is engaged in a long, bitter strike, marked by street battles with riot police and protests against the busloads of scabs crossing the picket lines.

Following the family tradition, Billy is expected to learn boxing at the Everington Boys Club where, instead, the 11 year-old becomes enthralled by the girls' dancing class, led by a chain-smoking teacher (Julie Walters) who soon recognizes his raw talent. He loves watching Fred Astaire in old movies and is instantly drawn towards the ballet class, but when his macho father and rabble-rousing brother (Jamie Draven) discover he's taking ballet classes, they ridicule Billy - "Lads do boxing and football and wrestling, not friggin' ballet!" - forcing him to hide his slippers under the mattress and sneak off to class. Then come the auditions for the Royal Ballet School and Billy's defiantly joyful, foot-stompin' "I Want to Boogie" sequence.

What makes this heartfelt English import such a gem is the collaboration of screenwriter Lee Hall, cinematographer Brian Tufano ("Trainspotting") and former stage director Stephen Daldry ("An Inspector Calls"), who - despite the simplistic predictability of the plot - create eccentric, lovable characters and evocative imagery. One haunting sequences focuses on a little neighborhood girl dragging a stick along a brick wall, which dissolves into a phalanx of plastic police shields. Another involves the father grimly chopping up Billy's mother's beloved piano for needed firewood. While some of the authentic, heavily accented dialogue may be indecipherable to some, the musical soundtrack, combining classical and pop, is terrific.

In the title role, newcomer Jamie Bell embodies awkward determination, juggling grim reality with a surreal fantasy world, explaining, "Just because I like ballet doesn't mean I'm a pouf!" As Billy's father, Gary Lewis ("My Name is Joe") is tough-yet-tender, and Julie Walters ("Educating Rita") scores as Billy's crusty yet compassionate teacher. ("I feel like a sissy," Billy tells her. "Well, don't act like one," she retorts.) Jamie Draven and Stuart Wells lend strong support. Jean Heywood is touching as Billy's senile grandmother, whom he tenderly cares for and who repeatedly recalls, "I could have been a professional dancer."

While the bleak setting, in the 1984 miners' strike in northeastern England, is reminiscent of "The Full Monty," the energetic mood evokes "Flashdance" - and it was a bit hit at both the Toronto and Cannes Film Festivals. On the 'Lund Movie Scale' of 1 to 10, "Billy Elliot" is an exhilarating 9. Combining comedy and poignancy, it's all about being able to express yourself.

Buried Treasure
I found "Billy Elliot" in a local video store, and really only got it because it was used, and cheap. Took it home, didn't know what to expect. I found it was a treasure and a few days later, bought the DVD.

From the title sequence I knew something was up, they weren't ordinary, a kid bouncing up and down through the screen. Then moving into the first "real" scene I watched closer, the film drew me in, I couldn't stop watching.

Right off, the viewer finds great character development, with 11-year-old Billy at home caring after of his aged "Grama" and then more, with his dad and older brother heading off to the miner's picket line in their small Northern England town. His newly deceased mom appears there at home in family photos on the piano top.

Next scene, Billy is drawn into a girl's ballet class that just happens to meet where he's taking boxing lessons. That's where we meet the rest of the main characters, his school-mate Michael, his dance teacher, Mrs wilkinson and her daughter, Debbie.

The expected conflicts arise as Billy pursues his passion for dancing. Family, culture, economics, and just plain ol' growin' up come into the fray. Billy's resolve and guts drive him through to his goal of being a ballet dancer. The happy ending is expected, but getting there is what's unexpected.

This film has greatly directed scenes that are composed like a master painter. Scenes move artistically from one to the next. Watch for the blend from the Fred Astaire movie clip moving right on screen to the scene with Grama and him as they go to visit Billy's mom's grave. Later, watch for the slight turn of his father's head as he sits on Billy's bed moving to the next scene as dad decides to be a "scab", going back to the mine for Billy's sake. I think "little" stuff like that makes for a great movie.

The story is well written. The acting is dramatic and believable.
The music is worth getting the soundtrack. The dancing scenes are just great, from the initial stumbling about with Mrs. Wilkinson, to serious artistry when Billy auditions at the Royal Ballet School. Jamie Bell as Billy is a kid you cannot help but to root for in this movie and in the future as well. He's a talent that I pray no one exploits, I think you'll want to wish the best for him.

I missed it at the theatre but found "Billy Elliot", a real treasure, buried at my local video store. And then later, with the added features on DVD.

Coal Miner's daughter?
I'm not being fascietious. That's what Billy's father, Jackie probably thought when he was confronted with the painful (to him) realization that his 11 year old son wanted to do Ballet. Boys do Boxing, like he and Billy's grandfather did, or wrestle - "they don't do ballet". Well, Billy takes after his deceased mother who played piano and whom, Billy's grandmother tells him, could have been a professional dancer. Billy enjoys watching Fred Astaire dance in those old movies and when he starts watching the ballet lessons that share the gym with his boxing classes - he's hooked.

The film is set in Durham, England during the bitter coal miners strikes of 1984. The social tensions and economic hardships are portrayed with frequent views of riot clad policemen and in the difficulty Jackie and Tony (Billy's foul mouthed older brother) have in just feeding the family. The tensions are of course there when father and brother find out that Billy has been taking the money for boxing and attending ballet classes.

The film handles the family relationships well. Jamie Bell (Billy) is excellent in portraying the passion with which he comes to have for his dancing and the acting of Gary Lewis as Jackie - showing outrage, disapproval, grudging acceptance and then support, largely with facial expressions - is excellent. There is a scene that shows this subtle acting best. Billy, dancing and Jackie watching, show their feelings completely without a word being expressed.

A very good 'feel good' movie, light on the sentimentality and just enough weight on the 'heavy' topic of father and son relationship.

Excellent moive, good music and extradionary dancing.
I can't say enough about Billy Elliot. The boy who plays Billy ( Jamie Bell) started ballet dancing when he was 6, this film is his debut. He's 13 now and by the looks of his leg muscles he's been working out hard. The film has an excellent sound track and another surprise boy whom loves Billy.

You'll love Billy Elliot, it's the most exciting and heartwarming film I've seen this year.

William

Beautiful & Outstanding Performance!
This is a beautiful film, warmth, sensational, and it may even make you cry. The film also makes you feel complete: it starts with young Billy's kiddie jumps while he's making his breakfast, it ends with grown-up Billy's beautiful ballet jump while he's already a superstar ballet dancer performing the Swan Lake. The storyline is straight foward but the details between the father and son's bonding, the confusing friendship with Billy's sweet gay friend Michael, are very well done. Jamie Bell (as Billy) did an outstanding performance in his debut. Undoubtfully, his acting, his dancing, his enthusiastic performance, really make this film truely alive! Billy Elliot, FIVE STARS! ... Read more

Reviews (1789)

Video Excellentus!
In 2001, two fall blockbusters involving witchcraft and wizards reached the theatres. Unfortunately, I don't have a wand with which to say "Review autoscriptus!" or some snowy owls on one-day delivery standby so I have to do this with my fingers (sigh) and create words of wonder on the movie I liked better.

While I haven't read J.K. Rowling's books, it must have been chock full of detail I don't know of the movie:book accuracy ratio, but for director Chris Columbus to fit it in two and-a-half hours, it must have been a book spectacularis.

Witches and wizards were persecuted throughout the ages, regarded as threats more than freaks as Harry's aunt did her sister, and more often than not, burned at the stake. With Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, the song remains the same, only this time, his uncle, aunt, and obnoxious cousin treat him contemptuously, as if he's an unwanted burden. Who knows how his life would have been without the flurry of invitations to Hogwarts School courtesy of one-day owl delivery? Fortunately, giant Rubeas Hagrid comes crashing to the rescue. The real adventure begins from there.

Daniel Radcliffe gives a performance competentus and credibilis as the totally likeable title character. Of the troika of main characters, he's the most human. However, Emma Watson as the resourceful and well-read Hermione Granger steals the show wands aloft. Despite being snooty and knowing who she is, she proves herself to be a cut above others in classes (see her frantically waving on Professor Snape to call on her, and her proficient wand handling). She does have feelings, though, as she angrily stomps past through Weasley, who fed up with her conceit, was verbally cutting her down a peg to Harry, finishing with "No wonder she doesn't have any friends." If Hermione's character leads more children to flip pages instead of flipping bad guys on their PS2's or X-Box's, so much the better. Rupert Grint, as Ron Weasley, makes a good foil for both his counterparts, being a fellow explorer and Christmas holiday companion with Harry or someone for Hermione to impart knowledge.

The other performer to whom this show belongs to is veteran actor Robbie Coltrane as the friendly giant gameskeeper Rubeas Hagrid. After Krull, Nuns On The Run, two James Bond movies, and From Hell among others, he has finally become a recognizable face on American shores. American audiences should have warmed up to this talented performer earlier, and that's something I should've said.

As for other veteran actors, Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, and Zoe Wanamaker do wonders as the professors of Hogwarts, but Alan Rickman turns in a solid performance as the sinister Professor Snape, who doesn't seem to like Harry all that much.

People, (or should that be muggles?) this is one movie specialus. The special effects, while spectacular, do not detract from the character development or dialogue, like certain films I'm not going to name. They merely support the magic whether it's the entrance to the square or the action scenes, such as the Quidditch match.

Well, review terminatus, and see you at the theatres for the Chamber of Secrets

I didn't want it to end!
Though by no means the only example of the subject, Joanne Rowling's imaginative book about an eleven year old boy discovering his new-found talent for magic, reintroduced the age-old genre of the fairy story to modern children. "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" benefits enormously from modern CGI effects to bring to life a film which will entertain everyone. The basic story concerns an orphaned boy living with his appalling cousins who are determined that he should not find out that he was actually born a wizard. Through outside help from the magical community, he finds himself enrolled at Hogwart's School of Witchcraft and Wizardry and the fun starts.

Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane and Alan Rickman help to back up the principal child stars and give this film some real presence. Daniel Radcliffe is rather flat as Harry Potter and Emma Watson, as the precocious Hermione Granger, is excessively theatrical and both are shaded by Rupert Grint who is excellent in the role of their cynical friend, Ron Weazley. No doubt all the child actors will improve with time, given that they stay with the series. At the moment they are still finding their feet.

There are plenty of special effects to amaze and amuse and I can't imagine how such a film could have been made without them. The cinematography by John Seale, ACS, is excellent and the whole film has a very pleasing look. The two-disc DVD set has many extras, some of which seem to require an intimate knowledge of magic to access.

On the whole, I thoroughly enjoyed this film and I wait with baited breath for the sequels. It is not a five star film; I did not expect it to be, but it certainly rates considerable merit. I have yet to figure out why WB chose to release it as anything other than "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone", since that is both the title of the original book and the title of the film in any other market than the US. Apart from a few little blemishes, an excellent movie. Kids will give it five stars; parents will enjoy it, too. Thoroughly recommended.

"A rather BIG surprise"
When Harry Potter came to the big screen, I did NOT go to see it. I was of firm standing that it was kidd stuff. Then, a few weeks ago, the people on abc2 news had it on as a "movie event". I figured since it was free, why not watch it? Needless to say, I was realllyyy surprised. I sat, spellbound through ALL commercial breaks, so I would'ent miss any of the story. I've never read a single book in the series, so I can say with out them, this movie still can stand on it's own. P.S. John Williams' score is amazeing!!!! P.S.S. Still, I will say that "The Lord of the Rings" are much better movies, and if you LIKE Harry Potter, You'll LOVE them.

The Best Movie of 2001
Harry Potter is a great movie that the whole family can sit down and enjoy. And the Harry Potter series has a big future. This is the first one in the series that introduced the school of withcraft and wizardry that Harry Potter would be going to. It's called Hogwartz. It introduces many characters such as Harry himself, Ron Weasley who becomes Harry's friend, Hermione Granger who also becomes Harry's friend, Draco Malfoy who is Harry's enemy, Albus Dumbledore who is the headmaster of Hogwartz and many more. Get your kids, get this movie and watch it. Trust me your going to love it. It's great fun really. Then when your done this one go to the store and get Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and then see Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban in theatres.
10/10
Rated PG for Some Scary Moments and Mild Language.

helloo! its the best!
harry potter is the BEST series in the world and kj rowling is sooo talented!!! there's a reason why harry potter's so popular! get THEM ALL ... Read more

Description

The next installment in the Harry Potter series finds young wizard Harry Potter (DANIEL RADCLIFFE) and his friends Ron Weasley (RUPERT GRINT) and Hermione Granger (EMMA WATSON) facing new challenges during their second year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry as they try to uncover a dark force that is terrorizing the school. ... Read more

Reviews (649)

Fascinatingly enchanting as it is entertaining
Summer vacation is a dreaded time for Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) as it means having to endure the histronics of his mean aunt and uncle. Returning back to his Hogwarts School of Witchcraft would seem a much wiser option but Dobby the House Elf warns him of "a plot to make most terrible things" is in the brewing. With disregard of the warning, the boy wizard begins his sophomore year at the school of magic - and things happen - when his schoolmates are 'petrified' into statues. In fact this is only the beginning when he later takes on gigantic spiders, screeching mandrakes, Fawkes the phoenix and the fearsome Basilisk.

The second entry adapted from J.K Rowling's legacy has neither the epic sweep of the fourth book (The Goblet of fire) nor the mystery of the third (The Prisoner of Azkaban) but is nonetheless an engaging adventure and a riveting story. What's more with director Chris Colombus at the helm who shows more precision and familiarity after his first attempt, Harry Potter and the Chamber of secrets is a majestic adventure filled with visionary sets and fluid CGI effects that astonishingly enhance the darker fantasy tale and adventure. The soaring adventure thrills with its enshrouding perils, awesome moments of wonder and enlightening morality and friendship.

It thus resembles more of an awkward adolescence stage in this saga for the three main casts. Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grinch as Harry, Hermoine and Ron reprises their role with the loss of their innocence along with veterans Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall, the late Richard Harris as the benevolent headmaster Dumbledore, Robbie Coltrane as giant Hagrid and Alan Rickman as Professor Snape. The new interlopers are equally scene-grabbing in their own rights: Kenneth Branagh does a rib-tickling interpretation of braggadocio Gilderoy Lockheart as well as Jason Issacs as the wicked Lucius Malfoy.

With a solidly ensembled cast and sumptuous sets, the second installment is fascinatingly entertaining as it is enchanting enough to sustain its 3 long hours without any misgivings.

Just as good if not better!
This DVD gives you a great movie, lots of special features, and great commentary from the stars and people behind the scenes. Just as good a movie as the first Harry Potter installment, this is definitely a great addition to anyone's DVD collection!

Not as goood as the book
This film is not as good as the book, but still a very good film. There are a few scenes from the book that I wish had made the final cut. It does drag a little after the climax, but those scenes are need to tie up loose plot lines as well as items that might have an impact in future editions.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets-Widescreen Edition
This movie was definately a great work of theatre and art alike. The entire movie was captivating, and while the director, Christopher Columbus, could of done better on some parts, this movie does what most do not, and it stayed true to the book. I loved this, and I watched it about 3 times before I was satisfied with it! Go get the movie and see it, and you'll see what I mean!!! The scenes with the Chammber of Secrets were beautifully detailed, giving you a clearer picture than even the book did! So buy this, sit back and be amazed by the production of Harry Potter's second year at Hogwarts school of Withcraft and Wizardry! Enjoy!

Harry Does It Again! Better Than The First!
"Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" pulls off something that only "The Empire Strikes Back" has done. It's better than the first film! Not only is the story more interesting(though the first was tops as well), it's packed with even more wonder and imagination than the first as well. The castmembers of the first flick return, as well as Kenneth Branagh in a superb performance as Lockhart, the bumbling, vain writer of "Magical Me."

I'm sure the naysayers had a wonderful time bashing this sequel for its evil undertones. Students get "petrified" and the basilisk takes shots at Harry, but all in all, Harry prevails. He makes the right choices, does the good deeds and fights a good fight. How dare he promote such horrible values!

Please folks, I used up a lot of space harping on how kids need to have fun in my review of the first film. The same applies to this movie as well. Don't worry about your kid becoming a warlock or praying to Satan, just let them have a little fun. If you raise them right, you won't have to worry about any of that anyway.

The "Potter" books encourage kids to read and use their imagination. That's a good thing in my book. The movies encourage kids to use their imaginations as well.

You've just got to love something that promotes so many good things. We need more heroes like Harry. He's a good character to let your kids read about and watch on the big screen. He's caring to others, takes his studies reasonably serious(you might want to promote Hermione's study habits to your kids, though) and he always tries to do the right thing.

Overall this movie is fun and enjoyable for the whole family. Some of the scenes might scare the little ones, but this movie is worth explaining those scenes in order to get the message across.

Watch this one and have a ton of fun. It's great for everybody. Highly recommended. ... Read more

Reviews (26)

....absolutely stunning....
Once, in a great while, a film is released that completely shakes your long held beliefs on morality, the politics of class and justice. This is just such a film. Centering on the relationship between two sisters employed as maids in the household of an upper class woman in provincial France, this film is absolutely stunning to behold. Julie Walters gives a fantastic performance as the arrogant and demanding employer who ruthlessly controls the hired help while simultaneously chipping away at her daughter's sense of self worth.

Jodhi May lends an air of youthful naivete to the film as Lea, the devoted younger sister who is the constant favorite of all who meet her. But what makes this film truly superb is Joely Richardson's portrayal of the confused and tortured older sister, Christine. Richardson is able to convey a wealth of emotion with nothing more then a solitary glance and the viewer is left feeling absolutely shattered as they see the gradual physical and psychological disintegration of Richardson's character.

It is no surprise that the film builds to an unbelievable climax of brutality and murder. Nancy Meckler's use of foreshadowing is skillfully done as she presents a situation that can only end in tragedy for all those involved. What may be the most shocking aspect of all, is that this film was inspired by actual events.

Intriguing British lesbian incest melodrama
Sister My Sister is like "Heavenly Creatures" with more sex and less madness. It simply lacks the nuanced believability of "Creatures'" Paulie and Juliet's descent into madness as well as "Creatures'" top-notch production values. That said, any movie that even deems comparison with the now-classic Heavenly Creatures is clearly good and worth-seeing in some respects. And indeed, Sister My Sister creates a claustrophobic, quietly sickening atmosphere which left an intriguing grab on my emotions.

Jodhi May and Joely Richardson star as unnaturally close sisters, Leah and Christine. The two work as maids for a sadistic gentlewoman (Julie Davies, Mrs. Weasely in Harry Potter) and her adult daughter that she endlessly oppresses. Through various sisterly activities and excellent acting by both May and Richardson, they are completely believable as sisters. Thus their eventual sexual relationship not only intellectually but emotionally feels incestual, a nuanced feat that the filmmakers effectively pulled off.

But what drives Leah and Christine to become lovers and later criminals? Their despotic employer? Too close of quarters? Pre-existing emotional instability? I believe the answer is all three, and speculation seems warranted since this movie is in fact based on a true story, the sensationalistic crime that shocked (and also entertained) 1930's France... the OJ Simpson case of the time...

The primary reason to see this movie is not for a history lesson though. It is about the drama between the sisters, as their relationship evolves towards progressively extreme heights. And it is for this drama that the film should be seen. What keeps it all afloat is the fantastic acting on display. Joely Richardson, an actress who's appeared in a lot of cheese since making this movie (Event Horizon, the Parent Trap) proves her adeptness as she plays an essentially unlikeable character and acrobatically makes her sympathetic and compelling throughout the entire film.

Jodhi May's performance as Leah is another example of this actress's ability and charm. She respects and looks up to her big sister, Christine, and as this admiration grows into lust, May makes this transition tragic AND tender. She is an actress who acts with her eyes. And throughout Sister My Sister hers seem to assess every situation with maximum articulateness. May's performance should have been a wake-up call to any Hollywood producer with a brain. This IS the girl.

Despite May's expert character development, most of the movie suffers from lack of transition. The ending seems a little abrupt. In Heavenly Creatures everything built up to the climax. In Sister My Sister, a good twenty more minutes would have helped in properly building the tension towards the final, tragic act.

Overall, I recommend this movie. Jodhi May and Joely Richardson make it entertaining and emotionally affecting.

Remember, you're not buying this for the cover
One of the great pleasures of the "art film" lies in the way they are able to present the most prurient aspects of human nature, whilst maintaining that air of "Emperor's new clothes" respectability. It's a great way to slow your car down to watch the aftermath of a traffic accident, comfortable in the knowledge that YOU are watching the blood pool on the ground for much higher reasons than the proles in the other lane; which brings me (kicking and screaming), to Sister My Sister.

Based loosely on the actual events of the Papin murder case, Sister My Sister plays out like a Merchant Ivory version of Heavenly Creatures, sans the innovative cinematics, and careful plot and character development. One very quickly gets the impression once the film begins, that the sensational aspects of the Papin case alone were considered to be enough to hold your interest; in my case at least, it wasn't.

As stated several times in other reviews, the performances of the two leads are indeed excellent, and a large part of what keeps you watching. Although the two young women look nothing alike, they somehow manage to convey a very convincing sibling bond, all-the-more praiseworthy in the context of this film, as they certainly got little help from the director, and none at all from the screenplay. Quite simply, the problem with Sister My Sister is plausibility. How can that be when it's based on a true story you ask? Easy. The film offers next-to-no backstory on the the two girls or, for that matter, the "repressed" Mother and daughter employers. All we are told, is that the mother of the maids favours the younger girl, and takes a great deal of their wages (a common custom of the era). We are never, for a moment shown or even pointed-to a sensible reason or motive for their impending madness, so that when it ultimately erupts at the end of the film, it comes off as a last-minute afterthought on the part of the script.

The sisters work for a fairly petty and picky aging widow who, at least on screen, is no more opressive or cruel than petty and picky people we have all probably worked-for at one time or another, leaving you with an ending that makes little-to-no sense whatsoever. The victims have done nothing remotely bad enough to rationally explain their brutal murder, leaving only complete madness on the part of the sisters as an explanation; yet unlike in the afore-mentioned Heavenly Creatures, there is practically no view of any descent into madness either. The sisters become suddenly insane in the last 10 minutes of the picture, making for a highly implausable and unsatisfying ending. It could be that a lot of exposition was edited-out for whatever reason, but what remains seems like 80 minutes of the girls somberly doing chores, having sex, and going for walks, occasionally punctuated by the matron complaining about their dressmaking skills, followed by 5 minutes of confrontation and murder that barely seem to belong in the rest of the film you just watched.

The "wink-wink" scenes are indeed strangly erotic, for the one or two of you who are interested, (ok, maybe more than one or two) but you can't help but think, while watching the 3rd or 4th heavy-breathing montage, that the interest of the filmaker was clearly more focused on this aspect than in actually watching these characters develop.

The mother and daughter are merely every matron stereotype you've ever seen, and exist for no other reason other than being the needed antagonists for our incestuous "heroes". By the standard, liberal, conventions of modern film, you are supposed to hate them. They are rich and upper-class and therefore ...er...bad. They sneer at the odd, silent, creepy, almost zombie-like maids who rarely leave their room, and we are supposed to think that's intolerant I suppose. No one I've ever known would let these two creepy, girls sleep under the same roof with them for all the tea in China, but well, that's Hollywood for you.

Sister My Sister is not good storytelling or a good character study, in fact, it barely seems to attempt either. It is a series of prosaic episodes, interspersed with hushed, gauzy love scenes. You never get to know or understand the people in the house, and considering the cameras basically never leave that house, I would certainly call that a failure, but then again, looking at the DVD cover, I doubt this review will stop you ;)

TRUE CRIME STORY-The High Crimes Of France's Papin Sisters
Set in the 1930's, in the small town of Le Mans in France, two sisters, Christine, the eldest & Lea, the kyounger, are hired on as cook and chambermaid to an upper middle-class widow & her only daughter, Madame and Madamoiselle Lancelin. Based on France's true crime of the century, Julie Walters as the perfectionistic & haughty, Madame Lancelin & Joely Richardson as the eldest master manipulator sister, Christine Papin turn in EXCEPTIONAL performances & the rest of the cast is well above average in their undertakings also.

In February, 1933, the whole of France was horrified to learn of an unspeakably savage double murder that had taken
place in the town of Le Mans. Two respectable, middle-class women, mother and daughter, had been murdered by their
maids, two sisters who lived in the house. The maids had not simply killed the women, but had gouged their eyes out
with their fingers while they were alive and had then used a hammer and knife to reduce both women to a bloody pulp.
The full force of the attack was directed at the heads and the victims were left literally unrecognizable.

Adding the bizarre to the horrifying, the sisters made no attempt to escape (...) Interesting, no? This naturally added a dimension of scandal and titillation to the case. Were the maids having a sexual relationship? If so, it was both homosexual and incestuous. Overnight, the two sisters, aged 21 and 27, became France's most infamous couples who kill.

This film delves into all the speculation of the case but also has some unexplained parts about the sisters' youth & their obvious mistreatment & abuse.

There are quite a many double entendres & a look into both couples chiefly meaning the two sisters and the mother and daughter Lancelin relationships. Many similarities occur between Madame Lancelin & Christine as far as their perfectionistic attitudes & control issues. The Madamoiselle Lancelin & Lea Papin also have commonalities inasmuch they are both trapped, shy and easily influenced by the former...

Highly interesting & thought provoking movie. Especially since it REALLY HAPPENED!

Taboo subject, wonderfully darkly comedic film
Sister My Sister (Meckler) is a rather tawdry tale of French sister-maids who lived in Le Mans, working for a mother and her daughter in the early 1930s. The sisters were oddly attached to each other, spending every moment either working together, or other, questionable activities.

Already dramatized in Genet's The Maids (which was made into another film, Murderous Maids, the real-life Papin women present a psychological study of how close is too close in sibling adoration.

In Sister My Sister, Joely Richardson and Jodhi May pull off spot-on performances, staying true to the compulsive natures of the women, while the household of the Danzard's is presented as more of a macabre flashback to the emotional abuse suffered by the sisters at the hands of their mother.

This entire film is wonderfully dark in characters, satire, sets, lighting, and subject.

The mother and daughter are quirky, darkly homo-erotic, and without restraint as the sisters scurry about, repressed as hell.

There is double entendre to spare in this brilliant piece. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Helped considerably by a relatively high budget for a 1988 British film, Buster perfectly remade the 1960s caper-film experience. Rock star Phil Collins plays Buster Edwards, who's only one of a gang who all seem doomed to be captured after their £2.5 million train heist. The caper is over within 30 minutes. However, the film is really about the love story between Buster and his doting yet long-suffering wife June (an excellent Julie Walters). When the action switches to sun-drenched Mexico, you just know her loyalty is going to be tested to extremes because that's when Collins's award-winning songs kick in! "Two Hearts" and "Groovy Kind of Love" may not be '60s-styled, but the message is that love always conquers time and place. --Paul Tonks ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Brilliant, Fun, Love, Laughter, Music & Crime
I was so happy to find this in American format - I'm a British expat and was thrilled to see this again.

The Four Tops on the soundtrack is wonderful!

One of those "rootin' for the bad guy" movies.
I'm so glad this video is being reissued, not only because I'm a Phil Collins fan, but because it's a great movie in general.

Phil plays Buster Edwards, who may be a thief by profession but whose real reason for living is the love of his wife June (Julie Walters) and his daughter Nicky. After pulling off the biggest train robbery in British history, Buster flees with his family to Mexico, along with the ringleader (Larry Lamb), and his wife.

What starts out as a vacation in paradise turns into tensions boiled over when an argument between June and Buster gets physical (he slaps her face) and she retaliates by taking Nicky and flying home. That's when Buster realizes that living in exile is pointless if it means alienating his family.

All in all, this is a very moving, heartwarming film (which includes one of the best robbery sequences I've ever seen); it gets the R rating for some of the more violent scenes, brief nudity, and the occasional British curse word. The score by Anne Dudley is as beautiful as some of the film's most tender moments, and the songs in the soundtrack include two of Phil's biggest hits: "Two Hearts", and "A Groovy Kind of Love"; as well as such classic tunes as: "I Got You Babe" by Sonny & Cher, "I Just Don't Know What To Do With Myself" by Dusty Springfield," "Keep On Running" by the Spencer Davis Group (with lead vocals by a then-relatively unknown singer and keyboard player named Steve Winwood), and "How Do You Do It?" by Gerry & the Pacemakers ... Read more

Reviews (11)

get this if you like good writing and exceptional acting
At last. This film has been unavailable on VHS for a couple of years now. I seriously contemplated stealing the copy from my local video store but couldn't do it. The whole cast is superb. The story is extremely interesting and it's all true. Oldman is Joe Orton, the uninhibited English playwright who was the toast of the town in 60's London. Young and successful he lives life to its limits, hindered only by his mentor, lover and eventual murderer Kenneth, exceptionally portrayed by Alfred Molina (who has fallen far, now starring in a horrendous American sitcom called Ladies' Man). Their story is very engrossing. Vanessa Redgrave is the literary agent and this performance made her one of my fave female actors of all time. She's excellent. Get this movie!

looking for success
A beautiful film, a cult movie, finally on video.
The love-hate relationship between Joe Orton, the famous playwright of the 60s and his friend Kenneth Halliwell, a love story which is also a strife between two men who seem to try to overcome each other, what they both want is success, until one of them(Joe Orton) wins the "match" and becomes famous.
His sex life is extraordinarily "lively"; he finds sex in all the men's toilets and dark alleys of london, seeking those fleeting exciting moments that only the "hunt" can give. Eventually he writes all these episodes down in his diaries asking Halliwell to read them,"so you would like me a little less" says Orton.
He is now a famous playwright, Halliwell is his "personal assistant" as he defines himself trying to find a purpose in his life that he considers useless: Joe doesn't love him, he doesn't have sex with him any more, he cannot share success with Joe. Halliwell gets terribly depressed..........Then the tragedy.
Gary Oldman and Alfred Molina are two superb actors, director Stephen Frears is at his best.
A film that everybody should see.

I LOVE THIS MOVIE!
Am thrilled that it's finally being released on DVD. If you haven't seen it -- beautiful performances, fascinating subject. You won't be disappointed.

A short life story of Joe Orton
This was an entertaining film with suprizes. The production quality was good and the acting solid. I had no idea what to expect when I got this film and viewed it with an open mind. It is the life story of Joe Orton, Playwrite and all around character. A some what more modern Quentin Crisp although Mr. Crisp was bold and respectful and Mr. Orton was bold and much less concerned with being respectful. For his short life he was an Out, in your face sort. Gary Oldman did a masterful job of not only capturing the bold and harsh aspect of Orton but also did an outstanding job of letting us see the soft, tender and even semi-romantic feeling Orton had for his lover of ten years, Kennith. Just when your sure that Orton is cruel and cold, he shows you a loving act that that renews your hope.
The acting made this film a great investment and the story is excellant. You will most likely want to add this to your collection as I did. It was an impressive film.

A small gem for fans of modern English culture
This little-known movie has a great cast (actors who are quite famous now), and tells the story of gay playwrite Joe Orton. It's interesting in the details of gay life in less liberal times, and the quirkyness of its characters. Orton is a self-destructive enfant-terrible of British arts in the 60's, and we are often fascinated to see how someone like this tears through the lives of those who care about him, while creating great, or at least popular, art with apparently little effort. Somewhat like Jim Morrison or Jackson Pollock. ... Read more

Description

In this enchanting film adaptation of J.K. Rowling's delightful bestseller, Harry Potter learns on his 11th birthday that he is the orphaned son of two powerful wizards and posseses magical powers of his own. At Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, Harry embarks on the adventure of a lifetime. He learns the high-flying sport Quidditch and plays a thrilling game with living chess pieces on his way to face a Dark Wizard bent on destroying him. For the most extraordinary adventure, see you on Platform 9 3/4! ... Read more

Reviews (1789)

Video Excellentus!
In 2001, two fall blockbusters involving witchcraft and wizards reached the theatres. Unfortunately, I don't have a wand with which to say "Review autoscriptus!" or some snowy owls on one-day delivery standby so I have to do this with my fingers (sigh) and create words of wonder on the movie I liked better.

While I haven't read J.K. Rowling's books, it must have been chock full of detail I don't know of the movie:book accuracy ratio, but for director Chris Columbus to fit it in two and-a-half hours, it must have been a book spectacularis.

Witches and wizards were persecuted throughout the ages, regarded as threats more than freaks as Harry's aunt did her sister, and more often than not, burned at the stake. With Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, the song remains the same, only this time, his uncle, aunt, and obnoxious cousin treat him contemptuously, as if he's an unwanted burden. Who knows how his life would have been without the flurry of invitations to Hogwarts School courtesy of one-day owl delivery? Fortunately, giant Rubeas Hagrid comes crashing to the rescue. The real adventure begins from there.

Daniel Radcliffe gives a performance competentus and credibilis as the totally likeable title character. Of the troika of main characters, he's the most human. However, Emma Watson as the resourceful and well-read Hermione Granger steals the show wands aloft. Despite being snooty and knowing who she is, she proves herself to be a cut above others in classes (see her frantically waving on Professor Snape to call on her, and her proficient wand handling). She does have feelings, though, as she angrily stomps past through Weasley, who fed up with her conceit, was verbally cutting her down a peg to Harry, finishing with "No wonder she doesn't have any friends." If Hermione's character leads more children to flip pages instead of flipping bad guys on their PS2's or X-Box's, so much the better. Rupert Grint, as Ron Weasley, makes a good foil for both his counterparts, being a fellow explorer and Christmas holiday companion with Harry or someone for Hermione to impart knowledge.

The other performer to whom this show belongs to is veteran actor Robbie Coltrane as the friendly giant gameskeeper Rubeas Hagrid. After Krull, Nuns On The Run, two James Bond movies, and From Hell among others, he has finally become a recognizable face on American shores. American audiences should have warmed up to this talented performer earlier, and that's something I should've said.

As for other veteran actors, Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, and Zoe Wanamaker do wonders as the professors of Hogwarts, but Alan Rickman turns in a solid performance as the sinister Professor Snape, who doesn't seem to like Harry all that much.

People, (or should that be muggles?) this is one movie specialus. The special effects, while spectacular, do not detract from the character development or dialogue, like certain films I'm not going to name. They merely support the magic whether it's the entrance to the square or the action scenes, such as the Quidditch match.

Well, review terminatus, and see you at the theatres for the Chamber of Secrets

I didn't want it to end!
Though by no means the only example of the subject, Joanne Rowling's imaginative book about an eleven year old boy discovering his new-found talent for magic, reintroduced the age-old genre of the fairy story to modern children. "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" benefits enormously from modern CGI effects to bring to life a film which will entertain everyone. The basic story concerns an orphaned boy living with his appalling cousins who are determined that he should not find out that he was actually born a wizard. Through outside help from the magical community, he finds himself enrolled at Hogwart's School of Witchcraft and Wizardry and the fun starts.

Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane and Alan Rickman help to back up the principal child stars and give this film some real presence. Daniel Radcliffe is rather flat as Harry Potter and Emma Watson, as the precocious Hermione Granger, is excessively theatrical and both are shaded by Rupert Grint who is excellent in the role of their cynical friend, Ron Weazley. No doubt all the child actors will improve with time, given that they stay with the series. At the moment they are still finding their feet.

There are plenty of special effects to amaze and amuse and I can't imagine how such a film could have been made without them. The cinematography by John Seale, ACS, is excellent and the whole film has a very pleasing look. The two-disc DVD set has many extras, some of which seem to require an intimate knowledge of magic to access.

On the whole, I thoroughly enjoyed this film and I wait with baited breath for the sequels. It is not a five star film; I did not expect it to be, but it certainly rates considerable merit. I have yet to figure out why WB chose to release it as anything other than "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone", since that is both the title of the original book and the title of the film in any other market than the US. Apart from a few little blemishes, an excellent movie. Kids will give it five stars; parents will enjoy it, too. Thoroughly recommended.

"A rather BIG surprise"
When Harry Potter came to the big screen, I did NOT go to see it. I was of firm standing that it was kidd stuff. Then, a few weeks ago, the people on abc2 news had it on as a "movie event". I figured since it was free, why not watch it? Needless to say, I was realllyyy surprised. I sat, spellbound through ALL commercial breaks, so I would'ent miss any of the story. I've never read a single book in the series, so I can say with out them, this movie still can stand on it's own. P.S. John Williams' score is amazeing!!!! P.S.S. Still, I will say that "The Lord of the Rings" are much better movies, and if you LIKE Harry Potter, You'll LOVE them.

The Best Movie of 2001
Harry Potter is a great movie that the whole family can sit down and enjoy. And the Harry Potter series has a big future. This is the first one in the series that introduced the school of withcraft and wizardry that Harry Potter would be going to. It's called Hogwartz. It introduces many characters such as Harry himself, Ron Weasley who becomes Harry's friend, Hermione Granger who also becomes Harry's friend, Draco Malfoy who is Harry's enemy, Albus Dumbledore who is the headmaster of Hogwartz and many more. Get your kids, get this movie and watch it. Trust me your going to love it. It's great fun really. Then when your done this one go to the store and get Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and then see Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban in theatres.
10/10
Rated PG for Some Scary Moments and Mild Language.

helloo! its the best!
harry potter is the BEST series in the world and kj rowling is sooo talented!!! there's a reason why harry potter's so popular! get THEM ALL ... Read more

Description

Critics across America loved THE WEDDING GIFT, praising its wry wit and heartfelt performances. It's the inspirational story of a remarkable couple, Deric and Diana (Academy Award(R)-winner Jim Broadbent -- Best Supporting Actor, IRIS, 2001; GANGS OF NEW YORK, MOULIN ROUGE and Julie Walters -- HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS), who share their lives in perfect harmony, amusing each other with good humor as they face Diana's failing health. As a final act of affection for Deric, Diana orchestrates a gift of love in its purest and deepest form -- by secretly setting him up with another woman! ... Read more

Reviews (2)

paralysis is a state of mind
This BBC TV is based on the true story of Deric and Diana Longden, who were faced with the debilitating symptoms of what was at the time undefined Chronic Fatigue and Immune Dysfunction Syndrome, with Diana a paralytic who has blackouts. The trap in dramatising this kind of tale is allowing the proceedings to get either too maudlin or too icky sweet uplifting. Adapter playwright Jack Rosenthal and director Richard Loncraine overcome this but fall into the opposing trap, by making the situations mundane and distracting the narrative with the seemingly unnecessary plight of the Longden's to be married son, and the lack of success of Deric's business. We don't so much resent the time given to Deric's doddery mother played by Thora Hird since her addle-mindness is so funny, with the reactions to her underplayed as a given. Thankfully as the Longden's, Julie Walters and particularly Jim Broadbent partially restore the balance by investing their characters with warmth and wit. Walters has the tougher role since it is her last wish for Deric to re-marry, and though she makes her Diana someone to be treasured we also see the pain and frustration of her dependence on Deric. Unlike the couple in the Jill Clayburgh Miles to Go, Diana's wish is only activated by Deric's chance meeting with Aileen (if that name wasn't based on the real person it would be unforgiveable), a writer who happens to be blind. As Diana witnesses Deric's interest in Aileen, she sees that the blindness would allow for Deric to continue his need to watch out for someone, without them being totally dependent. The arrangement isn't pushed, much like Diana's anger towards the medical profession's inability to help her. Since the disease she suffers from is unknown to them, they dismiss her as an "hysteric" which matches the medieval hand aides she is given to wear. The film's second half is definitely stronger than the first, as if we need to pause after the gothicness of Diana's encounters with hospitals and before Aileen makes her entrance, and by the conclusion we become grateful that things are left somewhat open, which nicely undercuts what could have deteriorated into tragedy and sentimental sludge.

Well worth watching.
Julie Walters is very good in this movie. It's a wonderful story about peoples tragedies...and how strong it can make one.....and persistent. ... Read more

Reviews (649)

Fascinatingly enchanting as it is entertaining
Summer vacation is a dreaded time for Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) as it means having to endure the histronics of his mean aunt and uncle. Returning back to his Hogwarts School of Witchcraft would seem a much wiser option but Dobby the House Elf warns him of "a plot to make most terrible things" is in the brewing. With disregard of the warning, the boy wizard begins his sophomore year at the school of magic - and things happen - when his schoolmates are 'petrified' into statues. In fact this is only the beginning when he later takes on gigantic spiders, screeching mandrakes, Fawkes the phoenix and the fearsome Basilisk.

The second entry adapted from J.K Rowling's legacy has neither the epic sweep of the fourth book (The Goblet of fire) nor the mystery of the third (The Prisoner of Azkaban) but is nonetheless an engaging adventure and a riveting story. What's more with director Chris Colombus at the helm who shows more precision and familiarity after his first attempt, Harry Potter and the Chamber of secrets is a majestic adventure filled with visionary sets and fluid CGI effects that astonishingly enhance the darker fantasy tale and adventure. The soaring adventure thrills with its enshrouding perils, awesome moments of wonder and enlightening morality and friendship.

It thus resembles more of an awkward adolescence stage in this saga for the three main casts. Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grinch as Harry, Hermoine and Ron reprises their role with the loss of their innocence along with veterans Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall, the late Richard Harris as the benevolent headmaster Dumbledore, Robbie Coltrane as giant Hagrid and Alan Rickman as Professor Snape. The new interlopers are equally scene-grabbing in their own rights: Kenneth Branagh does a rib-tickling interpretation of braggadocio Gilderoy Lockheart as well as Jason Issacs as the wicked Lucius Malfoy.

With a solidly ensembled cast and sumptuous sets, the second installment is fascinatingly entertaining as it is enchanting enough to sustain its 3 long hours without any misgivings.

Just as good if not better!
This DVD gives you a great movie, lots of special features, and great commentary from the stars and people behind the scenes. Just as good a movie as the first Harry Potter installment, this is definitely a great addition to anyone's DVD collection!

Not as goood as the book
This film is not as good as the book, but still a very good film. There are a few scenes from the book that I wish had made the final cut. It does drag a little after the climax, but those scenes are need to tie up loose plot lines as well as items that might have an impact in future editions.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets-Widescreen Edition
This movie was definately a great work of theatre and art alike. The entire movie was captivating, and while the director, Christopher Columbus, could of done better on some parts, this movie does what most do not, and it stayed true to the book. I loved this, and I watched it about 3 times before I was satisfied with it! Go get the movie and see it, and you'll see what I mean!!! The scenes with the Chammber of Secrets were beautifully detailed, giving you a clearer picture than even the book did! So buy this, sit back and be amazed by the production of Harry Potter's second year at Hogwarts school of Withcraft and Wizardry! Enjoy!

Harry Does It Again! Better Than The First!
"Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" pulls off something that only "The Empire Strikes Back" has done. It's better than the first film! Not only is the story more interesting(though the first was tops as well), it's packed with even more wonder and imagination than the first as well. The castmembers of the first flick return, as well as Kenneth Branagh in a superb performance as Lockhart, the bumbling, vain writer of "Magical Me."

I'm sure the naysayers had a wonderful time bashing this sequel for its evil undertones. Students get "petrified" and the basilisk takes shots at Harry, but all in all, Harry prevails. He makes the right choices, does the good deeds and fights a good fight. How dare he promote such horrible values!

Please folks, I used up a lot of space harping on how kids need to have fun in my review of the first film. The same applies to this movie as well. Don't worry about your kid becoming a warlock or praying to Satan, just let them have a little fun. If you raise them right, you won't have to worry about any of that anyway.

The "Potter" books encourage kids to read and use their imagination. That's a good thing in my book. The movies encourage kids to use their imaginations as well.

You've just got to love something that promotes so many good things. We need more heroes like Harry. He's a good character to let your kids read about and watch on the big screen. He's caring to others, takes his studies reasonably serious(you might want to promote Hermione's study habits to your kids, though) and he always tries to do the right thing.

Overall this movie is fun and enjo