User Score
7.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 524 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 42 out of 524
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Mar 27, 2012
    10
    An astonishing movie that was perfect in its tone. It captured the world of magic perfectly and John Williams score connected brilliantly. A classic it certainly is. Who knew what would come of this series. It will always remain the beginning of a franchise that will be remembered forever in cinema.
  2. Mar 4, 2011
    8
    Not the best of the Harry Potter movies (needed to be closer to the books). Nevertheless, the movie was a great introduction to a ten year long franchise.
  3. Apr 21, 2013
    10
    I've never been the kind of person that buys into hype and to be honest, I hate most big budget films, So until this weekend, I've avoided everything Harry Potter. That being said, I have never met anyone who had anything bad to say about the Potter films, so I finally decided to give it a shot, and boy was I surprised! For those select few who don't know the story, Harry Potter is the sonI've never been the kind of person that buys into hype and to be honest, I hate most big budget films, So until this weekend, I've avoided everything Harry Potter. That being said, I have never met anyone who had anything bad to say about the Potter films, so I finally decided to give it a shot, and boy was I surprised! For those select few who don't know the story, Harry Potter is the son of two legendary wizards, who was hidden with distant relatives, in order to protect him. Until his eleventh birthday, he had no idea that he was famous or had the potential to be the most power wizard the world has ever known. Potter is invited to join the Hogwarts school of wizardry and that is when the adventure begins. British Actor, Daniel Radcliffe, plays Potter and is nothing short of spectacular. Before the Potter films, Radcliffe had very limited acting experience and many say, he got the part, because of his resemblance to Harry Potter on the cover of the book. That may be how he got the part, but he defiantly shows he has the talent to go along with the right look. His performance was terrific, but there is something to be said about having the right Director, and Christopher Columbus was the perfect choice. Columbus has a ton of experience working with young newcomers in films with high expectations. Overall, the story is extremely well written, the young cast was refreshing and full of energy, the direction was stellar, and the set, costumes, and effects were some of the best I've ever seen. I'm not going to go run out and join a quitage team, but I am going to see the rest of the series. Harry Potter is a huge budget franchise, but for once, a blockbuster film does live up to the hype, and earns the title of a must see movie! Expand
  4. Oct 19, 2012
    7
    Released in 2001, J.K. Rowling's international bestseller got its film adaptation here. While it must be admitted that it does have a nice charm to it, its sometimes lopsided pacing can break it off from the perfection it was so dramatically close to.
  5. Nov 28, 2012
    8
    Dark, mystical, and not afraid to leave the audience begging for more, "The Sorcerer's Stone" truly remains a worthy start to a great franchise.
  6. Nov 30, 2013
    7
    Even though it was all kids, or for the most part, Chris Columbus did it pretty well this time in 'Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone'. It stayed really true to the book and had decent effect for its time.
  7. Sep 23, 2011
    8
    Director Chris Columbus has created "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" a dazzling movie that stays true to its book and adding itself with pure zeal and passion with impressive visuals.
  8. Mar 28, 2012
    10
    Amazing this movie, is really interesting, amazing, a bigger sorprise, I think that have some mistakes, but is awesome movie. I love Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is a classic.
  9. Nov 22, 2011
    10
    Where do I start?! This movie presents the greatest entertainment the business had to offer in 2001! I personally love this series, and this is a wonderful introduction. Harry Potter has arrived at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, and the magic begins here. Harry meets two children named Ron and Hermione, and he wouldn't live without them. The choice of casting surpassesWhere do I start?! This movie presents the greatest entertainment the business had to offer in 2001! I personally love this series, and this is a wonderful introduction. Harry Potter has arrived at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, and the magic begins here. Harry meets two children named Ron and Hermione, and he wouldn't live without them. The choice of casting surpasses perfection, and the movie is an awesome start to an awesome series! Expand
  10. Aug 14, 2012
    7
    We all know the story to Harry Potter. Orphan who has nothing turns into the greatest wizard of all time. The first film instalment sticks true to the original book and includes some good special effects but nothing that will stand out from anything but a kids film.
  11. EstebanF.
    Feb 27, 2006
    10
    This is the most-"loyal"-to-the-book Harry Potter movie, and it's from one of the best books. Logically, results in a wonderfull, amazing movie. Even if the effects aren't so good compared with the later films, the plot line is incredible. I have to repeat it, the "loyalty" to the book was amazing, that made this film awesome. I watched it 7 times in video and 2 times in the This is the most-"loyal"-to-the-book Harry Potter movie, and it's from one of the best books. Logically, results in a wonderfull, amazing movie. Even if the effects aren't so good compared with the later films, the plot line is incredible. I have to repeat it, the "loyalty" to the book was amazing, that made this film awesome. I watched it 7 times in video and 2 times in the cinema. Yes, you heard well. I repeated a movie in the cinema, without beeing a super-fan. I loved it. Expand
  12. SandraV.
    Jun 9, 2002
    10
    I thought that if you read the book you were probably pleased with the movie. Sure some critics may not like it but did they take the time to read the book to be amazed? i really doubt it. The movie compared to the book is great b/c it could not find better people for all the characters played, or better settings. I loved this movie.
  13. Jul 5, 2011
    8
    An 11-year old boy named Harry Potter discovers that he's a wizard and receives an invitation to a magical school called Hogwarts. Along the way, he meets two friends named Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger as they spend their natural lives at the school, but little do they know that an evil sorcerer plots to steal the magic stone known as The Sorcerer's Stone and they must find it andAn 11-year old boy named Harry Potter discovers that he's a wizard and receives an invitation to a magical school called Hogwarts. Along the way, he meets two friends named Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger as they spend their natural lives at the school, but little do they know that an evil sorcerer plots to steal the magic stone known as The Sorcerer's Stone and they must find it and solve the mystery about the death of Harry's parents.

    Wow. I was very speechless when I first saw this movie in theaters as a little child. To tell the truth, I've never read the book in which this movie was based on, but when I read it, the chapters showed the same thing that were included in the movie and I think it followed the book quite well.

    What else can you say about it? The actors were very entertaining and had a lot of talent with their performances since they look like the same characters from the book. Daniel Radcliffe did very well as the main character (god bless him) and I can't say anything else about the rest of the actors because they did great as well as him.

    The storyline was well-paced and the John Williams music score was very memorable and had a lot of emotion to it.

    The CGI effects were great and the fantasy action was very good.

    There's nothing negative to say about this movie and that's it.

    Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is a faithful adaptation of the book with excellent performances, great settings, and a well-paced storyline. Thumbs up from me.

    8/10
    Expand
  14. Aug 16, 2010
    9
    I have to say that I did not enjoy this film very much when I first saw it, but after multiple viewings, I have grown very fond of it. The magic is really in the air when you watch this movie, as Columbus visualizes Hogwarts so brilliantly and faithfully to the book. The performances are not the best obviously (they're just kids) but they're good enough. Rickman makes a terrific Snape, butI have to say that I did not enjoy this film very much when I first saw it, but after multiple viewings, I have grown very fond of it. The magic is really in the air when you watch this movie, as Columbus visualizes Hogwarts so brilliantly and faithfully to the book. The performances are not the best obviously (they're just kids) but they're good enough. Rickman makes a terrific Snape, but I wish the characters were a bit deeper in the movie, as they were in the book. Still, one of the best of the series. Expand
  15. DuncanS.
    Jul 4, 2002
    10
    The best fiction movie i've seen in a while.
  16. Nov 22, 2010
    7
    The first installment of a great intriguing series from J.K. Rowling, becomes to be a dark and addictive fantasy film that makes you like Harry Potter. He finds out he is a wizard, and asks to stray from his evil step-parents to attend the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. More secrets about his close evil relationship with Lord Voldemort unveil and he cannot wait to meet him.The first installment of a great intriguing series from J.K. Rowling, becomes to be a dark and addictive fantasy film that makes you like Harry Potter. He finds out he is a wizard, and asks to stray from his evil step-parents to attend the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. More secrets about his close evil relationship with Lord Voldemort unveil and he cannot wait to meet him. The film in general was well directed, but the film lacks a sense of greatness. Despite it's PG rating, it has several instances of dark sequences of action that might frighten small children. The film's maturity should appeal to anyone who has read the book, but the instensity of the film could be more intense, but with a young cast and a PG rating, the direction and tone of the film is mild. Expand
  17. Aug 9, 2011
    7
    Even though this movie was eventually topped by almost all of the following films in the series, it is a modern classic and a very satisfying first chapter. There are also some stand-out adult performances that elevate this movie (Alan Rickman)
  18. Nov 6, 2011
    8
    It's an excellent start to an excellent franchise. It's very faithful to it's literary counterpart and it's pure cinematic magic. It's impressively designed and sports likable characters, emotion, friendship and bravery to coincide with the story . There are some moments I found a little too childish, but that's understandable given the film's general child-friendly demographic. The youngIt's an excellent start to an excellent franchise. It's very faithful to it's literary counterpart and it's pure cinematic magic. It's impressively designed and sports likable characters, emotion, friendship and bravery to coincide with the story . There are some moments I found a little too childish, but that's understandable given the film's general child-friendly demographic. The young actors weren't that convincing through certain parts of the film. But, again, it's understandable given their age and lack of real acting experience. 3/4 stars. Expand
  19. Nov 8, 2012
    10
    Harry Potter is dazzling and magical. It's a film of pure of wonder that's enjoyable for the whole family.
  20. Dec 17, 2011
    8
    With fantastic and heartwarming debut performances from the children, good visual effects, a heartwarming, sometimes thrilling story, make this a good start to one of the greatest franchises ever. Despite the fact of the incredibly long length and the lack of adventure. I give this excellent movie an 84% of a good movie.
  21. SaraL.
    Jan 4, 2003
    10
    The movie kicked arse!
  22. Mar 25, 2012
    10
    The Sorcerer's Stone is an excellent start to Harry Potter. It is a magical a joyful film. Everything i expected from reading the book Christopher Columbus has turned into something even more special. i suspect this will continue into the others.
  23. KisshaunaS.
    Oct 10, 2002
    10
    This movie is exciting and unpredictible I give it a 10 it is one of the best movies I ever saw and it is also funny.
  24. MaraJ.
    May 19, 2002
    9
    A movie worth watching! It was capable of bringing out the images in the book to life. It is not just a movie for kids but its something special for everyone!
  25. HeathcliffJ.
    Aug 3, 2002
    9
    This movie really captured every aspect of the book without becoming too lengthy. The special effects were excellent and I cannot wait for the next film!!!!!
  26. MaribelN.
    Jun 28, 2003
    10
    I love the harry books better but the characters really come to life and i can see them now in my minds eye as i read. I am leaing to got to the park but harry potter is ALWAYs with me lol
  27. RichardW.
    Nov 6, 2002
    10
    I think this film was one of the greatest films of all time and I hope the next film will be even better.
  28. AndyP.
    Jan 9, 2002
    10
    Best movie of the year...next to "Atlantis." I'd give this a pure A, just like "Atlantis." The movie was great!!! All the effects were the best. Not even "Shrek" can top this.
  29. WhitneyD.
    Feb 3, 2002
    10
    It was so amazing!!! there were some parts left out...but that does not mean that it was a bad movie. I cannot believe the special effects, and how well the characters fit the description of the book!!! It is the best movie in the world...and you know it!!!
  30. ShannonR.
    Jun 1, 2002
    9
    Beautifully directed, wonderful cast! It casts a spell on everyone thats watching. But I give it a 9 because the book is better...:)
  31. AilaJ.
    Jun 17, 2002
    10
    I loved the action scenes. This movieis one of the best movies I had ever seen! The characters seem really down-to-earth. Rupert was my favorite character... he is so cute!!
  32. TeresaC.
    Aug 29, 2002
    8
    On the whole I thought this adaptation was great. The only real complaints I have are: 1. John Cleese, as Nearly Headles Nick, did little more than make two brief cameo appearances. As a fan of Monty Python, fawlty towers, etc., I hope the filmmakers gave him a larger part the next time around. 2. Rick Mayall was originally supposed to appear here as the obnoxious poltergeist (which, On the whole I thought this adaptation was great. The only real complaints I have are: 1. John Cleese, as Nearly Headles Nick, did little more than make two brief cameo appearances. As a fan of Monty Python, fawlty towers, etc., I hope the filmmakers gave him a larger part the next time around. 2. Rick Mayall was originally supposed to appear here as the obnoxious poltergeist (which, considering his past roles, is a good casting decision), but wasn't put in for time reasons. I hope he appears in the next movie as well. Otherwise, I was extremely pleased with this adaptation. I hope that the rest of the Harry Potter movies are created by the same people, rather than someone like Stephen Spielberg (who wanted to AMERICANIZE it!). Expand
  33. Alright,then,here'sGilbertMulroneycakes
    Jan 12, 2003
    9
    In reply to Torri F: I have no complaint with the title in and of itself, it's just...why? I don't mind the Germans calling it Sorceror's Stone - maybe Philosopher's doesn't translate into German properly, whatever - but why the hell was the name changed in America? It smacks of some Random House executive with nothing to do trying to justify his pay cheque. In reply to Torri F: I have no complaint with the title in and of itself, it's just...why? I don't mind the Germans calling it Sorceror's Stone - maybe Philosopher's doesn't translate into German properly, whatever - but why the hell was the name changed in America? It smacks of some Random House executive with nothing to do trying to justify his pay cheque. You're right: it makes no difference. That's why it weirds me out. Okay? Good good. Expand
  34. TaylorJ.
    Mar 22, 2003
    7
    The special effects were a bit uneven, and sometimes the children's acting was forced, but other than that, it's a satisfying adaptation. The production is awesome and the characters pop mostly from Rowling's pages. I wish it had a little more heart and a zippier sense of magic like the books, but it all right.
  35. JamiA.
    Apr 19, 2003
    10
    The movie was wonderful. I have watched the first one about 30 time and the second one about 20! I love it. It is my FAVORITE movie!!!
  36. KatieP.
    Jun 4, 2004
    10
    How could anyone human give this movie anything lower than a 9? It's a fantastic movie.
  37. SaerA.
    Jul 2, 2004
    7
    Harry Potter maybe a movie that might scare younger viewers, but it still is a good film.
  38. JackB.
    Aug 9, 2007
    8
    A great movie that was taken off an awsome book.
  39. LilyP.
    Nov 15, 2001
    10
    I loved it. critics suck :P
  40. EricM.
    Nov 17, 2001
    10
    A truly brilliant movie! Read the books, see the movie, you'll love them all.
  41. Lauren
    Jan 12, 2002
    10
    This movie was excellent! IN my opinion it was the best movie of the year, not a dull moment at all...my friend needed to use the bathroom but couldn't leave through all this excitement and thrill. JK Rowling's book's are better then any I've read in my life. GOOD JOB!
  42. LadyC.
    Oct 29, 2002
    10
    It's a great movie and less boring that the book!!!!! Characters are very cool...
  43. S.A.
    Feb 4, 2002
    10
    It was awesome.
  44. M.W.
    May 13, 2002
    10
    This was one of the best movies I have seen. I don't know what you other people are talking about (just pig-headed I guess).
  45. SamanthaV.
    Jun 10, 2002
    10
    It was the greatest i've ever seen. emma watson was excellent. as also daniel radcliffe and rupert grint and the whole cast.
  46. ErikN.
    Jun 17, 2002
    10
    I LOVED this movie. It's the best!!!
  47. StacyB.
    Jun 21, 2002
    10
    This movie is the best I've ever seen and I think it will always be that way. (Except for the other Harry Potter movies coming out, of course)
  48. ConnieB.
    Jun 3, 2002
    10
    This is an awesome movie! The actors were great!
  49. HarryP.
    Jun 5, 2002
    8
    I thought they did a wonderful job of translating the book into the movie but I think I could have been a better looking Harry Potter! I'm sorry but I think Daniel Ratcliff looks nothing like the general public envisions Harry Potter when reading the book.
  50. BitBurn
    Jun 6, 2002
    7
    Magical! Spectacular!! Enchanting!!...but what a terrible ending it has!! When we're kids, we're taught that in life the important thing is to participate and winning don't matter. Harry Potter failed royally in that department.
  51. Nancy
    Jul 12, 2002
    10
    IT WAS GREAT!! They left some bits out but oh well, and another thing, isn't Ron supposed to be TALL?!?
  52. MylesG.
    Jul 19, 2002
    9
    This film got my son started on reading works of fiction. He saw the film, bought the shirt and bought the book. As a 44 year old saddo I couldn't help noticing that the props department had skimped or fallen for product placement. It seems unlikely that so many households on the Dursley's block would drive Vauxhall Vectras of about the same model year. Boring car for boring This film got my son started on reading works of fiction. He saw the film, bought the shirt and bought the book. As a 44 year old saddo I couldn't help noticing that the props department had skimped or fallen for product placement. It seems unlikely that so many households on the Dursley's block would drive Vauxhall Vectras of about the same model year. Boring car for boring people maybe but even boring people drive Fords, VWs and BMWs too. Expand
  53. TrixieJ.
    Jul 4, 2002
    10
    Daniel Radcliffe was made for this movie. Since his skills in acting are exellent, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets should be a BLAST!
  54. BenP.
    Aug 27, 2002
    10
    I thought that despite one little situation when Rupert Grint (Ron) laughed. The movie was a great sucess in Canada as well in the UK and USA. The movie was exactly as I thought of the book. I can't wait to see the next movies and can only hope the others are like Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone!
  55. It'sGilbertMulroneycakesAgainReally,Really,So
    Jun 10, 2003
    9
    Not to flog a deceased equine here, but what the hell, "Superman"? Not many people know what a philosopher is? Oh, come on, that's not...American culture's not that spoonfed by now, is it? I mean, us Brits can't exactly (or at all) be smug on that point, but we know what a philosopher is! Surely you...aren't THAT stumped...are you? Anyway. Sorry. You don't need to Not to flog a deceased equine here, but what the hell, "Superman"? Not many people know what a philosopher is? Oh, come on, that's not...American culture's not that spoonfed by now, is it? I mean, us Brits can't exactly (or at all) be smug on that point, but we know what a philosopher is! Surely you...aren't THAT stumped...are you? Anyway. Sorry. You don't need to post this, really. It's just a weird thing to say. Expand
  56. DaveC.
    Jul 16, 2003
    7
    A film with its ups and downs. There is some good humor her and there, the older characters are well acted, the plot is good and Hogwarts looks great. On the downside, the special effects look cheap, the younger actors are bad (especially Hermoine and Draco) and there's somewhat of a lack of genuine thrills seen in 2001's other fantasy films, Shrek and Lord Of The Rings.
  57. KittyC.
    Jul 24, 2004
    9
    Very good, yet the weakest of the three Harry Potter films. Not great acting but good.
  58. MariahR.
    May 5, 2006
    8
    this movie was really good but too different from the book to get a ten.
  59. AndrewN.
    Aug 11, 2007
    7
    Average but has its merits for remaining faithful to the book and giving a good insight into Harrys world.
  60. RuanH.
    Aug 12, 2007
    7
    It gets better with the second attempt, but does not quite capture me as much as I would like it to. The actors are becoming better in their roles, which leaves a big promise for the next installment.
  61. NoahR.
    Nov 15, 2001
    10
    It was great!
  62. BillC.
    Nov 16, 2001
    10
    It's everything you wanted the film version to be...only better! A perfect holiday gift for anyone who loves movies, books...or BOTH!!
  63. RobertF.
    Nov 16, 2001
    9
    I read the book and I liked the movie..a lot. Anyone who has read the book wants to see it on screen...and that's exactly what you get...the last thing I wanted was some ego driven director's version of Rowling's story.
  64. MaggieT.
    Nov 17, 2001
    10
    I loved the movie! I've read all of the books out so far, and I am already anticipating the next movie. I'm so glad they stayed on the same plot as the book, it probably wouldn't have been as good. The casting was great.
  65. JaquerieP.
    Nov 22, 2001
    9
    Perhaps this is more of a bitter rant about a number of misaligned reviews of the film.. first of all, Chris Columbus did a wonderful job of bringing the book to life - and staying true to that fact... which seems difficult in a world of mindless glitter, flash, and baby-babble. What seems to escape a number of people, it was designed to attract children not because of commercial value Perhaps this is more of a bitter rant about a number of misaligned reviews of the film.. first of all, Chris Columbus did a wonderful job of bringing the book to life - and staying true to that fact... which seems difficult in a world of mindless glitter, flash, and baby-babble. What seems to escape a number of people, it was designed to attract children not because of commercial value (such as the hack and slash adventures of "Power Rangers" or dribble of "Pokemon") but for the visual, imaginary side of the books which has inspired a vast number of children, my own included to seek out Harry Potter books with a dying thirst and slowly being drawn to the classics of Nancy Clue and the Hardly Boys, anything that might spark an interest until the next book.. to stray from the adventures of the books would have been a great injustice to the many adults, children, and even those few teens who have been touched, sparked with a love of the storyline. For a children's film to have a fairly strong element of drama, fantasy, adventure, and even a sense of maturity to attract an audience of any age one can only hope that this will continue to spark trend and spread into the rest of children?s media. You'll either love it or be able to stand to see it two or three, maybe five to 8 more times. See it more than once, give it a chance people! Expand
  66. DawnW.
    Dec 12, 2001
    9
    The British cast was brilliant, I loved how they made Hogwarts, and they stuck to the plot impeccably well. They did leave out a quidditch match, Peeves the Poltergiest, and basically thinned out almost every smaller character, so those facts were kind of sad. But that was all for time reasons. They didn't want to movie to be "Gone With the Wind" for heaven's sake, it's notThe British cast was brilliant, I loved how they made Hogwarts, and they stuck to the plot impeccably well. They did leave out a quidditch match, Peeves the Poltergiest, and basically thinned out almost every smaller character, so those facts were kind of sad. But that was all for time reasons. They didn't want to movie to be "Gone With the Wind" for heaven's sake, it's not their fault. Two and a half hours was a perfect length in my opinion. If people could sit through Titantic they can definitely sit through this. I just wonder what they're going to do with the fourth book... that's 972 pages long, and you can't leave out anything or the storyline's ruined. It'll be like five hours long! Expand
  67. MichelleL.
    Dec 16, 2001
    9
    I quite agree with "Dawn W." Percy, Fred, and George weren't really given a lot of characterization-but the movie was already a bit lengthy. My one complaint is the Quidditch match- in the books Slytherin could never just knock out all those players and get away with it! Committing fouls right and left- blatching and cobbing to name just two. I picked it to pieces every single place I quite agree with "Dawn W." Percy, Fred, and George weren't really given a lot of characterization-but the movie was already a bit lengthy. My one complaint is the Quidditch match- in the books Slytherin could never just knock out all those players and get away with it! Committing fouls right and left- blatching and cobbing to name just two. I picked it to pieces every single place it varied in the slightest from the book after seeing it- but in spite of everything, I loved it. I can't wait to buy it. For the 4th one, maybe they'll divide it into two movies, or something? They can't leave much out, most of it's essential to the plot. Expand
  68. MattR.
    Dec 22, 2001
    10
    Engrossing, faithful to the book and delightful fun.
  69. TheDarkLordGilbertMulroneycakes
    Nov 25, 2002
    9
    What is it with you Americans? What was wrong with the title "Philosopher's Stone"? What is so confusing about the concept of crumpets? Ah, you're all eejits. Still, the film's a good one, with great performances (what a shame Richard Harris had to die so soon...his Dumbledore was a joy) a faithful-but-not-to-a-fault script, and three very promising kids - I, for one, hope What is it with you Americans? What was wrong with the title "Philosopher's Stone"? What is so confusing about the concept of crumpets? Ah, you're all eejits. Still, the film's a good one, with great performances (what a shame Richard Harris had to die so soon...his Dumbledore was a joy) a faithful-but-not-to-a-fault script, and three very promising kids - I, for one, hope they don't get replaced. Even if Emma Watson's teeth are too small. If there is a fault, it's that it's too simplistic - but then, so's the book, by dint of being the first one. It gets better. Trust me. Mind you, at over 2 and a half hours long (from the shortest book), god knows what they'll do with Goblet Of Fire (nearly 700 pages). Maybe they'll try to resurrect Sir David Lean. Expand
  70. TonyR.
    Jan 26, 2002
    10
    This movie is brilliant. The settings and action seem directly taken from my mind's eye as I read the book. The director wisely does not try to outdo the well-written book but instead captures its most brilliant moments. The cast wonderfully seems to experience the surprises of what they are seeing and doing, much as I turned with wonder from page to page dying to know what would This movie is brilliant. The settings and action seem directly taken from my mind's eye as I read the book. The director wisely does not try to outdo the well-written book but instead captures its most brilliant moments. The cast wonderfully seems to experience the surprises of what they are seeing and doing, much as I turned with wonder from page to page dying to know what would happen next. Harry Potter succeeds at every step where LOTR fails miserably: it has a tight story, closure with a desire for more, compelling and articulate characters that are well-developed. I can't wait for the next one! Expand
  71. YongWooK.
    Jan 27, 2002
    7
    This movie is great for the kids, but not good for the adults as they might find the disappointment of lack of action. Harry Potter would be more exciting and fun if they put on the sound a bit louder. The book was better as it has more adventure and excitement. The characters should have put more charm into it. It really seems like it's too much for children and less for older This movie is great for the kids, but not good for the adults as they might find the disappointment of lack of action. Harry Potter would be more exciting and fun if they put on the sound a bit louder. The book was better as it has more adventure and excitement. The characters should have put more charm into it. It really seems like it's too much for children and less for older people. But this movie may also be good by it's story and it's scenery as it was well imagined. I'm hoping the second one will be better. But still, this movie is good and recommendable for kids. Expand
  72. DaveH.
    Feb 15, 2002
    8
    This movie was closely related to the book, and I liked it a lot. Yep.
  73. PetraV.
    Feb 17, 2002
    10
    This movie was awesome!!! Daniel Radcliffe was EXCELLENT in this movie; gotta love that guy!! I've never read the HP-books, but after the movie I bought them all and within 3 weeks time I'm now in the fourth book!! I'm totally hooked and can't wait till the next movie and book!!
  74. SusanM.
    Jun 18, 2002
    10
    This movie kicks butt!
  75. TomR.
    Jun 24, 2002
    10
    It's the best movie ever.
  76. DanielleK.
    Jun 26, 2002
    10
    It was the best movie I have ever seen! Rupert Grint is a really great actor, and he really gave feeling to the acting part.
  77. BeccaN.
    Jun 28, 2002
    8
    As a Harry Potter fan, I would have kicked myself for giving this movie an 8, but comparing to the movie, the book is way more action packed.
  78. ImaSillyduck
    Sep 22, 2002
    10
    Ah! This is a great movie! It has a couple of hot guys, too. :CoughCoughSeanBiggerstaff& TomFeltonCoughCough:: (Draco Malfoy and Oliver Wood) The actors and actresses are awesome! Apart from some poor special effects, this is the best movie I've ever seen!
  79. #1HPFan!
    Feb 11, 2003
    9
    It was absolutly great. Even my brother(who canot understand my anticipationfor#5) liked it! Daniel Radcliff, Rupert Grint, & Emma Watson were awesome. My only regret is that it is not completelyhonest to the book , but hey not many movies are.
  80. G.M.D.K
    Dec 4, 2004
    10
    Hugely entertaining,has great music and the acting is nothing short of great.one of the best films of all time.
  81. Chris
    Sep 24, 2005
    8
    I haven't had chance to read this book but as films go its a good introduction the the Potter world. Acting is a bit weak but most of them (the child actors that is) are just starting out. It defines the characters well enough ready for the follow up movies which seem to get better and better.
  82. TomK.
    Aug 19, 2007
    7
    The film is fun very enjoyable, but it's not matching the book's environment as well, it's a little bit more childish than the books.
  83. ChrisP.
    Nov 16, 2001
    7
    Having read the book, it was fun to watch the movie (the Quidditch scenes and other special effects were great) but I wouldn't say that it was a great movie. It was a good movie.
  84. KimS.
    Nov 17, 2001
    9
    I really liked the QUIDDITCH scenes. I always had trouble understanding the rules til I actually saw it played. The movie was very faithful to the book except in a couple of ways that weren't very important. I liked the movie very much and I think I'll go see it one more time.
  85. RyanM.
    Nov 17, 2001
    10
    The film sticks with the book, and truly, I can?t say enough wonderful things about it. The acting is the best child performances ever, the sets are the best sets ever, and the effects are the best effects ever. They just are. It?s not the best movie ever, but most likely, it?s one of them. Their epic tone with sly in-humor creates an extraordinary filmmaking force, one of the best The film sticks with the book, and truly, I can?t say enough wonderful things about it. The acting is the best child performances ever, the sets are the best sets ever, and the effects are the best effects ever. They just are. It?s not the best movie ever, but most likely, it?s one of them. Their epic tone with sly in-humor creates an extraordinary filmmaking force, one of the best filmmaking forces of the year. It?s a film for everybody, it?s so great?I mean so great. It?s the kind of movie that makes you want to clap for the whole 150 minutes that you?re sitting in the theatre. It a new classic, a real CLASSIC, it will go down in history. It?s especially redeeming if you?ve read the book, because you see your actual envisions of the world of Hogwarts, jump out from the screen. Expand
  86. TorriF.
    Dec 15, 2002
    9
    This film was an excellent adaptation of J.K Rowling's novel. I would, however, like to ask the Dark Lord Gilbert what his protest against the title The "Sorcerer's" Stone is, as it makes no difference whether it's Sorcerer's Stone or Philospher's Stone.
  87. Dec 2, 2010
    9
    It's hard to believe such a marvel could all take place in the vicinity of an enchanted school. The mind-blowing visuals and set pieces will leave you breathless; the magical moments are truly endless in Potter's debut film.
  88. Feb 19, 2011
    9
    One of the best movies in the series, it has humor, and action, and an enjoyable plot, and extremely charming characters, a movie I would recommend seeing.
  89. Sep 23, 2012
    7
    The Sorcerer's Stone is a decent opener for the Harry Potter franchise. There is a lot of fun to be had discovering the world of Hogwarts. The film isn't perfect however; hefty over-length and an uneven final third keep it from joining the truly brilliant Potter outings.
  90. Jul 11, 2011
    8
    I first saw this film when I was around 4 when it was released on DVD and I loved it when I first saw it! Ten years later, this film is still the most faithful to the book unlike the others. Seeing the actors playing the trio at such a young age is still a delight to see as they grow up. The visuals are fantastic and it certainly gets you introduced to the world of Harry Potter. Not theI first saw this film when I was around 4 when it was released on DVD and I loved it when I first saw it! Ten years later, this film is still the most faithful to the book unlike the others. Seeing the actors playing the trio at such a young age is still a delight to see as they grow up. The visuals are fantastic and it certainly gets you introduced to the world of Harry Potter. Not the best Harry Potter film, but is a great film. Expand
  91. May 29, 2011
    7
    The lack of discernment between the boundaries by literature and the cinema compromises part of the movie, which seems oddly limited and unimaginative in a universe that is just the opposite. Chris Columbus, with a monstrous technical department, prepares the magical world beautifully, however fills the air. The scenes seem a succession of sketches made strategically to put the narrativeThe lack of discernment between the boundaries by literature and the cinema compromises part of the movie, which seems oddly limited and unimaginative in a universe that is just the opposite. Chris Columbus, with a monstrous technical department, prepares the magical world beautifully, however fills the air. The scenes seem a succession of sketches made strategically to put the narrative in motion, without any soul or your driving style. The soundtrack by John Williams, however, besides having a theme already unforgettable simply creates beside the photograph the whole mood and atmosphere of Hogwarts. As a product, is a beautiful film and well done, but it suffers from the absence of a different taste and own something that is only acquired later along the saga goes on. Expand
  92. Apr 5, 2011
    10
    A great entry to the world of Harry Potter. The beginning of it all. I believe this is probably the best of it's lot because of the way it introduces all these things. Quidditch, Broomsticks, withes and wizards like you've never imagined. J.K rowling has definitley got alot of inspiration from fairy tales and stories of witches and magic but revamps it like no one has ever seen. It's oneA great entry to the world of Harry Potter. The beginning of it all. I believe this is probably the best of it's lot because of the way it introduces all these things. Quidditch, Broomsticks, withes and wizards like you've never imagined. J.K rowling has definitley got alot of inspiration from fairy tales and stories of witches and magic but revamps it like no one has ever seen. It's one of the most original film series since Star Wars. I guess the story I don't really need to talk about because i'm sure most of you out there have heard of Harry Potter. Basically Harry is 'the boy that lived' from a dark evil wizard by the name of Voldemort when he was just an infant. Dumbeldore, the headmaster of Hogwarts, Hagrid and the other teachers of Hogwarts leave him off at his closest relatives, his uncle an aunt. At the age of 11 Harry is revisited by Hagrid and is taken to Hogwarts. this is where he learns all about wizardry and why he is their. It's a fnatastic story and a pretty touching story. Harry grew up with his uncle and aunt who are extremely mean to him along with his cousin, Dudley who is the selfish spoilt little brat. All three of them are characters you love to hate. As much as they are extremely mean people it's enjoyable to see them be so pompus and narcistic at times. Most of the characters in the story are brilliant. It makes this world very believable and reels you in.Hagrid i'd like to start with. He is a brilliant character at about the height of 7 foot. As much as he looks monstrous he's actually a gentle heartfelt man who can cook and do gardening. The relation he has with Harry, Ron and Hermione is great. He looks like such a good friend. Ron weasley, a friend Harry meets on the train to Hogwarts. He's silly at times and things sometimes don't work out for him. Hermione is a school addict who knows plenty about spells and potions. Harry is played wonderfully by Daniel Radcliffe and it's easy to see how he got the role. All the characters of the story seem fit for the film. The way they look, the way the talk has a magnificent style. That's what the Harry Potter films have. Alot of style. They are very distinct from other films. How many films involve stories as deep as this along with mythical creatures, Witched, Spells and thousand year old castles. As the first of the Harry Potter films this is a wonderful entry and if you haven't watched ANY of the Harry Potter films then it's worth starting with this one. Expand
  93. Jul 3, 2011
    9
    Innovative special effects and picture perfect child acting. I am proud to say that this film is the greatest children's movie of all-times. Don't believe me? Watch the film and see if you don't enjoy it. Few films can take a children's novel and make it a serious contender for greatness but Chris Columbus does it and does it well!!!
  94. Dec 25, 2012
    8
    While this is only the first installment in the series and remarkably Disney-like, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. It's in no way a groundbreaking movie, but it has no major drawbacks either. Good character build-up combined with a nicely produced movie makes this an easy recommendation.
  95. Jun 18, 2011
    9
    In retrospect, this film is a lot better then when you first see it. Although the acting, primarily on the stars is not so great, the movie itself still manages to be pretty good. This may be due to the fantastic performances of the supporting cast that includes Alan Rickman, Maggie Smith, and Richard Harris, or it may be due to the brilliant score by John Williams that has become somewhatIn retrospect, this film is a lot better then when you first see it. Although the acting, primarily on the stars is not so great, the movie itself still manages to be pretty good. This may be due to the fantastic performances of the supporting cast that includes Alan Rickman, Maggie Smith, and Richard Harris, or it may be due to the brilliant score by John Williams that has become somewhat the classical theme of a generation. The direction may not be as visually impressive as later installments, but Columbus still does a good job of bringing wonder to Hogwarts. The changes from the book, although few, are still apparent to a fan of the series, and are not that much a distraction. Absolutely for Potter fans, and possibly for everyone else, Sorcerer's (Philosopher's) Stone is a great movie that launches the magical franchise. Expand
  96. Jul 12, 2011
    9
    It is a fantastical achievement. It introduces us to a richly detailed world with great characters and above all a good story. It doesn't particularly flow at times and Chris Columbus seems a bit stale with the camera but the actors, sets and John William's score more than make up for it. Dan, Rupert and Emma are perfectly cast and all the other older british actors give Hogwarts a richIt is a fantastical achievement. It introduces us to a richly detailed world with great characters and above all a good story. It doesn't particularly flow at times and Chris Columbus seems a bit stale with the camera but the actors, sets and John William's score more than make up for it. Dan, Rupert and Emma are perfectly cast and all the other older british actors give Hogwarts a rich atmosphere. The story provided by JK Rowling is really strong so the filmmakers were wise in following it closely. In the end, Chris Columbus deserves much credit for starting off the series on the right foot. I saw this when I was 14 and it just resonated with me on a very personal level. It's a classic. Expand
  97. Jul 20, 2011
    8
    A charming, sweet and colourful film. The acting among the young is iffy, and the effects are rather poor, but the emotion and the very faithful plot quickly pull you in. The sets are one of the key delights of this film. Everything is beautifully decorated and lavishly coloured to make it absolutely awe-inspiring. Together with the rich cinematography, it really brings the magic to life.A charming, sweet and colourful film. The acting among the young is iffy, and the effects are rather poor, but the emotion and the very faithful plot quickly pull you in. The sets are one of the key delights of this film. Everything is beautifully decorated and lavishly coloured to make it absolutely awe-inspiring. Together with the rich cinematography, it really brings the magic to life. The music also adds to the magic and the wonder, and follows the emotion closely. This can make it slightly boring, as there is nothing really converse about how it flows, but it adds something really satisfying and real to the film. Expand
  98. CRL
    Jul 27, 2011
    7
    This was where one of the highest grossing and most critically acclaimed series began, with a somewhat humble adaptation of J.K. Rowling's bestseller. These actors back then were completely unknown, and though they weren't at the level they are now, they were still good enough for a movie that depended on a wonderful and well-represented story as well as some of the best directing of the series.
  99. Jul 24, 2011
    7
    SO The HP saga begins with the sorcerer stone. I started writing the reviews after the last movie come out so i really understand the all the films. So where i began the first movie was a good movie where you saw that harry has magical powers and begins on hogwarts the school for wizardy. It was a spectacular movie with good specialeffects and good acting especially for the litle harry.SO The HP saga begins with the sorcerer stone. I started writing the reviews after the last movie come out so i really understand the all the films. So where i began the first movie was a good movie where you saw that harry has magical powers and begins on hogwarts the school for wizardy. It was a spectacular movie with good specialeffects and good acting especially for the litle harry. But there a few minors in the first movie that was later be solved by other directors, professor dumbledore is much better in the next films than in the firts 2 and the old look at hogwarts does not fit in the movie, further is was a thrill and it was a good firts harry potter but not the best. so i give it an 7 Expand
  100. Jun 14, 2012
    10
    The first movie, Chris Columbus opened a saga that would mark a generation. I was dazzling, visually beautiful, funny and magic. John William's music was wonderful, it fitted very well to every sequence.
Metascore
64

Generally favorable reviews - based on 35 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 23 out of 35
  2. Negative: 0 out of 35
  1. 50
    Potter-philes are sure to get what they want -- if what they want is, in fact, an exacting version of J.K. Rowling's charming children's fantasy. If it's enchantment they are after, that's quite another matter.
  2. If the movie doesn't ultimately transport us to places The Wizard of Oz once took us, that may be partly because "The Sorcerer's Stone" is just the first chapter, with more magic waiting to be parceled out in the coming years.
  3. That sense of déjà vu is at once this Harry Potter's balm and its limitation: many charms, but few surprises.