As a child with $2.30 to spend in Honeydukes candy shop, the makers of the movie version of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone had only two hours and thirty minutes to spend on the sumptuous array of material the book offered them. And, with several notable exceptions, they spent it very wisely indeed. Visually the movie chose to focus on the landscape of the magical world, and in this regard it succeeds sensationally. The looming castle, bustling shops, streets, and corridors, entrancing and natural in their feel, are fully realized in every sense. The casting is superb throughout, and great attention to nuance and detail was given even to smaller roles, the Gryffindor biased Quidditch announcer Lee Jordan, for example, seems to have stepped right out of the book. In fact all the central characters at Hogwarts excel in their roles. Some reviewers have criticized the film for sticking too closely to the book, wrongly I think, for the movie is strongest where its ties to the book are the most fully realized. In terms of plot and character development, however, the film makers chose to sidestep the stickier elements of relations between magical and non-magical people, the bigotry on both sides, and in particular the internal prejudice within the wizarding community towards "mudbloods," witches and wizards born of muggle parents, which is entirely ignored. This prejudice is central to the book's social and cultural dynamic in many ways, and its removal has a markedly simplifying effect. It also takes away some of the book's more humorous and delicate touches. For example, when Hermione Granger, who we know from the book was born of muggle parents, takes leave of Harry and Ron for Christmas break, in the movie she urges them to search for Nicolas Flamel and then simply walks off. In the book however, Ron, who is of an old wizarding family, urges her to ask her parents if they know who Flamel is because "'It'd be safe to ask them.' 'Very safe, as they're both dentists,' Hermione replied." The one area which I think the film did unwisely to short change the book was the key dialogue sequence between Quirrell and Harry in the movie's climax. It's a remarkable exchange which resolves a slew of hanging questions. The shortened version in the film is distinctly unsatisfying. Perhaps the most important
thing, however, that will emerge from the movie is that it will educate young
readers in the profound, though often subtle, distinctions between the mediums
of books and film. Many children asked to read Stuart Little will respond,
"Augh, I've seen the movie." This time however, because so many
children know Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone so very, very well,
it will be different. Intensely aware of what is and isn't in the film, and of
any changes in dialogue and tone, they will be drawn into contemplating and
understanding the unique strengths and potentialities of two distinct but
complimentary mediums. |
