Published on
I have a particular fondness for the first two Harry Potter films, both directed by Christopher Columbus. They approach the source material with genuine amazement and wonder, using that sense of discovery as the foundation for a colorful, vibrant world that draws the viewer in and makes them feel part of it. These films stand in clear contrast to the later entries, which progressively drained the color palette to the point that the final two-part installment might as well have been shot in black and white.
I’m assuming anyone reading this is already familiar with the story, but for those who somehow aren’t—one can only wonder what rock you’ve been living under.
Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone follows eleven-year-old Harry Potter, an orphan raised by his unkind relatives, who discovers on his birthday that he is a wizard and has been accepted to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. As Harry enters the magical world, he befriends Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger, learns about his parents’ mysterious deaths, and uncovers the truth about his connection to the dark wizard Voldemort. While adjusting to life at Hogwarts, Harry becomes entangled in a secret surrounding the Philosopher’s Stone, a powerful object hidden within the school, and must face trials that test his courage, loyalty, and sense of right and wrong to prevent the Stone from falling into the wrong hands.
For a two-and-a-half-hour film, the story is fairly light on plot. The Philosopher’s Stone itself takes a back seat for much of the first two acts, as most of the runtime is devoted to exploring the magical world—and a good deal of that can be described as exposition, meant entirely as a compliment. We experience this world alongside Harry over the course of a full school year, discovering its rules, quirks, and wonders as he does. The filmmakers clearly had the luxury of planning multiple installments, which allowed them to take their time and build a rich, immersive setting. In an original standalone film, this kind of exposition would likely have been confined to the first thirty minutes, but here it’s used to give the story an epic sense of scale, with new details and discoveries unfolding well into the third act, to the film’s benefit.
Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone boasts a strong ensemble cast of British actors, with Robbie Coltrane stealing the show as the warm and larger-than-life Hagrid. The late, great Alan Rickman also makes a memorable impression as Professor Snape, initially positioned as the story’s apparent villain. While the three young leads are still quite raw in terms of acting, they nevertheless manage to carry the weight of such an epic production, which is an impressive achievement in itself.
Released in 2001, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone is very much a special effects-driven film. It was one of the movies that truly pushed the limits of what VFX could achieve at the time, bringing the magical world vividly to life with fully computer-generated characters and scenes obviously shot in front of green screens. Some of the effects haven’t aged perfectly—particularly the troll scene, which can feel a bit rough by today’s standards—but it’s not nearly as bad as some critics make it out to be. That said, certain characters, like the troll and a centaur later on, do occasionally drift into uncanny valley territory.
While the later, darker entries in the series are often more highly regarded, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, in my opinion, is one of the most enjoyable to revisit. It radiates a sense of wonder and delight that immerses the viewer—a magic that, unfortunately, is largely lost in the later films.
