Réalisation:
Chris ColumbusScénario:
Steve KlovesPhotographie:
John SealeMusique:
John WilliamsActeurs·trices:
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Robbie Coltrane, Tom Felton, Richard Harris, Fiona Shaw, Ian Hart, John Hurt, Richard Griffiths (plus)VOD (4)
Résumés(1)
Harry Potter, un jeune orphelin, est élevé par son oncle Vernon et sa tante Pétunia qui le détestent. Alors qu'il était haut comme trois pommes, ces derniers lui ont raconté que ses parents étaient morts dans un accident de voiture. Le jour de son onzième anniversaire, Harry reçoit la visite inattendue d'un homme gigantesque se nommant Rubeus Hagrid. Celui-ci lui révèle qu'il est en fait le fils de deux puissants magiciens et qu'il possède lui aussi d'extraordinaires pouvoirs... (Warner Bros. FR)
(plus)Vidéo (3)
Critiques (12)
Two decades have passed and the film that started it all hasn't aged a day. It's hard to say whether Chris Columbus knew what enormous phenomenon that was undertaking, but I am incredibly grateful to him for it. Without him, I would have never gotten into movies, but most importantly, I would never have discovered the beloved subject matter of the books. And the nostalgia while watching "our new celebrities" haunted by Severus Snape is truly immeasurable. It may not the best installment, but it is truly the first.
()
A slavish, unimaginative, and routine adaptation that has the ungrateful task of drowning the whole first half in slavish, unimaginative (what a pity given its magical nature) and merely routine introductions of the characters and their world. There's not much to criticize, but it's also completely without invention ideas of its own. Which is true of most of Columbus' movies. There is not one originally filmed scene, not a single interesting camera angle; simply nothing. It's as if a robot made the movie, page by page. And the extended version is worse because the extra scenes are not only completely unnecessary, but are as mundane as everything else. The casting of the child actors is quite successful but the acting is not great; yet it is slowly getting better with each episode. The adult “back-up" cast is invariably great.
()
I know that as an ordinary muggle I have no say in this, but why on earth didn't the creators conjure up a better lead? Daniel Radcliffe is awfully plankish, even though I can't expect miracles from a rookie. And I would also expect that in a project like this, some of the visual effects wouldn't be so blatantly digital. And while I'm criticising, Williams's music isn't one of the strong points either. I find Williams quite repetitive, and part of the main motif reminds me strikingly of one of the motifs in Schindler's List. On the other hand, the Quidditch scene was good and the the pawns with two swords in the chess game were cool. I also liked John Cleese’s appearances. And one more thing, I’ve made up my mind, sod cars, I’m getting a Nimbus 2000…
()
Ummm… I was forced by circumstance to see it. Yes, it's visually perfect, but for God's sake, I don't understand what that the guy with glasses was doing. It was too serious for a fairy tale, too infantile for fantasy, not funny enough for a comedy, and not adventurous enough for an adventure film. Columbus reminds me of a craftsman who didn't want (couldn't) smuggle any of his own ideas into the story. A perfectly done commercial product, nothing more. The fault is probably in me, Harry Potter made me very bored even after I read a few pages. We were not meant for each other, and Rowling is never going to be poor... And neither am I, so why worry?
()
Photos (236)
Photo © 2001 Warner Bros
![Harry Potter à l'école des sorciers - Film](http://image.pmgstatic.com/cache/resized/w663/files/images/film/photos/162/903/162903357_188eff.jpg)
Annonces