Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone 2001 123movies

Watch: Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone 2001 123movies, Full Movie Online – This is the tale of Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), an ordinary eleven-year-old boy serving as a sort of slave for his aunt and uncle who learns that he is actually a wizard and has been invited to attend the Hogwarts School for Witchcraft and Wizardry. Harry is snatched away from his mundane existence by Rubeus Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane), the groundskeeper for Hogwarts, and quickly thrown into a world completely foreign to both him and the viewer. Famous for an incident that happened at his birth, Harry makes friends easily at his new school. He soon finds, however, that the wizarding world is far more dangerous for him than he would have imagined, and he quickly learns that not all wizards are ones to be trusted..
Plot: Harry Potter has lived under the stairs at his aunt and uncle’s house his whole life. But on his 11th birthday, he learns he’s a powerful wizard—with a place waiting for him at the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. As he learns to harness his newfound powers with the help of the school’s kindly headmaster, Harry uncovers the truth about his parents’ deaths—and about the villain who’s to blame.
Smart Tags: #magic #wizard #orphan #school_of_magic #based_on_novel #train #unicorn #bully #forest #ghost #quidditch #evil_wizard #best_friend #friendship #magic_wand #good_versus_evil #witch #creature #forehead_scar #teacher #serpent

Find Alternative – Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone 2001, Streaming Links:

123movies | FMmovies | Putlocker | GoMovies | SolarMovie | Soap2day

Ratings:

	7.6/10 Votes: 777,147
	81% | RottenTomatoes
	65/100 | MetaCritic
	N/A Votes: 23628 Popularity: 206.41 | TMDB

Reviews:

Alright first lets start with my problems with this movie.
Some of the effects do not hold up and that can take away from the magic or suspense.
The child actors are not very good at acting in this movie.
It is way to easy to nitpick this movie and all the nitpicks can be very distracting.
I think the main theme was used way to much in the beginning and that kind of took the magic out of the main theme for me.
I personally did not get sucked into this world which made me kind of bored at times.
People love the harry potter movies but these movies don’t really click with me when it comes to characters, the lore, and the magic and I think the full story of harry potter is to drawn out and I just want the movies to get to the point.
For me if the ending of the film is not very satisfying my respect for the movie drops a ton and I don’t think the ending of this movie was very satisfying!
The villain in this movie is super basic.
Now on to the good stuff!
I like how most of the scenes build up the characters, show us some magic, and it builds up the mystery!
I like the sets and costumes a lot!
I like most of the music!

Ahh, the magic begins.

Harry Potter is an Orphan who on his eleventh birthday discovers he’s a wizard and is called to term at Hogwarts School. But Harry is soon to find out that his past, and his destiny, is a truly remarkable, magical, and terrifying thing.

Harry Potter And The Philosopher’s Stone arrived in a blaze of publicity, one of the most hyped and talked about motion pictures of the decade had finally arrived. The box office was guaranteed to bulge based on fandom book base alone, regardless of if the film got bad word of mouth or not, it was destined to be a monster smash hit. To someone like me who to this day has never read any of the Harry Potter books, it was easy for me to view objectively without comparison to the source – I enjoyed it immensely upon theatre release, and I still enjoy it equally as much now.

Director Christopher Columbus, I believe has wisely stayed loyal to the source material, and thus pleased the literature masses. Yet not all newcomers to the party were that taken by the magic on show, that’s a little baffling to me because the budget explodes from the screen at every turn. Oliver Twist like sets form the marvellous Diagon Alley, dream like smoke cloaks the splendid Hogwarts Express, the school itself is a monolithic delight nestling in among eerie mountains – and what about the exhilarating introduction of Quidditch? Pulsating and frantic with no amount of devilment to keep us intrigued throughout.

The characters are all perfectly formed in the first two thirds of the film, here Columbus pulls off a masterstroke by interjecting the character arcs with dashes of wonder so that we the audience never gets bored. The final reel plays out solidly as per the mysterious “who done it” core of the piece, but it’s down to the previous work in the film that we actually care come the finale. Some great casting of the adults really helps to make the film triumph, with Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane (one of the best casting jobs of the decade I would say), Richard Harris, Alan Rickman and Zoe Wanamaker all doing excellent work here. The kids are all newcomers that overnight were to become household names, all fresh faced and wet behind the ears, Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint & Tom Felton are a delight to watch, and they all help to keep the feeling of charm constantly glowing up on the screen.

Owls here, witches there, what’s that strange three headed dog doing over there? The Harry Potter franchise begins with a bang and a whip of the wand, and I and gazillions of others personally love it. 8/10

It’s a true adaptation, but lacks an edge like the novel. *** (out of four)
HARRY POTTER / (2001) *** (out of four)

Here’s a method of evaluating a movie based on previously published material: ask yourself if the film makes you want to read the material from which it is based?

Before the release of “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone,” I was one of the few remaining souls who had not read J.K. Rowling’s fantasy book series. After screening the first film installment, I did want to read the book. Borrowing the novel from a family member, I briefly skimmed over the chapters. The book’s intelligence and similarities with the film really surprised me.

With over 100 million copies sold in over 46 different languages, J.K. Rowling’s best-selling series of books has become a worldwide phenomenon. Naturally, with soaring expectations abound, the filmmakers felt great pressure to create a faithful adaptation. They have. This film is essentially a visualization of the words in the novel, with very few differences.

That said, the film does run into a few conflicts with the book’s story. The middle of the movie has nowhere to go. It’s like a false second act; almost nothing of major significance occurs in this period of the film. The young characters wander from scene to scene with nothing much to do and nothing much to say. We’re left with a grand display of eye-popping special effects.

“Harry Potter” certainly dazzles us with a solid beginning and an engaging final act, however. We first meet a young wizard boy named Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe). Soon after the film opens, the boy discovers he has magical powers. He’s then thrust into an enchanting world of sorcery, magic, and witchcraft. He’s sent to a school for young wizard children, where he meets new friends, learns about magic, and participates in fun competitions. But someone at the school doesn’t like Harry, as mysterious events begin to occur. Harry soon finds himself in the middle of a diabolical scheme of revenge. Who is the culprit and what do they want with Harry?

The film asks some involving questions. Too bad it doesn’t give enough depth to the side characters or subplots. We don’t really care about the mystery because we don’t know enough about the suspects. The movie does conclude with a twist, but it doesn’t encourage another examination of the movie. It lacks a foundation altogether. The story spends so much time foreshadowing the villain’s identity, it is pointless for the story to abandon its proceeding plot points and develop a new villain at the end. The book gets away with this; the movie does not.

After his gentle “Home Alone” and sweet-natured “Stepmom,” many questioned the ability of director Chris Columbus to bring a sense of darkness to the story-and for good reason. “Harry Potter” contains charming, likable characters and a rich pallet of lush, inventive images. Unfortunately, the film lacks an edge. It’s missing the dark atmosphere Rowling’s novel so vividly brought to life. Columbus does construct some memorable sequences, but the individual scenes themselves are much better than the movie as a whole.

Despite it’s childish story and pre-teen characters, many define “Harry Potter” as a film for all ages. While that’s debatable, during my screening, adults were plowing through the isles every five minutes. Going to the bathroom? Getting drink refills? Buying concessions? Who knows? But not a single child budged from their seat. Their eyes were glued to the big screen.

Conclusion: It’s a sure-fire experience for children, especially if they’ve read the books. But adults may not encounter the same enticement as kids. Then again, if I had nothing better to do than to count the people leaving the theater, why am I recommending the film?

Other Information:

Original Language en
Runtime 2 hr 32 min (152 min), 2 hr 39 min (159 min) (extended)
Budget 125000000
Revenue 976475550
Status Released
Rated PG
Genre Adventure, Family, Fantasy
Director Chris Columbus
Writer J.K. Rowling, Steve Kloves
Actors Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Richard Harris
Country United Kingdom, United States
Awards Nominated for 3 Oscars. 18 wins & 69 nominations total
Production Company N/A
Website N/A

Technical Information:

Sound Mix DTS-ES, Dolby Digital EX, SDDS (8 channels), 12-Track Digital Sound, IMAX 6-Track, DTS (DTS: X), Dolby Atmos (re-release)
Aspect Ratio 2.39 : 1
Camera Panavision Panaflex Millennium XL, Panavision Primo Lenses, Panavision Panaflex Millennium, Panavision Primo Lenses, Panavision Panaflex Platinum, Panavision Primo Lenses
Laboratory Technicolor, London, UK
Film Length 4,248 m (Spain)
Negative Format 35 mm (Kodak Vision 500T 5279)
Cinematographic Process Digital Intermediate (4K) (2017 remaster), Super 35
Printed Film Format IMAX Digital, IMAX Laser, 35 mm (anamorphic) (Kodak Vision 2383)