NPR Relevancy Review: NPR
Mount Peter / WireImage
The movie that brought the wizarding world to life – from Hogwarts to Hedwig to Man-Not-A-Name – is 20 years old.
“Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone” premiered on November 16, 2001, four years after the first book of the series hit shelves.
Seven books, eight movies, many amusement parks, millions of books sold, a Broadway show and some spinoff later, franchising has left its mark over millions of muggles. It has influenced everything from popular culture to children’s literature to classroom curriculum.
To celebrate, we’re dusting Our Pensieve to review NPR’s coverage of the first film.
NPR’s reviewer calls this a “copy” of the book
LA time Film critic Kenneth Turan recommends a mixed review but overall positive, which focuses on the film’s extreme loyalty to the book.
“Just as the NFL’s offensive linemen contracted to protect a valuable defender, every Harry Potter hire is done with the intent of ensuring that the throngs of fanatical fans will not must be disappointed,” he said on television.
Turan describes it as both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, he said, “woe to those who would mess with that story.” On the other hand, even an impressive copy doesn’t leave much room for risk, protest, or celebration.
Still, he applauds the filmmakers who have built a world of visual magic and cut the lengthy book short without resorting to cliched lines or clichés. And he called the top trio of child actors “excellent” (despite being mistakenly referred to as Ron as Fred, and also giving word of mouth to Robbie Coltrane’s Hagrid).
“Despite its imitative nature, what ultimately saved ‘Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone’ was what made it in the first place: [Author J.K.] Turan concluded that Rowling’s special imagination.
It also resonates with kids and parents
Of course, critical acclaim isn’t everything. What did the young Potterheads do about the movie?
AFP/AFP via Getty Images
Late NPR reporter Margot Adler talking to a wide range of children and their parents as they left a movie theater in Manhattan. She found that she loved the movie the most, but loved the book more.
“I loved the book,” said one young viewer. “It explains more.”
“I thought the book was very detailed and the movie was great but it just went a bit too fast,” said another.
Not everyone agrees.
“I like the movie better,” suggested one viewer. “It’s great to see all the things you imagine.”
And many of those surveyed were impressed with the visuals: the wizarding board game, the lively paintings on the walls of Hogwarts, and the actors bringing the characters to life. One parent said that Dumbledore looked exactly as expected, while one child said they envisioned Snape completely differently.
However, some viewers weren’t impressed with the music, and Adler notes that makes a lot of sense: Most people don’t have music in mind when they’re reading a book.
For parents in the audience, Adler said, the most common reaction was a sense of relief “that no matter what the Harry Potter movie is about, whether it succeeds in portraying this or fails. in portraying the other, it’s not going to do that. It scares a lot of parents.”
“It won’t destroy the soft plants that the Potter phenomenon helped cultivate,” she explains. “Their children suddenly sat on the sofa reading for hours, the whole family gathered together, reading aloud.”
If you’re in the mood to go even deeper in memory, listen to another passage from Adler: the first story NPR ever aired about Harry Potter, above All things Considered year 1998.
Among other gems, it includes a quote from a bookstore manager surprised at having sold “hundreds” of copies and Adler’s (correct) prophecy that the word “muggle” will be successful.
This story originally appeared on NS Morning version live blogs.