Harry Potter

With all the new movies based on books or comics that are out, people wonder why Hollywood keeps doing it. Some say they're greedy people, just doing it for the money, and others say that it helps bring the book to life. But I say, why ruin a good book, like Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, with bad lighting and adequate actors? I say that we don't have to because the comparison between the two forms of entertainment is a landslide victory for the book.

You may ask why this bothers me so much. Well little things, like less character involvement, can annoy me. For example, in the first year of Hogwarts, Harry was running away from the caretaker, Mr. Filch. In the book, he was with Hermione Granger, Ron Weasley, and Neville Longbottom. What got me rattled was that in the movie, he was with only Hermione and Ron. True, Neville is a secondary character but no less important as the storyline continues.

Also, I feel the movie can't really grasp at how mean Harrys family is. Since his parents death, a year after he was born, he had to live with his Aunt Petunia, Uncle Vernon, and Cousin Dudley. They were truely cruel to him as he grew and always favored their son with tons of present and candy. What they did to Harry through his life could have put them in jail.

Like most other movies, like To Kill A Mockingbird, it was less funny than the book. In the fourth book of Harry Potter, the school nurse, of the "muggle" school, was worried about Dudleys weight and told his parents that he was equivilant in weight to a baby whale. The movie, as most would agree, did not portray Dudleys, nor his fathers, weight well enough. Harry always ...