Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's (Philosopher's) Stone: Book-To-Film Adaptation

On the highly anticipated day of November 16, 2001, avid fans of the Harry Potter book series busted into theatres across the globe with purpose, in a desperate attempt to finally catch a glimpse of their favorite characters’ Big Screen adaptations. As these fans left the cinema, however, many of them immediately found something (regardless of how miniscule) to complain about.

And while Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s (or, before many of you exit this tab in sheer disgust – Philosopher’s) Stone ended up being perhaps the most true to the novel, in comparison with all eight of the “Warner Bros.” productions, the vast majority of hardcore Potter fans still felt strangely disappointed by this movie.

In actuality, I am not suggesting that every single minor difference between the novel and the film must be highly scrutinized. I am not suggesting that we should collectively revolt because we do not get to see Professor Snape officiating a Quidditch match in the film. I am not suggesting that we should throw our arms up in disbelief at the idea that Harry sees only his parents in the Mirror of Erised, rather than the entirety of his extended family. I am not suggesting that we should angrily shake our heads when Firenze is the only centaur to meet Harry in the Forbidden Forest, whilst Ronan and Bane remain undiscovered . . . okay, you get the picture.

The fact of the matter remains that I am not even suggesting that this is in any way a bad film. On the contrary, I firmly believe that Chris Columbus (the one who didn’t sail the ocean blue) was probably the most faithful in his page-to-screen adaptations of all four Harry Potter film directors.

However, I am suggesting that Potter fans on the whole should definitely delve deeper into the differences between the books and the movies, before simply deciding that the films hold zero relevance and should be discarded like moldy bread.

With that being said, let us cut to the chase:

We’ll start with perhaps the most obvious difference: Petunia and Dudley Dursley aren’t blonde.

Okay, so maybe this bears no weight whatsoever – it really doesn’t affect the plot at all, so why should we be concerned? 

Maybe we shouldn’t. But when Rowling continuously insists that both characters have blonde hair, what exactly was the point of casting an actor and actress who both have dark hair? Were there no other legitimate candidates? Were wigs or hair dye completely out of the question? Moving on.

Let’s reminisce about the Boa Constrictor at the Zoo. Need I say more?

In the novel, Rowling claims that Harry spoke to the snake (in Parseltongue, as we are later informed) and released a Boa Constrictor from its cage – in the film, however, the snake is said to be a Burmese Python. While this may not be of the highest relevance, it’s still a tad bit irritating for the die-hard fan: why not actually get the snake right?

The film, however, totally redeems itself (I’m looking at you, Dumb and Dumber), and changes the ensuing scene from Dudley leaping backwards as the glass vanishes and the snake slithers off, to Dudley falling inside and actually getting trapped in the cage. Let’s be honest, the latter is much more visually satisfying. And we’re off to dissimilarities of higher significance. 

Shall we talk about my good friend and yours – Draco Malfoy? In the novel, Harry first meets Malfoy at Madam Malkin’s robe shop in Diagon Alley (what did he say, dear?). In this confrontation, Malfoy is blatantly rude to Harry, discussing Hagrid in a way which he finds quite distasteful. In the movie, however, Harry doesn’t meet Malfoy until they’re inside of the castle, where Harry is forced to make a quick decision about where his loyalties should lie – with Ron or with Draco. I’ll give both parties (novel and film) credit in this situation – it was necessary for Rowling to introduce Malfoy in Diagon Alley, whereas the memorable scene in the movie worked splendidly. To this day, however, I can’t help but wonder why Harry didn’t choose to befriend Draco, as he was such a kind young boy (Yes, I’m being sarcastic).

And now, why don’t we board the Hogwarts Express – but . . . in July or in September? I’m doubtful that you’ve never considered this, but in the novel, Harry’s first trip to King’s Cross is with the Dursley’s (who leave him there despite the fact that he’s somehow expected to find Platform Nine-And-Three-Quarters). In the film, however, after buying his school supplies in Diagon Alley, Harry is accompanied by Hagrid to King’s Cross, which leaves all of us wondering . . . exactly what did the two of them do together in the entire month of August, which has remained unaccounted for? Perhaps this was a hole in the filmmakers’ plot, perhaps this was just plain unimportant, but it does seem a bit curious. (Yes, I said ‘curious’, Mr. Ollivander.)

Next, let us discuss The Sorting Hat. Throughout the seven-novel series, The Sorting Hat bursts into song thrice. Each song is very carefully created by Ms. J.K. Rowling, and possesses quite witty lyrical rhymes. However, we set a precedent in the first film: a minute or two of screen time will not be spared for the musical talents of a singing hat. C’mon, Warner Bros., that would’ve been dope (calm down, Hufflepuffs, I don’t have any).

Now that I think about it, the first film set yet another unfriendly precedent: the intolerable idea that Peeves the Poltergeist would not be a significant character in the on-screen portrayal of the series. In fact, the movies would simply choose to pretend that Peeves never existed at Hogwarts. How can we, as the Harry Potter generation, be satisfied with the idea that Peeves is not roaming the castle wreaking havoc at the most inopportune of times? (Inconceivable, Vizzini!) 

And then, there is the arrival of Harry’s Nimbus 2000. In the book, Professor McGonagall keeps Harry’s broomstick delivery a secret, so as to keep his position as Gryffindor seeker . . . well, a secret. In the film, however, Harry’s broomstick delivery is quite prominent – apparently it wasn’t exactly important to conceal the fact that he was the youngest Gryffindor Quidditch player in a century. 

Also, while we’re on the subject of Quidditch, let us discuss one more thing. In the film, Hermione leads Harry to a plaque which shows that Harry’s father, James Potter, was at one time the Gryffindor Seeker. Meanwhile, in the book, this scene never occurred. Moreover, in a Scholastic interview in 2000, J.K. Rowling herself confirmed that James Potter was actually a Chaser. (Ya dun goofed, Warner Bros.)

As you consider the aforementioned bit of obscure trivia, let us proceed to the overall character of Neville Longbottom. While his importance to the story may be limited in the first novel, I feel that the movie drastically undervalues the development of his character. Although it may be true that the movie needed to focus on establishing the chemistry of our lovable trio, leaving Neville out of the mix just didn’t seem like quite the right way to do this. 

In the novel, Neville joins Harry, Ron, and Hermione on their nighttime adventure as they are deceived by Draco Malfoy into attending a ‘wizarding duel’ (this chapter is also conveniently omitted from the film). Instead of attending the duel as promised, however, Malfoy has alerted the caretaker Argus Filch that students are to be out of bed, which leads to a thrilling chase scene around the castle in which the trio (and Neville) first discovers Fluffy, the three-headed-dog who is guarding the trapdoor which leads to the Sorcerer’s Stone. (If you are still following me, congratulations.)

Nevertheless, in the movie, Neville isn’t present in this scene, and the trio merely stumble upon Fluffy when the staircase which they are climbing shifts in favor of the prohibited third-floor corridor (which is lame on both levels – I mean, after all, it is a staircase). 

While this may seem to some like senseless repetition of the same, dull topic, Neville Longbottom is undoubtedly one of the most lovable characters in the Harry Potter world. Who isn’t rooting for the awkward, misfit young boy with magically-injured parents and a stern, rather inconsiderate grandmother? Thus, the transition which Neville undergoes (even in just his first year at Hogwarts) seems a rather important story to tell.

In the novel, Neville also joins Harry and company on an eerie adventure into the depths of the Forbidden Forest. In the movie, however, Neville doesn’t receive a detention with the group, nor are viewers able to watch as Neville gets in a fight with a big-headed Draco Malfoy at one of the Quidditch matches. 

There are a plethora of scenes in the novel where Ron implores Neville to stand up for himself, and without these scenes in the film, his evolution seems rather unimportant. The fact that Neville stands up to the trio when they decide to sneak out in an effort to prevent Severus Snape (*cough cough*) from obtaining the Sorcerer’s Stone, seems quite sudden and unanticipated in the film, as the backstory has not been fully developed. And thus, my Neville rant has come to an abrupt halt.

Let us backtrack briefly to discuss the differentiation in the reasoning behind our protagonist’s trip into the Forbidden Forest. Good old Norbert, Rubeus Hagrid’s Norwegian Ridgeback. 

In the novel, Norbert is taken to the tallest tower of the castle by Harry and Hermione to give to Charlie Weasley and his friends, who occupy their time by taming dragons in Romania. Protected by Harry’s Invisibility Cloak, Harry and Hermione are undetected on their ascent to the high tower, but when they accidentally forget his cloak on the way back, they end up being caught and punished by Argus Filch.

On the contrary, in the film, Norbert’s escape is not shown. Rather, it is said that Norbert is sent away by Dumbledore, to Charlie Weasley perhaps, and the detention is simply due to the ever-pesky Malfoy sticking his nose into “famous” Harry Potter’s business. If I have to be honest, I’m giving the nod to Ms. Rowling’s novel once again.

If you’ve survived the past 1,700 words, you’re probably now wondering: what in the world could possibly be left to complain about, in a movie that is so very similar to its original novel? The answer to that very question is simply: one more thing. THERE IS NO POTIONS TASK. 

Have you ever stopped to consider that Hermione’s golden moment in her first year at Hogwarts (and the first time that we ever truly question why she was placed in Gryffindor, instead of Ravenclaw) was not included in this film? Instead of moving forward with Harry in pursuit of the Sorcerer’s Stone, Hermione remains with an injured Ron in the midst of a chess war zone, as Harry sets off by himself to face a top-notch evil wizard. 

Meanwhile, in the novel, there were six barriers between someone who sought the Sorcerer’s Stone, and someone who actually possessed the Sorcerer’s Stone – Fluffy, Devil’s Snare, An Enchanted Key, A Game of Wizard’s Chess, A Troll, and Numerous Deadly Poisons. In the movie, however, only the first four barriers are included.

I’m going to be quite honest, I don’t as much mind having a collapsed troll omitted, but without Hermione’s Potion-examining brilliance, Professor Quirrell is riding off into the . . . well, I wouldn’t consider life with Lord Voldemort on the back of your head ‘the sunset’, so that’s probably not the best of expressions. (It’s a good thing we’re not discussing Professor Lupin, am I right?)

Okay, okay, I’m finally done complaining. But then, I must admit that there are quite a few moments in the film where I, personally, believe that the use of improvisation worked rather flawlessly. I will leave you with ten examples of this concept, as it seems quite necessary to give credit where credit is due.

First, in the film, Hermione greets Harry and Ron for the first time by repairing Harry’s tape-bound glasses. In the novel, however, she’s an “insufferable know-it-all” who doesn’t do much to prove it in introduction. Props to you, moviemakers, for nailing down the core of Hermione Granger in the opening stages of her characterhood (because that’s most definitely a word – get lost, Webster’s).

Second, in the film, Harry and Ron are late to their Transfiguration Class, and Ron wonders aloud what the look on “old McGonagall’s face” would be like if they were caught. McGonagall then transforms from her Animagus cat-form into a human, and makes them look like a pair of fools. (At least they don’t ask for a map to find their seats.)

Third, in the film, Seamus Finnigan attempts to turn his water into rum, and it explodes quite nastily in his face. Unfortunately, this scene never occurred in the book, but once again, the filmmakers have quickly rooted down the very core of a character into the viewers’ mind.

Fourth, in the film, Ron shouts “UP!” and gets smacked in the face by his broomstick during their first flying lesson. In the book, such a scene never occurred, and I can’t help but wonder why. It’s just such a Ron thing to do (R.I.P. Rupert Grint’s face). 

Fifth, in the novel (yes, I’m switching it up now), when Hermione attempts to prevent Harry from chasing after Malfoy during the aforementioned flying lesson, he ignores her, and she does not pursue the matter any further. In the film, however, Emma Watson is given that praise-worthy line: “WHAT – AN – IDIOT.”

Sixth, in the novel, Hermione often prioritizes receiving a proper education over her life, and she and Ron frequently have rows (no, I’m not British, but I hope I’m using the term properly) over everyday living. In the film, however, after being informed that expulsion is worse than death, Rupert Grint utters that wonderful phrase: “She needs to sort out her priorities.”

Seventh, in the novel, Ron seems completely fine with Hermione performing “Petrificus Totalus!” on Neville (thus putting him in a full body-bind). However, in the movie, Ron seems shocked and scared at the prospect that Hermione has this sort of power at such a young age. Perhaps this is merely an actor’s portrayal of a character, but judging by the fact that Ron is deathly afraid of even the smallest of spiders, the latter seems like a much more suitable reaction.

Eighth, in the film, the keys that Harry must peruse via broomstick to get past Professor Flitwick’s protection and to the Sorcerer’s Stone, chase him towards the next room and smash into the door violently. In the novel, the keys do nothing of the sort, and I can’t help but wonder why they were so lenient, considering that they were amongst the last lines of defense for an item which grants never-ending life. (Way to go, Ravenclaws, your Head of House almost brought Voldemort back to power.)

Ninth, in the novel, Professor Quirrell snaps his fingers to bind Harry with tight ropes, and when Harry touches Quirrell’s skin, it is burned by a deep magical enchantment which has unknowingly been set upon Harry by his mother. In the film, however, Professor Quirrell snaps his fingers and the room’s perimeter becomes a ring of fire (and it burns, burns, burns) to prevent Harry from escaping. Later, when Harry touches Quirrell’s skin, his body simply turns to stone and disintegrates. The film adaptation of the scene would seemingly resonate with the viewer more so than the book (in my opinion), and thus, I tip my cap to Warner Bros. once more. (I’m sorry, Ms. Rowling).

Tenth, and finally, in the movie, when Hermione alludes to the fact that it’s going to be sad going home, Harry implies that Hogwarts is already his true home. While there is no such discussion in the novel (rather, a hearty exchange about the potential of terrorizing Dudley with magical threats over the summer), it is a quite effective close to an all-around solid film, and sets the stage for many more adventures to come. Of course, Hogwarts is Harry’s true home, as well as many of ours.

Understandably, for the die-hard Potter fans that have successfully resisted the temptation to throw their electronic device across the room while reading the latter stages of this blog, you probably have many opinions related to the relationship between book and film (including significant differences which I have undoubtedly missed, and perhaps even assessments which you strongly disagree with).

To this, I say, thank you for considering my thoughts, and please feel free to sound off in the comments section below.

If you're interested in my assessment of "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets", click here.

If you're interested in a Severus Snape character analysis, click here.

If you're interested in Hinny and Harmony, click here.