Talk:Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 08:05, 21 July 2007 editGran2 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers26,809 edits →Why the different name?: re.....← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 15:21, 4 November 2024 edit undoEsowteric (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers31,007 edits Undid test edit in revision 1255362167 by 159.242.68.42 (talk)Tag: Undo
(562 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Talk header}}
	{{WPHP\|class=B\|importance=Top}}
			{{British English}}
	{{FilmsWikiProject\|class=B\|importance=High}}
			{{Article history
	==Large Edit==
			\|action1=GAC
	I just made a large edit to the artice, removing several sections.
			\|action1date=31 July 2007
	The cast section was completely unnecessary, as it can be viewed in IMDB. The name alteration section pertains to the book primarily (because the movie follows the book). The music section is rather random, but if anyone feels the need to integrate it somewhere, here it is:
			\|action1link=Talk:Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film)#GA fail
			\|action1result=not listed
			\|action1oldid=147981683

			\|action2=GAC
	The film features a score composed by ], the fourth collaboration between the composer and director Chris Columbus. The score re-established John Williams as the top film composer, and leader of the ] style. The score features many themes, the main theme, or ], being featured at the beginning of every Harry Potter film so far.
			\|action2date=25 September 2007
			\|action2link=Talk:Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film)#GA Pass
			\|action2result=listed
			\|action2oldid=391618937

			\|action3=WPR
	] 02:30, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
			\|action3date=04:39, 12 January 2008
			\|action3link=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Films/Peer review/Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film)
			\|action3result=reviewed
			\|action3oldid=183655748

			\|action4=PR
	----
			\|action4date=19:20, 17 October 2010
	regarding the final inconsistency, Harry '''did''' see Diggory die in the goblet of fire, so this isn't as big of a deal as the article makes it seem.
			\|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film)/archive1
			\|action4result=reviewed
			\|action4oldid=391283823

			\|action5=FAC
	:Yes, that was the whole point -- the reason Harry saw the thestrals is because he saw Cedric's death at the end of GoF, not because he saw Quirrell "die" in the first book. There is no inconsistency, you're correct on that point. ] 01:36, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)
			\|action5date=21:11, 19 October 2010
			\|action5link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film)/archive1
			\|action5result=not promoted
			\|action5oldid=391618937

			\|topic=film
	:: There '''will be''' an inconsistency if the explanation for seeing the Thestrals (sp?) remains true to the book. In the Book universe, one can see the Thestrals after they have witnessed and had time to understand a death. In the movie universe, it will be four years since Harry saw someone die, and never saw the Thestrals in the intervening time. ] 14:46, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
			\|currentstatus=GA
			}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=GA\|
			{{WikiProject Film\|British=yes\|American=yes}}
			{{WikiProject Novels\|harry-potter-task-force=yes\|harry-potter-importance=low\|importance = low}}
			}}
			{{Archive box\|
			# ]
			# ]
			}}
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
			\|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
			\|maxarchivesize = 150K
			\|counter = 1
			\|minthreadsleft = 4
			\|minthreadstoarchive = 1
			\|algo = old(365d)
			\|archive = Talk:Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film)/Archive %(counter)d
			}}

	== Name inconsistencies ==

			{{Refideas
	I understand the name problem with the US and I had two comments:
			\|1={{cite web\|first=Jessica\|last=Wolf\|url=http://www.hive4media.com/news/html/Product_article.cfm?article_ID=2569\|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20020618083200/http://www.hive4media.com:80/news/html/Product_article.cfm?article_ID=2569\|title=Harry Potter DVD Features Include Games, More\|website=hive4media.com\|archivedate=June 18, 2002\|date=February 7, 2002\|accessdate=}}
	# The IMDB page uses "Sorceror's Stone" in the title and the page heading, so the imdb template title should also reflect that.
			}}
	# Can we get a poster for the UK version to use in the infobox? It's a little confusing to see "Philosopher" in the infobox banner and "Sorceror" in the poster.
	--] ] 17:50, May 11, 2005 (UTC)
	:OK, I was able to find the UK poster, so I made these changes. I'm still not thrilled with the formatting of the page, as the three images are hard to place on the page without muddling everything up, so if you have any suggestions on better layouts, please be bold and implement them. --] ] 18:02, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

			==''Philosopher's Stone'' vs ''Sorcerer's Stone'' debate summary==
	==Quirrel==
			<div class="boilerplate metadata rfa" style="background-color: #fff5f5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
	It says that in the film version Quirrel was "cremated" where Harry touched him, but I seem to remember him being turned to stone. Which is it?<br />
	] 18:13, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
	:If memory serves (I unfortunately don't have the DVD here to check), he turned to a statue of ash that then crumbled, similar to (SPOILER FOR INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE! SPOILER AHEAD!) what happened to two vampires in the Interview with the Vampire movie. So he looked like a stone statue at first, but he was actually turned to ash like a person who'd been cremated. --] 02:38, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

			The following summarizes archived debate discussions regarding motions to change the name of the article from the British ''Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone'' to the American ''Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone''. There are additional shorter discussions and queries on the same general subject that have also been archived along with the main discussions.
	== quidditch scene ==

			===Requested move===
	I seem to remember the scene where Lee Jordan, the announcer, and McGonagall fight over the mic being in the theatrical version, but it was absent from the DVD, even the deleted scenes. Did I just imagine this or did it really happen this way, I think I am right because my brother seemed to remember the same thing happening.
			The first major actionable discussion debate was proposed in July 2007 as a formal ] to ''''']''''', which was in turn in response to a discussion debate entitled ''Why the different name?''. Both are topics located at the ''']''', with the ''Why the different name?'' discussion included there as a preamble to the move request. The result of the ] move request survey: Three users (including one anonymous IP user) supported moving the article, to 16 users opposing the move. An ensuing discussion debate included 13 participants, with three firmly debating in support of the move, six firmly against, and three more appearing to be neutral acting as clerks: asking general questions, or making general observations without stating a clear position for or against. The conclusion was there was '''no consensus to move''' the article, and the subject was closed by a neutral non-participating third-party after 4 days.
	] 02:05, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
	:While I would have liked to have seen it, I'm sorry to see Lee's commentary is never biased in the movies and he and McGonagall do not argue. --''']''']''<font color="green">]</font>]'' <sup>(] \| ])</sup> 02:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

			===RfC: Title of this article===
	== Fullmetal Alchemist ==
			In January 2008 after another ''Title'' discussion, the general subject was taken up again as a formal ] on the title - see the ''']'''. Many of the participants in the original ''Move Request'' discussion rejoined, and many new ones joined in. There was no formal "poll" but rather a re-examination and discussion debate of the issues raised from the July debate. The discussion included approximately 25 participants, with 2 participants debating in support of changing the title to ''Sorcerer's Stone'', 22 debating against, and one neutral. After one month the RfC was closed by a neutral non-participating third-party. The precursor discussion from Aug-Dec 2007 that resulted in the RfC is included as a preamble. The subsequent ''Notice of Mediation'' announcement and discussion (see also '''Further Actions''' below) is tagged on at the end of the RfC subpage as a postscript.

			===Further actions===
	*There have been some rumors of the Philosopher's Stone in Harry Potter is the same type as in the one in "]" anime/manga, this is due to the fact that the versions of stone in both are exactly the same and can both grant large amounts of power.
			====Administrator's Noticeboard / Incidents====
			In mid-January 2008, some of the parties in support of the title change sought relief from ] - see . The inquiry was turned away within an hour as not an issue for ANI to resolve, but rather for ], with recommendations to take the dispute to an RfC, which was already underway but near to closing.

			====Request for Mediation====
	What does that mean and why is it here? Was ''Fullmetal Alchemist'' inspired by ''Harry Potter''? The ] is a legend that long predates these works of fiction. --] 05:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
			Parties in support of changing the title also sought relief from the ] - see ''''']'''''. The case was rejected after about 5 hours, as the involved parties did not agree to mediation.

			====Request for Arbitration====
	:Not to mention a large amount of differences in the creation of one in FMA and such...involving the use of many human souls and such...But that's not here or there. >.> ] 22:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
			Parties in support of the title change also sought relief from the ] - see . The Arbitrators declined and rejected the case as a content dispute, and the case was subsequently withdrawn without prejudice.

			===Similar discussion elsewhere===
	Yes, ] long predates either work of fiction and there is no reason for either to be connected. --] 06:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
			A similar discussion debate was held during April and July 2007. See ].
			</div>

			==Music Situation/Remove Conrad Pope's Credit==
	== Differences between European and North American versions ==
			Why are we crediting Orchestrator ]? There is no reason to. We should save his name for the ]. Also, he's not the ''only'' orchestrator for the first three Potters, seriously, why don't we just credit every single individual who was associated with the music? The music is by ] and no one else, why should we credit someone who didn't write a single piece of music for the film, but only arranged it? My opinion, remove his credit and relocate it to the soundtrack page, because if there isn't a credit for Pope on the Soundtrack page, why should there be a credit for him on the film's page? ''] ]'', 27 September 2010 (UTC)
	This is so I can clear something up on ]. Someone is claiming that the Canadian release of the film is different from the US version. It comes down to the name of the stone. We all know that the book was originally 'Philosopher's stone' but for some reason the US call it the 'Sorcerer's Stone'. This editor from the WP,DR page states that the Canadian version has scenes added to it where the characters say Philosopher's instead of Sorcerer's, thus changing the length of the film, thus making WP,DR out of sync with the film. Can someone confirm with me that, in the US release, the characters definitely call the stone the Sorcerer's Stone? --] 06:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

			== Small change ==
	==Harry, I am your father!==
	I think the HP1 movie' Harry<-->Voldi battle scene differs a lot from the HP1 book, but it is not mentioned in the article. The film scripts a quite Star Wars-like situation. "Let's become allies, hand over the stone and we can resurrect your beloved ones". This is more or less the same what what Palpatine says to Anakin after killing Mace Windu in SW:RoS. The HP1 book says nothing about resurrecting Harry's parents, why was this invented? JKR always emphasizies HP is not SW. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 20:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

			As the page is writtien in British English I changed "gotten" to "got". ] (]) 20:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
	==Japanese seiyū==
	Since there's nowhere else to put it...
	{\| class="wikitable"
	\|-
	!Character
	!English voice actor
	!Japanese seiyū
	\|-
	!Harry Potter
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Ronald Weasley
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Hermoine Granger
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Draco Malfoy
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Neville Longbottom
	\|]
	\|Something Uedo
	\|-
	!Oliver Wood
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Percy Weasley
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Fred Weasley
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!George Weasley
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Albus Dumbledore
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Minerva McGonagle
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Rubeus Hagrid
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Severus Snape
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Filius Flitwick
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Quirinus Quirrell
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Madam Hooch
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Argus Filch
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Molly Weasley
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Vernon Dursley
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Petunia Dursley
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Dudley Dursley
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Nearly Headless Nick
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Lord "He-Whom-We-Don't-Care-To-Name" Voldemort
	\|]
	\|]
	\|-
	!Mister Ollivander
	\|]
	\|]
	\|} ] 02:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

			== Needs an explanation as to why the name was changed in the US ==
	== References ==

			Nowhere in the article does it explain why the name was changed in the USA. Why? ] (]) 11:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
	Some of these references seem to be randomly assigned, having nothing to do with the sentences they are citing. Anyone know what happened? ] 19:18, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
			:We need reliable sources explaining the change. Here's an explanation: . <b>]<small> + ] + ]</small></b> 11:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

			== The American name of the first Harry Potter film ==
	And almost exactly half of them are pages written by some Brian Linder. How has this happened? ] 19:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

	~~:Because~~ ~~they~~ ~~just~~ ~~are?~~ Is ~~there~~ ~~really~~ ~~any~~ ~~problem,~~ ~~what~~ ~~sentences~~ do ~~you~~ ~~exactly~~ ~~mean.~~ ~~And~~ ~~yes~~ the ~~references~~ ~~are~~ ~~written~~ by ~~Brian~~ ~~Linder...~~ ~~why~~ ~~is that~~ a ~~problem~~, ~~IGN~~ is a ~~reliable~~ ~~source.~~.. ]~~<sup>~~]~~</sup>~~ 19:23, 15 ~~July~~ ~~2007~~ (UTC)		The easy solution to this disagreement is to list both names of the film in the title of the article and the article itself, identifying "Philosopher's Stone" with Europe, and "Sorcerer's Stone" with the U.S. ] (]) 20:51, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

			:The American name already redirects to this article and is listed promptly in the first sentence of the lead. This seems sufficient to me. ] (]) 21:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
	::I was just wondering if it was just because it was handy, or if there weren't other sources that said the same. It would probably be better to use something more definate where possible; for example, rather than speculation that filming might be taking place at London Zoo, and that it will probably be for the scene with the snake, if we could find something saying that filming of that scene took place at London Zoo. ] 22:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

			:It's fine as it is, coming out first in the UK, so using that title. The leading sentence already reads: {{tq\|Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (also known as Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in the United States)}}. <b>]<small> + ] + ]</small></b> 21:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
	== Why the different name? ==

	The article doesn't explain WHY the name is different in the US? ]<small><sup>(]) </sup><sub>(])</sub></small> 23:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
	:Well why should it? This is the film, the title was renamed for the book, so a reason should be included there. ]<sup>]</sup> 05:20, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
	::Quite right, sorry. I have found the explanation in that article. Cheers ]<small><sup>(]) </sup><sub>(])</sub></small> 09:33, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
	:::Don't worry, I was a bit rude, so don't mention it. ]<sup>]</sup> 15:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
	::This suggestion may garner some outrage, but maybe the title of the article should be changed to the American title. I am a Briton and not trying to be biased in any way here but it's just because it is an American film as it was produced by Warner Bros. based in Burbank, California. ] 07:59, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
	:::And yet it is a half British film, based on a British book, written by a British author who served as an Executive producer. The whole cast was British, it was filmed it Britain, it was produced by a Briton. It was released it Britain first, under this title. The only American things about it are WBs, Columbus, Kloves and John Williams. It should remain in its current name. ]<sup>]</sup> 08:05, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:21, 4 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 12 months

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 31, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed
September 25, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
January 12, 2008	WikiProject peer review	Reviewed
October 17, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
October 19, 2010	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
Current status: Good article

This article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film: British / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
	This article has an archived peer review.

Novels: Harry Potter Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Harry Potter task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Wolf, Jessica (February 7, 2002). "Harry Potter DVD Features Include Games, More". hive4media.com. Archived from the original on June 18, 2002.

Philosopher's Stone vs Sorcerer's Stone debate summary

The following summarizes archived debate discussions regarding motions to change the name of the article from the British Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone to the American Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. There are additional shorter discussions and queries on the same general subject that have also been archived along with the main discussions.

Requested move

The first major actionable discussion debate was proposed in July 2007 as a formal move request to Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (film), which was in turn in response to a discussion debate entitled Why the different name?. Both are topics located at the Move Request subpage, with the Why the different name? discussion included there as a preamble to the move request. The result of the straw poll move request survey: Three users (including one anonymous IP user) supported moving the article, to 16 users opposing the move. An ensuing discussion debate included 13 participants, with three firmly debating in support of the move, six firmly against, and three more appearing to be neutral acting as clerks: asking general questions, or making general observations without stating a clear position for or against. The conclusion was there was no consensus to move the article, and the subject was closed by a neutral non-participating third-party after 4 days.

RfC: Title of this article

In January 2008 after another Title discussion, the general subject was taken up again as a formal Request for Comment on the title - see the Title RfC subpage. Many of the participants in the original Move Request discussion rejoined, and many new ones joined in. There was no formal "poll" but rather a re-examination and discussion debate of the issues raised from the July debate. The discussion included approximately 25 participants, with 2 participants debating in support of changing the title to Sorcerer's Stone, 22 debating against, and one neutral. After one month the RfC was closed by a neutral non-participating third-party. The precursor discussion from Aug-Dec 2007 that resulted in the RfC is included as a preamble. The subsequent Notice of Mediation announcement and discussion (see also Further Actions below) is tagged on at the end of the RfC subpage as a postscript.

Further actions

Administrator's Noticeboard / Incidents

In mid-January 2008, some of the parties in support of the title change sought relief from the Administrator's Noticeboard of Incidents - see Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone vs. Philosopher's Stone. The inquiry was turned away within an hour as not an issue for ANI to resolve, but rather for dispute resolution, with recommendations to take the dispute to an RfC, which was already underway but near to closing.

Request for Mediation

Parties in support of changing the title also sought relief from the Mediation Committee - see Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film). The case was rejected after about 5 hours, as the involved parties did not agree to mediation.

Request for Arbitration

Parties in support of the title change also sought relief from the Arbitration Committee - see Sorcerer's Stone vs. Philosopher's Stone. The Arbitrators declined and rejected the case as a content dispute, and the case was subsequently withdrawn without prejudice.

Similar discussion elsewhere

A similar discussion debate was held during April and July 2007. See Talk:Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (film)/Archive 3#What makes a film from a certain country?.

Music Situation/Remove Conrad Pope's Credit

Why are we crediting Orchestrator Conrad Pope? There is no reason to. We should save his name for the soundtrack page. Also, he's not the only orchestrator for the first three Potters, seriously, why don't we just credit every single individual who was associated with the music? The music is by John Williams and no one else, why should we credit someone who didn't write a single piece of music for the film, but only arranged it? My opinion, remove his credit and relocate it to the soundtrack page, because if there isn't a credit for Pope on the Soundtrack page, why should there be a credit for him on the film's page? ThatsGoodTelevision ThatsGoodTelevision, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Small change

As the page is writtien in British English I changed "gotten" to "got". 147.147.29.0 (talk) 20:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Needs an explanation as to why the name was changed in the US

Nowhere in the article does it explain why the name was changed in the USA. Why? MisterZed (talk) 11:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

We need reliable sources explaining the change. Here's an explanation: Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone was renamed in the US because Americans don’t know what a philosopher is. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 11:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

The American name of the first Harry Potter film

The easy solution to this disagreement is to list both names of the film in the title of the article and the article itself, identifying "Philosopher's Stone" with Europe, and "Sorcerer's Stone" with the U.S. Dcenters (talk) 20:51, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

The American name already redirects to this article and is listed promptly in the first sentence of the lead. This seems sufficient to me. DonIago (talk) 21:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

It's fine as it is, coming out first in the UK, so using that title. The leading sentence already reads: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (also known as Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in the United States). Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 21:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Categories: