Harry Potter - May 2002 (1 Viewer)

[Patrick Mirza]

Rumor alert: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone DVD should be released end of April/beginning of May 2002.
It's going to be timed to coincide with the next book release.

 

[Dan Hitchman]

I work at a national chain book store and the word is that the fifth book is not coming out until late next year.

Dan

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Where is this rumor coming from?

I hate to have information like this posted

without a source or from someone not associated

with a studio.

 

[Brian E]

VideoTropic.com reports that the DVD for Harry Potter is scheduled for April 2002:

"Harry Potter to DVD: Warner Brothers is currently scheduling an April, 2002 DVD release for the 2-DVD Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (a widescreen version is planned, as well as fullscreen). This is good news on two fronts: first, the fact that Warners will be offering a widescreen version acknowledges that the "fullscreen-only" decision may have been rescinded, and second -- a multidisc set means no snapper case."

 

[Bill McCamy]

Gone and forgotten...

 

[Chris Bardon]

What I want to know is, will I be able to buy the PROPER version of the film: Harry Potter and the PHILOSOPHER'S STONE in widescreen.

 

[Edwin-S]

Why did they rename it Sorcerer's Stone for U.S release?

 

[nolesrule]

The title of the book sitting on my coffee table is "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone". It's the First American Edition, published in 1998.

 

[Julian Lalor]

Why did they rename it Sorcerer's Stone for U.S release?

This was the name of the book in the US only. The US publishers probably thought the original title was too esoteric for children. The film has the correct name outside of North America, so if you want the original title you'll have to go to R2.

 

[Chris Bardon]

Actually, the book has the correct title EVERYWHERE except the USA-including Canada. The reasons for changing it-apparently the publishers thought that they had to reinforce that the book was about magic, and not philosophy, hence the title change. I know that JK Rowling has said that this was one of her only regrets about the books, and am very surprised that she didn't insist on keeping the film the same worldwide as one of the conditions.

I know it's being stubborn, but I see this the same way as I do the OAR issue-keep the original vision intact!

 

[Matty B]

I didn't read the book, but the stone was OBVIOUSLY not created by a philosopher in the movie, I don't understand why it wouldn't be called the Sorceror's Stone everyplace else. Don't they know what a philosopher is? I can't really see Descartes busting out some magic.

 

[David Lambert]

Matty B -
The "Philosopher's Stone" has been around long before JK Rowling incorporated it into Harry Potter books. In olden times, alchemists thought that this legendary item was the biggest source of power going.
If you're a fan of the old Atari 2600/Atari VCS video game console (the one that brought us the first Pitfall! game), then perhaps you recall a series of games in 1982-83 called "Swordquest". It was to be 4 titles: Earthworld, Fireworld, Waterworld, and Airworld. Atari was to have a tournament for each title, and the winner of the tourney would get a $25,000 item. The one awarded for Earthworld was the Talisman. A jewel-encrusted sword was to be the final prize for the overall winner of the grand tourney.
But the winner of the next-to-last tourney was to receive a jewel-encrusted Philospher's Stone. Of course, when the Atari console came off the market in 1983, and Atari all but disappeared, the final tourneys were cancelled and the prizes never awarded. Some say they're in the basement of the former Atari owner.
But it was natural for JK Rowling to incorporate the idea of a Philosopher's Stone into her books. She got convinced that the USA translation of her books needed to change certain words that would be confusing to Americans. Like in UK, sweaters are called "jumpers", but in US a jumper is an outfit for a small girl.
She got talked into changing the title, too. The movie follows the titles of the books, at her acknowledgement (she has final approval on all movie-related decisions).
I don't care WHAT they call the DVD. It'd be nice to have the seamless branching give us both versions on one DVD, but do you REALLY think that WB will go that far?
Not. I'll be happy with OAR!!

 

[andrew markworthy]

The term 'philosopher's stone' is in any decent dictionary, though it's usually defined as an item which would convert base metals into gold. The term 'philosopher' at one time referred to a person conducting academic enquiries of any kind, and thus the term is not as incongruous as it may first appear.

 

[BrianB]

I didn't read the book, but the stone was OBVIOUSLY not created by a philosopher in the movie, I don't understand why it wouldn't be called the Sorceror's Stone everyplace else. Don't they know what a philosopher is? I can't really see Descartes busting out some magic.

Well done, MattyB, you've demonstrated exactly why they changed the book's title in the USA.

 

[Chris Bardon]

Any why is that Brian? Because MattyB didn't happen to know about the history behind the term? Godforbid that someone might actually LEARN something by reading one of these books. Why is it that everything that the USA touches has to be "Americanized"? To be honest, I'm surprised that the publisher didn't try to make hogwarts located just outside of new york, and Harry and Ron into Texans, and Quidditch into "wizard baseball".

One of the best things about the series of books is the way that the wizarding world is superimposed on a very real world. The idea that all of these things could exist right under our noses was a great one, and I think that this is reinforced by little details like the Philosopher's Stone. I happened to know about the legend of the stone before reading the book, and I have to say that its inclusion impressed me: even though it was a book written for kids, this lady had done her research. As an interesting note, I read somewhere that the name "Nicholas Flamel" is actually associated with the legend, although I don't remember now or where.

Sorry to get off on a rant like this, but it's like the issue of dubbing foreign films. When Princess Mononoke was first announced for DVD release, there was an uproar about not including the original Japanese track on the disc. When CTHD was released, there would have been a similar uproar had the original mandarin track not been included. Eyes wide shut is another example-Canada and the rest of the world had the uncensored release (I think everywhere else-I know that we did), but the US of A-censored.

Similarly, if a film was shot 2.35:1 and exhibited 2.35:1 everywhere but the USA, but for some reason was cropped to 1.85:1 for US release, which OAR would you want?

 

[Chris Bardon]

Sorry-just thought of another point.

PhD-the term for a doctorate degree, actually translates to "Doctor of Philosophy". Is someone with a PhD in Engineering a Philosopher? This goes back to the term being used for anyone making academic inquiries (as Andrew already pointed out).

 

[Rod Martin]

Funny you should mention dubbing. When watching the film, I tried (not always successfully) to note whenever the "Sorcerer's Stone" was mentioned. I'm not 100% sure, but I believe that every time it was mentioned. The person uttering it was either off-camera or their mouth was obscured in some way. So even if we would be able to see the Philosopher version, it may be nothing more than a few dubbed lines.

 

[Chris Bardon]

What about the text in the book in the library? The scene near the end of the year when Hermione brings the book to Harry and Ron clearly shows "Philosopher's Stone" written in it.

 

[BrianB]

Any why is that Brian? Because MattyB didn't happen to know about the history behind the term? Godforbid that someone might actually LEARN something by reading one of these books. Why is it that everything that the USA touches has to be "Americanized"? To be honest, I'm surprised that the publisher didn't try to make hogwarts located just outside of new york, and Harry and Ron into Texans, and Quidditch into "wizard baseball".

Let me make this clear: I think the 'dumbing down' of the book/film in the USA is a Bad Thing. The publishers claimed that that the 'average American' wouldn't know the history behind it - MattyB's rant supported that point of view. I happen to think that their pandering to that pov is a Bad Thing, just like you do.

MattyB's post was just perfect timing for supporting the frequently voiced foreign comment that 'all americans are stupid'.

 

[Julian Lalor]

Any why is that Brian? Because MattyB didn't happen to know about the history behind the term? Godforbid that someone might actually LEARN something by reading one of these books. Why is it that everything that the USA touches has to be "Americanized"? To be honest, I'm surprised that the publisher didn't try to make hogwarts located just outside of new york, and Harry and Ron into Texans, and Quidditch into "wizard baseball".

This is basically what Spielberg wanted to do (well, sort of: he wanted Harry to be played by an American). Rowling, who had veto over this, thankfully said no.