Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
I never heard of that. Apart from the note of Cornelius Fudge the scenes listed are just deleted scenes. Can someone tell me if that is fake or something? -- Seth Cooper Owl Post 14:56, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
I removed this header. I confess I don't have every line of every Potter book memorized, ditto the movies, but I don't recall ever coming across that term in the books (particularly in the context of listing anachronisms). I moved the Daily Prophet date error up to the, well, Mistakes section. However someone should check that it is in fact an error. I don't recall seeing this one, myself. 23skidoo 23:30, October 10, 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think the term was ever actually used in the books; I believe it was a fan-related term. But I don't really consider it fanon, because it's not really fan fiction. -- 00:33, October 11, 2009 (UTC)
- And the error's legit. You can check it here (upper-right corner). -- 00:37, October 11, 2009 (UTC)
.. i really love slytherin than gryffindor,ravenclaw ,or hufflepufff .. And i have a crush on DRACO MALFOY !!!184.108.40.206 13:55, January 26, 2011 (UTC)
Wood and the Snitch
I don't believe this belongs in the Mistakes section:
In the scene where Wood is showing Harry the Golden Snitch, as the Snitch lifts into the air towards the camera and Harry follows it with his eyes. Wood, however, looks around randomly and in the opposite direction of where the Snitch obviously went.
I took this to be deliberate in the film, showcasing just hard it is to follow the snitch. It's why Harry is the youngest seeker in 100 years. Wood seems almost too hard not to be seeing the snitch.
I agree I deleted it. Alumeng 14:16, November 13, 2011 (UTC)
- This has been a matter of some contention. In the Philosopher's Stone film, a date on a copy of the "Daily Prophet" newspaper can be seen as 2001, and there are several anachronisms in the films that could be explained by them taking place in more recent years. However, in the Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix films, the dates on Tom Riddle Sr.'s grave and on the Black Family Tree, including Draco Malfoy's birthdate, correspond to the book timeline. And there are also anachronisms in the books, such as Dudley's Playstation.
- For now, we're working off the assumption that the movies are still in the same timeframe as the books, 1991-1998, until any further developments come to light (such as if the dates on James & Lily's graves in the upcoming Deathly Hallows film match the book's). - Nick O'Demus 11:06, January 29, 2010 (UTC)
I also noticed that the cars shown in the beginning of the movie seem to be early 90s, rather than early 80s like the timeline should be. And when Harry is 11, again the cars look newer; early 2000s.
This is incorrect:
During the feast at the beginning of the movie, Percy tells Harry that Snape has been after Quirrell's job for years, but since Voldemort's jinx on the job only let a teacher keep the job for one year, this would have been impossible.
He says that but he doesn't specificly mean that Quirrel had the job. He just meant the position indivisually. I Want Pickles. Ducky Mo Mo is My Friend. I Have a Bad Feeling About This 00:05, October 8, 2010 (UTC)
It's written "unknown girl" as "Pansy Parkinson". In the french wikipedia, I find a name: Katharine Nicholson. I don't know if it's true or not. You could see for example:
--22:26, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
In the Cast a name, Billiusa Efgeledes, is placed in the actress section next to Doris Crockford. Is this a real name??
Must the third sentence about this topic be about how many American actors are in this film? Is it really that important to have this information at the start? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.127.116.11 (talk • contribs).
The movie picture
I did not recall seeing that as a movie poster.
- Could you be more specific as to which image in the article you mean? And I presume the posters that say "Sorcerer's Stone" were only used for promotion in America, thus making a "Philosopher's Stone" variant non-existent. Or is there another instance of Sorcerer's Stone being used that you're referring to?
EDIT: Never mind, I see that the main image has been changed recently. For the record, it does appear to be an official promotional poster for the film, though it obviously should not have been the main image. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 15:49, October 26, 2013 (UTC)
I have a question about that - sorry if it is asked somewhere else and I missed it. I did look. But in the Ameican verison of the film the stone is refered to as the "sorcerer's stone" throughout - it is never once called "The philosopher's stone" by any of the characters So is it just the title that is different in the British version or is the version itself a bit different - is the stone called "Sorcerer's stone" or is it called "phillosopher's stone" by the characters in the British version of the film?
- As a British series, the title is Philosopher's Stone around the world, and is called Sorcerer's Stone only in the United States. J. K. Rowling's American publisher, Scholastic, feared that American children wouldn't understand what "philosopher" meant, so they changed it to a word more evocative of magic. -- 18:23, November 20, 2014 (UTC)