Just finished watching the first Harry Potter on HD DVD, this one didn't look exactly great on DVD was I was a bit worried. But no, it looks great. No EE, noise reduction or compression artefacts. I'm sure the later films will provide better source material but as a transfer there is little this can be faulted on. It gets a big thumbs up from me.

Can you verify the extras, special features? Over here in the US we don't get these for another month.

Thanks for the quick report, Jeff. I ordered this from your side of the pond because I wanted the film with its original title. It's already in the post (;)), so I hope to enjoy this film all over again in HD this weekend.

Can you post a pic of the cover? The ones I've seen online look horrible and was hoping those were mock ups.

Amazon UK show the correct cover.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Harry-Potter-Philosophers-Stone-DVD/sim/B000X6R9OQ/1

Can you post a pic of the cover? The ones I've seen online look horrible and was hoping those were mock ups.

Unfortunately, the horrible cover is the actual one. ;)

Luckily, I'm just going to be putting this in my US "trunk" collection anyway... so the cover art doesn't concern me.


I ordered the UK edition of the first film for the original title and "philosopher" dialog. A minor thing, but worth the extra $$$ to me. Amazon UK shipped it 3 days ago, so I hope to have it by the weekend.

Can you verify the extras, special features? Over here in the US we don't get these for another month.

I think it's the same extras as the 2 disc DVD. I don't think there is anything special for this HD DVD release.

kinda off tp the side, can you play a region 2 Standard DVD in the 360 HD player?

Any screen shots?

Me too. I imported the books from Canada, which were the UK editions. Looks like the Canadian HD DVD's are correctly titled as well.

kinda off tp the side, can you play a region 2 Standard DVD in the 360 HD player?

No I believe that the 360/add-on are region locked.

What type case for the UK editions? Slim case like used in US or the thicker ones?

I ordered the UK edition of the first film for the original title and "philosopher" dialog. A minor thing, but worth the extra $$$ to me.

Can you fill me in here? Why does the US use "Sorceror's"? What was actually uttered during filming? The dialog is a bit different in the two versions? I just wonder why there are two different versions.

What type case for the UK editions? Slim case like used in US or the thicker ones?In another thread someone said the UK discs had the "bloody awful thick ones" or something to that effect.

I just preorderd the box set on amazon. Just have to have it for the library. Good entertainment for kids and adults.

Thanks for the quick report, Jeff. I ordered this from your side of the pond because I wanted the film with its original title. It's already in the post (;)), so I hope to enjoy this film all over again in HD this weekend.

You could of just got it form the other side of the border, but it comes out as the same time as the american one anyways, so your getting it early

Can you fill me in here? Why does the US use "Sorceror's"? What was actually uttered during filming? The dialog is a bit different in the two versions? I just wonder why there are two different versions.

Both the book and the motion picture were released in the United States with the revised title Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. The book's U.S. editor, Arthur Levine, who was also responsible for Americanizing words, spellings, and grammar characteristic of British English, felt that Philosopher's Stone conveyed an incorrect idea of the subject matter, and that a title change was necessary. Rowling and Levine had agreed to change words only when they felt that British usages would be unnecessarily confusing to American readers (e.g., replacing the phrase "Quidditch pitch" with "Quidditch field" in multiple instances). Several alternative titles were discussed, and Rowling chose Sorcerer's Stone in the end.[5] The "translations" in the American edition led to criticism by many readers. The New York Times ran an op-ed titled "Harry Potter, Minus a Certain Flavour" on July 10, 2000, which heavily criticised Scholastic's decision to Americanize the U.S. Harry Potter editions.[6] Many felt that the translations insulted the intelligence of the American public, and also deprived American readers of an opportunity to learn about other dialects of English. In their editions of the sequels, Scholastic continued to replace British orthography (such as "flavour") with the standard U.S. spellings, but otherwise left many of the British usages unaltered.


Quote from wikipedia

What type case for the UK editions? Slim case like used in US or the thicker ones?

It uses the thicker ones, which is a bit of a strange move since GoF uses the thiner case. I have quite a few thick cases and I can't say it bothers me that much. I'm going to put GoF in a thicker case so at least the set matches.

Just finished watching the first Harry Potter on HD DVD, this one didn't look exactly great on DVD was I was a bit worried. But no, it looks great. No EE, noise reduction or compression artefacts. I'm sure the later films will provide better source material but as a transfer there is little this can be faulted on. It gets a big thumbs up from me.

I couldn't agree more.I watched my copy last night and was very pleased.While not quite up with the quality of the "HP and the Goblet of Fire" HD-DVD, it was easily up in the top 25% of the best quality HD-DVDs i own.

the 360 Addon IS NOT REGION LOCKED in the US. They can play any HD-DVD from any country. Just as well as all the other HD-DVD players out there.

He asked about regular DVD's, they are regional locked.

He asked about regular DVD's, they are regional locked.

As far as I know, the drive itself is NOT region locked, it is the console that decides what region of DVD can be played on either the built in drive or the external HD unit.
I have a UK console and a US HD drive, but I can only play UK SD-DVDs in it.

If it works like a PC the drive will get region locked once you start to use it with a particular region. So if you start to use a US HD DVD addon on a UK 360 and play R2 DVD it may no longer work on a US 360 with R1 DVDs and it might not play R2 DVDs either due the the regional coding nuilt in to the 360.

Can you post a pic of the cover? The ones I've seen online look horrible and was hoping those were mock ups.

I've never understood the fascination with covers or with the art on the disc itself. :confused:

I can't wait for the boxset.

It uses the thicker ones, which is a bit of a strange move since GoF uses the thiner case. I have quite a few thick cases and I can't say it bothers me that much. I'm going to put GoF in a thicker case so at least the set matches.

Hmmm. My GoF (ordered April 2007 from Amazon.uk) came in one of those thicker cases. Strange.

For those asking about "Region 2" HD DVD's being able to play on U.S. HD-DVD players, no HD-DVDs are region locked to my knowledge.Any imported HD-DVD from Japan/Europe should play in any U.S. HD-DVD player the same as any U.S. release HD-DVD and vice versa.This is quickly becoming one of the best reasons for HD/Home theater/movie enthusiast's reasons for going with HD-DVD.

There aren't even any regions with HD DVD. The only question so far was OT and was about R2 DVD's.

Why does the US use "Sorceror's"? What was actually uttered during filming? The dialog is a bit different in the two versions? I just wonder why there are two different versions.

It was filmed as the Philosophers Stone but a bit of English racism/snobbery thought Americans were too dumb to understand the UK title and they changed/overdubbed it to Sorcerers to magic it up a bit for you.

It was filmed as the Philosophers Stone but a bit of English racism/snobbery thought Americans were too dumb to understand the UK title and they changed/overdubbed it to Sorcerors to magic it up a bit for you.


They did not overdub it . They shot alternative takes changing the required reference. There are two versions of the film .

And it was actually changed at the request of the US publishing wing when the book was first published years before the film. The book and film are titled "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone " everywhere apart from the USA.

They did not overdub it . They shot alternative takes changing the required reference. There are two versions of the film .

And it was actually changed at the request of the US publishing wing when the book was first published years before the film. The book and film are titled "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone " everywhere apart from the USA.

Right, but the point of her comment is still accurate.

Right, but the point of her comment is still accurate.

In what way exactly? English Racism? When the change was instigated by the US publisher of the book? :rolleyes:

English racism/snobbery
Oh please

Glad to see I'm not the only one anal about the alternate title!

Even though I'm ordering the domestic box set, I have the separate Philosopher's Stone disc coming from Amazon Canada.

I haven't read/seen anything Harry Potter yet, but learning they butchered it to make it "easier" for us dumb amerikuns makes me mad.

I was thinking I may wait for the canada version as well. The UK price is tough.

The GOF HD-DVD I got has the thicker UK style cases so their must have been a case change at some point..

Does anyone know if the Philosopher/Sorcerer's Stone references in the first film are the only differences in the US and UK versions? I know they made some changes in the books but are there also other changes in the other movies?

Yes just the one word change otherwise everything else is the same I've got the R1 and R2 DVD. All movies after are all the same as well it was just the books that had some word changes theirafter

Am I the only person who thinks that "Sorceror" sounds much more dramatic and appealing to a child audience, than "Philosopher" ? I feel that is the reason for the name change, not any assumed dumbing down (I live in the UK).

The point is that the philosophers stone is a known thing rather than something made up for a book.

I haven't read/seen anything Harry Potter yet, but learning they butchered it to make it "easier" for us dumb amerikuns makes me mad.

No "they" didn't butcher it. If anyone is to blame for "butchering" blame the US publisher.

Am I the only person who thinks that "Sorceror" sounds much more dramatic and appealing to a child audience, than "Philosopher" ? I feel that is the reason for the name change, not any assumed dumbing down (I live in the UK).

It's more flashy, though I've never heard of someone changing the title like that. The fault is really with J.K. Rowling, because she allowed them to do it. She had the final say.

It's more flashy, though I've never heard of someone changing the title like that. The fault is really with J.K. Rowling, because she allowed them to do it. She had the final say.

I'm not sure I agree with that, this is her first book, her level of influence wouldn't have been as it is today. It's interesting that this issue only happened with the first book.

I'm not sure I agree with that, this is her first book, her level of influence wouldn't have been as it is today. It's interesting that this issue only happened with the first book.

Instead of complaining about the name change we should all be thankful that Speilberg didn't get to turn it into "Goonies" with magic and the horrible Osman. Hogworts would have ended up somewhere between NY and Boston. Hagrid would have been played by John Goodman and Tom Cruise would have been Dumbledore.

Can someone please confirm the actual movies in the UK and/or Canada versions are "The Philosophers Stone"?


In Australia where we also call it the Philosophers Stone, our cases are correct, but the actual movie discs are US Sorcerers Stone copies.

I'd prefer the Canada version for the thin case, but think it is more likely they will also get dudded like us.

Can someone please confirm the actual movies in the UK and/or Canada versions are "The Philosophers Stone"?


In Australia where we also call it the Philosophers Stone, our cases are correct, but the actual movie discs are US Sorcerers Stone copies.

I'd prefer the Canada version for the thin case, but think it is more likely they will also get dudded like us.

Yes.The UK HD-DVD version is called "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone".The only version of the HD-DVD called "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" is the US version.

Yes.The UK HD-DVD version is called "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone".The only version of the HD-DVD called "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" is the US version.

Yeah, but in Australia where it is Philosophers Stone they have put the Sorcerers Stone version in the case, so wanted to confirm they hadn't just done the one version and released it only under different cases.

Our cases say Philosophers Stone but the disc is the Sorcerers Stone.

I think the Philosopher and Sorceror movies are different. The Sorceror version has some scenes that are not in the Philosopher version.

For instance, the begining scene, before Petunia wakes up Harry is different in both versions. That was my recollection, anyway.

Our cases say Philosophers Stone but the disc is the Sorcerers Stone.

The UK release is the "Philosopher's Stone" version of the actual movie.

To everyone interested in the canadian version, just be careful about that stupid bilingual packaging. I live in Montreal, and there are bilingual DVDs everywhere, including HD DVDs and Blu-Rays. I can't stand them, and I don't buy a movie if it's in a bilingual box. I don't even know if ordered from amazon.ca they'd come bilingual. I prefer ordering them directly from the US. And frankly, I wouldn't mind "sorcerer" over "philosopher" if that means a box in english only. Because here in QC, when you buy, say, Batman, you have the title written 2 times on the side of the box. 1 in english, "Batman", and..... 1 in "french", and that is..... ? well... "Batman". Most of the time the text is too small because both english and french have to fit on the box. Ridiculous!!!

I believe that the publishers changed it from Philosopher's to Sorcerers because they felt some Americans would think Philosophers sounded too "academic" and people would not know what kind of movie it was.

This kind of "dumbing down" for American audiences is not as uncommon as you might want to believe. When FOX was broadcasting NHL hockey games, they used to add a bright blue circle around the puck in their broadcasts so that people could follow the puck. They also added a video game-like blast to the puck whenever someone took a slap shot at the net. All this was done because FOX felt that Americans couldn't understand or follow the game. Many Americans also find hockey boring (to each his own) so FOX thought by adding flashy cartoonish animations to the game, it would make it more exciting. In reality, it all looked incredibly stupid.

Some people might have liked what FOX did, but my point is that it was all done because FOX thought most Americans were too stupid to understand the game....and that's pretty damn insulting.

I believe that the publishers changed it from Philosopher's to Sorcerers because they felt some Americans would think Philosophers sounded too "academic" and people would not know what kind of movie it was.

This kind of "dumbing down" for American audiences is not as uncommon as you might want to believe. When FOX was broadcasting NHL hockey games, they used to add a bright blue circle around the puck in their broadcasts so that people could follow the puck. They also added a video game-like blast to the puck whenever someone took a slap shot at the net. All this was done because FOX felt that Americans couldn't understand or follow the game. Many Americans also find hockey boring (to each his own) so FOX thought by adding flashy cartoonish animations to the game, it would make it more exciting. In reality, it all looked incredibly stupid.

Some people might have liked what FOX did, but my point is that it was all done because FOX thought most Americans were too stupid to understand the game....and that's pretty damn insulting.

I think some of the US broadcast companies do things like you mentioned
because they believe that most younger folks(21 and below)have super short attentions spans
and need lots of flashy stuff and constant action(in most cases violence)to keep them glued to the tv.
I'm not saying that's true, but i've heard the excuse used more than a few times by folks
i know that work in media advertising.

I guess I don't get the bruhaha over philospher vs. sorcerer.
There's about 3 references to the philospher's stone in the entire movie.
Big F'ing deal. Totally immaterial to the story.

The US publisher requested the title because no one in the demographic, or anyone else for that matter, in the US had any idea what the term meant.
This was the first book by a totally unknown author, I guess the fool wanted to sell books:rolleyes:
If that book and the series had been a failure in the US, these movies would never have been made.
What kind of idiot would then revert the name of the movie to the original UK title?

To some who deride this as "dumbing down", try this:
The next time you go car shopping ask the salesman "What's this baby got under the bonnet?" or "What's the cubic feet of the boot?"
Quite rightly, he won't know what the hell you're talking about.
You're using terms that are out of place in American English.
It's a simple matter of culture and language AND it's children's book.
Get over it.

Saying hockey is boring is like saying soccer is high-scoring. Both statements couldn't be further from the truth.

I think they started with good intentions then just went too far. Like changing Quidditch pitch to Quidditch field was a good idea, but I don't know why they changed Philosopher to Sorcerer since both are used in America.

To some who deride this as "dumbing down", try this:
The next time you go car shopping ask the salesman "What's this baby got under the bonnet?" or "What's the cubic feet of the boot?"
Quite rightly, he won't know what the hell you're talking about.
You're using terms that are out of place in American English.
It's a simple matter of culture and language AND it's children's book.
Get over it.

Those are bad examples, because those are British terms. Philosopher's Stone is not. It's from old European alchemy legends from hundreds of years ago, and equally as known in the US as England. It was a true dumbing down for Americans, assuming that they wouldn't know what it is and thus not like the book; too bad the publisher forced it. Especially as the book explains exactly what the stone does in its terms, so no prior knowledge is even needed.

Those are bad examples, because those are British terms. Philosopher's Stone is not. It's from old European alchemy legends from hundreds of years ago, and equally as known in the US as England. It was a true dumbing down for Americans, assuming that they wouldn't know what it is and thus not like the book; too bad the publisher forced it. Especially as the book explains exactly what the stone does in its terms, so no prior knowledge is even needed.

Changing names for a different market is not dumbing down. Showing a fast puck by outlines and flames helps out those with poor vision while not preventing people with good eyesight from tracking the game. The fact is the American market is almost the sole reason for the massive following HP has, and if the first book didn't sell well here the movies never would have been made. I am pretty sure the value of that one word was worth the success this movie has had.

Not to say that the sale of the books would have been worse under Philosopher Stone, as we were never given the chance to purchase it. One Companies feelings that we are to stupid for philosopher does not mean that we actually are. The fact is since the "Philosopher Stone" is actually an item in the book the history of the it in RL then becomes irrelevant.

The fact is since the "Philosopher Stone" is actually an item in the book the history of the it in RL then becomes irrelevant.

Tell that to Edward and Alphonse Elric ;)

Tell that to Edward and Alphonse Elric ;)

If you think about it, FMA would make an awesome live-action film.It's got a huge following, though not quite what the Potter books/movies do.

I've had these for about 2 weeks now and they all look rather good. Goblet of Fire was purchased last year...

My only issue so far has been with Philosopher's Stone's audio. At least on my setup, the A35 & Onkyo 805 Receiver- has trouble locking on the track. The default seems to be the DD+ track and when one selects TrueHd on the remote, it might take anywhere from 10 seconds to over a minute locking on to it. Probably an Onkyo-Toshiba issue with this disc as when it does lock on and say you want to change surround modes it loses the audio.

Interested in reading if others have this issue or will have it when they buy the U.S. version.

Otherwise a great disc. :)

Got around to finishing this U.K. disc and it's really a terrific movie. Kind of cool seeing this after all these years. (only 6 years but feels longer)...seeing how young the actors are. Wow.

Good looking HD disc. Not the best I've ever seen but very good. Sharper and much more 3Dimensional...Audio was stellar. Big improvement in regards to fidelity on the TrueHD track compared to the dvd. Dialouge that took on a digital-ish sound is more natural and fuller sounding on this HD. Dynamic range is much improved too. The dvd was kind of front heavy compared. This sounds more alive. Soft when it needs to be and then down & dirty when called for. :)

I look forward to re-living these films in their entirety (not just demos!) and in full HD glory.