Where's the NTSC "Philopher's Stone"?

[Just Some Guy]

I have the NTSC version of Harry Potter and the Philospher's Stone (not Sorcerer's Stone) and since the 20Q thread mentioned that problem I figured the fact that there were multiple Region 1 NTSC versions available depending on if you were in the US or not wouldn't be a problem.  However I purchased the riff today and saw only "Sorcerer's" for NTSC (which is US only), "Philospher's" for PAL, but no "Philospher's" for NTSC (Canada, Japan, and anyone in the US who decided to spend $2 extra to not get the US-ified version).  So where's the Rifftrax for this one?

[Conor]

We've never heard of it and unfortunately there is no RiffTrax available for it.  We can't create them for every possible release.  One of the two versions should work, since we have determined that there are no timing differences between the cut.

[Scott M Davis]

I downloaded the .riff and it works just fine.

[Just Some Guy]

Funky that they could keep it so even.  Thanks.

[Scott M Davis]

its the exact same movie. the only difference is the title.

Here we go:

The movie is known as "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" everywhere except the USA and so every scene in which the Philosopher's Stone was mentioned was filmed twice, once with the actors saying "Philosopher's" and once with the actors saying "Sorcerer's".

[BathTub]

Yeah as I mentioned in the 20qs thread there is no discernible timing difference between the 2 films.  I did compare one against the other.

[RoninFox]

It is impressive that they could keep the movie so close timing wise with so many alternate takes.

Personally I'd prefer if they just stop acting like Americans are so dumb they couldn't catch on to a "Philosopher's Stone" but "Sorcerer's Stone" is fine.  It doesn't even make sense.  People who actually know anything about alchemy would get the reference, and people who don't...can't they just go along with a magic item being called a certain name?

I think I noticed that the riffers avoided calling it by name.  I could have missed it laughing though.

[killeroo]

It is impressive that they could keep the movie so close timing wise with so many alternate takes.

Personally I'd prefer if they just stop acting like Americans are so dumb they couldn't catch on to a "Philosopher's Stone" but "Sorcerer's Stone" is fine.  It doesn't even make sense.  People who actually know anything about alchemy would get the reference, and people who don't...can't they just go along with a magic item being called a certain name?

I think I noticed that the riffers avoided calling it by name.  I could have missed it laughing though.

They were afraid most Americans would equate it to something that came from So-crate's kidney.

[RoninFox]

It is impressive that they could keep the movie so close timing wise with so many alternate takes.

Personally I'd prefer if they just stop acting like Americans are so dumb they couldn't catch on to a "Philosopher's Stone" but "Sorcerer's Stone" is fine.  It doesn't even make sense.  People who actually know anything about alchemy would get the reference, and people who don't...can't they just go along with a magic item being called a certain name?

I think I noticed that the riffers avoided calling it by name.  I could have missed it laughing though.

They were afraid most Americans would equate it to something that came from So-crate's kidney.

You make a good point.  In fact from now on, this is what I believe.   

[Scott M Davis]

is it really sad that I just now got that joke?

[RoninFox]

is it really sad that I just now got that joke?

Think about what you just said.  It's a Keanu reference, is it sadder that you didn't get it, or that I got it right away?

[Scott M Davis]

could it not be both?

[bratpop]

Why would a philosopher need a magical stone anyway? Wouldn't a philosopher just... philosophize about whether magical stones are really magical, or whether we're all living in the Matrix?

Despite refering to a mythological object, the change makes a hell of a lot more sense, especially since it's not even explained in a children's book. What, Americans are stupid if they don't know imaginary history, but kids are supposed to know it too? Due to the fact that it's the first Harry Potter book, calling it "Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone" tells you there's sorcery involved. Quite a logical marketing decision. Whereas calling it "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" makes no implication that it's not a book about whether it really matters if Harry throws stones or not, in the grand scheme of things. Besides... think about it... if there really WAS a philosopher's stone, it wouldn't BE a philosopher's stone anymore, because it would be proven. And it also would not be science, but sorcery. In the Hogwarts point of view, it would make sense that once discovered, they would rename it. It's like calling it The Stone That May Or May Not Theoretically Exist. Kind of stupid if you're a wizard. They practice magic, not "unexplained phenomena." Or really rather more likely, it would just be called "Joe's Stone." (Not to be confused with Joss Stone.)

[Just Some Guy]

Why would a philosopher need a magical stone anyway? Wouldn't a philosopher just... philosophize about whether magical stones are really magical, or whether we're all living in the Matrix?

Is that a real question or a joke?

Ah well, The term "Philosopher's stone" dates back to middle ages at which point "Philosopher" meant any thinker, not just ones who specialized in the metaphysical.  For example, from the Renaissance until the 19th century most of what we refer to as "science" was called "natural philosophy".  The Greeks who made those initial speculations on the nature of matter that formed the foundation of alchemy were "philosophers" in the same sense.

[BathTub]

They didn't alter the movie because the thought american's were dunces, they altered the book, and the movie just reflects this.