In theaters

HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER’S STONE. Directed by Chris Columbus. Written by Steve Kloves, based on the novel by J.K. Rowling. 153 minutes, Rated PG

After all the hype, the escalating expectations, the sold-out shows, the lines – the lines, good grief, the lines – and the crackling sense of hysteria that continues to border on the uncontainable, Chris Columbus’ adaptation of J.K. Rowling’s first novel, “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone,” cast its spell on audiences over the weekend – to the delight of Muggles everywhere.

In what’s easily the biggest event movie since 1999’s “Star Wars Episode One: The Phantom Menace” (Michael Bay’s “Pearl Harbor” doesn’t come close), “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone” is 21/2 hours of rollicking adventure, magic, wizardry and fun.

From the start, the film plunges audiences into a world so richly atmospheric and imaginative, so grand in scale yet absolutely specific in detail, its $125 million budget seems like the bargain of the year.

Or at least it will when the film finishes breaking box-office records.

Rising to the overwhelming task at hand, Columbus (“Home Alone,” “Stepmom,” “Mrs. Doubtfire”) has created a good deal of magic of his own.

He’s captured the tone of Rowling’s novel and brought it to life. That’s no small feat, but when you see the movie, it’s clear how much the director has toiled and worried over everything, from Steve Kloves’ snappy script to Stuart Craig’s Academy Award-worthy set design and Judianna Makovsky’s superb costumes.

The work paid off. With the exception of Norbert the Norwegian Ridgeback, who was disposed of in the book but not in the movie, every major scene, defining moment and element seems to be here – the moving staircases, the towering trolls, the thrilling game of Quidditch, the frumpy Sorting Hat, the three-headed dog, the Mirror of Erised, the heart-stopping game of chess and hidden Platform 93/4.

Given the movie’s lengthy running time, there are moments when it feels a bit long in the wand. But considering the alternative – removing key scenes at the risk of disappointing the book’s 100-plus million fans – Columbus wisely respects Rowling’s vision and her much-publicized concerns that the movie mirror her words.

For those who have been locked beneath a stairwell of their own for the past several years, “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone” is the story of Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), a bespectacled orphan with a lightening bolt scar on his forehead whose parents were murdered by Lord Voldemont, a man so evil, his name is rarely spoken.

Raised by his vicious, verbally abusive relatives – Aunt Petunia (Fiona Shaw), Uncle Vernon (Richard Griffiths) and their piggish son, Dudley (Harry Melling) – Harry discovers on his 11th birthday that he’s no mere mortal but a wizard.

Swept away by the gentle giant Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane), he eventually lands at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, where he befriends two classmates, Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson), makes an enemy out of the spoiled little brat Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton), and learns things about himself and the world that promise to forever change his life.

Indeed, as Hagrid warns Harry early on, “Not all wizards are good, Harry – some of them go bad.”

With Maggie Smith as Professor Minerva McGonagall, Richard Harris as Hogwarts’ headmaster Dumbledore, Alan Rickman as Snape, Ian Hart as Professor Quirrell and John Hurt in a brief yet terrific performance as the wandmaster Ollivander, “Harry Potter’s” all-British cast gets to the root of what made the book work so well – its relationships.

The child actors, in particular, are very good. As Harry, Radcliffe seems tailor-made for the part, easily resembling the books’ illustrations and Rowling’s physical descriptions.

But just as important is that he also captures the essence of what makes Harry Harry – his anxieties and fears, his sense of wonder and sadness, his courage, naivete, humility and heart.

With newcomers Grint and Watson at his side, these three make an entertaining trio as they go about their adventures and try to keep the Sorcerer’s Stone out of the wrong hands. Their bond is one of the movie’s best assets, certainly the soul of the story, and it’s to Columbus’ great credit that their friendship doesn’t seem manufactured for the screen. If that genuineness lifted the book, it also ignites the movie, a sequel of which, “Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets,” is already shooting for a 2002 release.

Grade: B 3/4

Christopher Smith is the Bangor Daily News film critic. His reviews appear Mondays and Fridays in Style, Tuesdays on “NEWS CENTER at 5” and Thursdays on “NEWS CENTER at 5:30” on WLBZ-2 and WCSH-6. He can be reached at BDNFilm1@aol.com.