Directed by:
Chris ColumbusScreenplay:
Steve KlovesCinematography:
Roger PrattCast:
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Maggie Smith, Kenneth Branagh, Richard Griffiths, Alan Rickman, Richard Harris, Fiona Shaw, Robbie Coltrane (more)VOD (4)
Plots(1)
Harry Potter has not had a good summer. Not only has he had to put up with his overbearing Aunt Petunia and Uncle Vernon Dursley and their dread of his magical abilities, but it seems as if Harry's best friends Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger have forgotten him as they haven't replied to a single one of his letters. Then, suddenly and mysteriously, house-elf Dobby appears in Harry's bedroom and warns him of great danger if he should attempt to return to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. But despite the elf's mischievous efforts to thwart Harry's return to school, the ever determined Harry is rescued from the Dursley's dreary clutches by Ron and his brothers and whisked into the warmth of the Weasley household. Upon arriving at Hogwarts, Harry finds that his first year heroics have caused him to become the center of much unwanted attention. His new fans include Ron's little sister Ginny; first year would-be photographer Colin Creevey; and most irritatingly, the New Defense Against the Dark Arts Professor, Gilderoy Lockhart. Outshone only by his own vanity, Lockhart craves the attention that Harry shuns. But not even Lockhart can offer an explanation for the sinister new terror that is gripping the school. (official distributor synopsis)
(more)Videos (5)
Reviews (12)
Chris Columbus took on a task of gigantic proportions. Not only did he have to follow up on the success of the first film without repeating it, but he also had to adapt a book that holds the most ambiguous position in the entire series. It serves only to bring the reader (in this case, the viewer) closer to the characters and to create a strong connection with them for the future installments. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone introduced the heroes, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban and Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire bring crucial parts of the mythology and key chapters of the entire history of the wizarding world. That's why I admire the director for handling everything with grace, even though he basically allowed the book to be almost entirely re-written in the screenplay without rushing it. Many creators would have stumbled with all the scenes that are typical of the Harry Potter series and that may seem unnecessarily drawn-out to regular viewers, such as the introduction of the Dursleys or Dobby's repeated hysterics, and would have ended up with an unwatchable bore. Chris Columbus heard countless complaints after the release of the film, calling him a mere people-pleaser who made a harmless family spectacle with no atmosphere, but in reality, he created two films that the series desperately needed and laid the groundwork for Alfonso Cuaron and others to experiment as they pleased.
()
Except for the overly annoying Dobby, who I didn't even like in the book, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets is better than the first installment in every way. First of all, it is more entertaining, but also the stunts and action scenes have improved (the Quidditch has finally got some pizzazz), the plot is more interesting with "something/someone" threatening the students' lives, and the visit to Aragog's house is pleasantly scary. Again, I have no complaints about the child actors (okay, okay, Rupert Grint makes too many faces, I admit), and of the adults, I was impressed by Kenneth Branagh as Gilderoy Lockhart. And needless to say, every sentence and every glance of Rickman's Snape and Isaacs' Malfoy is also worth it.
()
Still too long and conceptually the same as the first one, but this time properly atmospheric and more original in the staging of the climactic scenes (the passage with the giant spiders is simply amazing, likewise, for its time, the fight with the basilisk). Plus, well-developed characters and a very skilled straddling between a very dark film and an innocent fairy tale for children. Of course, needless to say, had it stayed exclusively on the dark side, it would have been awesome, but that’s understandably impossible... 80%
()
Compared to its predecessor, The Philosopher's Stone, the second Harry Potter is more action-packed, scarier and grimmer, but still aimed at a younger audience who will enjoy the naive touch that is still present. The plot is slightly better than the first installment, and on my very first viewing I was shocked by the conclusion. John Williams' score hasn't lost a note of its charm, and while some of the visual effects are still blatantly off-putting, it is a high standard for the year it was released. The main trio may be more jaded, but their performances are still evolving. The original ensemble is enriched with a couple of new faces, the most pleasing of which were Dobby and Gilderoy Lockhart. A slightly more mature sequel to the first part, which has something going for it, but still falls short of perfection.
()
At 160 minutes, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets is just too long. It’s brilliantly filmed, the characters haven’t lost any of their charm and the darker approach suits the film, but it still seems more routine and static. As a fan of J.K. Rowling, I was definitely excited to see it. But as an impartial viewer, I missed having a remote control with a rewind button in places.
()
Gallery (207)
Photo © 2002 Warner Bros
![Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets - Photos - Rupert Grint, Daniel Radcliffe, Matthew Lewis, Alfred Enoch, Oliver Phelps, James Phelps, Devon Murray, Hugh Mitchell, Emma Watson](http://image.pmgstatic.com/cache/resized/w663/files/images/film/photos/160/130/160130446_510746.jpg)
Ads