Entertaining and sometimes exhilarating film that is slightly superior to its predecessor but still pales when compared to the book..

Rating: 7/10 (17 December 2002)

Christopher Columbus, the director of the first two Harry Potter movies, has had a heavy burden to bear. He had to recreate on the screen what millions of adults and children imagined when they read J.K Rowling's books, he had to bring the characters and world alive for those who had never read the novels, balance out being exciting enough for the adults with not being too scary for the kids and endure the inevitable, unflattering comparisons with not just the books but Peter Jackson's superb Fellowship of the Ring'. Overall he's done a decent job  the first movie was a good though straight and occasionally flat reproduction of The Philosopher's Stone' and The Chamber of Secrets' is an improvement on that, if not a major one.
If you haven't seen or read The Philosopher's Stone' then don't bother watching this, as it will be very hard to follow what is going on. For those of you who have and want a summary of the plot, Harry again escapes from the Dursleys, his horrible non-magical relatives, and returns to Hogwarts, despite receiving a warning from a house-elf called Dobby that his life will be in danger. And indeed when he gets back there he not only has to worry about his enemies Professor Snape and Draco Malfoy, and the narcissistic new Defence Against the Dark Arts professor Gilderoy Lockhart, he also discovers that there is something monstrous stalking the corridors of Hogwarts, something that only he can hear.
Like the book, the movie The Chamber of Secrets' is darker than it's predecessor and will be too scary for many young children. This makes it more intense and enjoyable for most of us adults, though there are a couple of moments in the climax where Columbus shies away from fully showing some graphic violence, which reduces the power of the scene. It is a difficult balance that he has to maintain and while he does a great job in an earlier scene with giant spiders, he can't quite pull it off for Rowling's pretty gory finale. Unfortunately again the movie is not as thrilling or satisfying as the book, as Columbus still does not seem to have the pacing and atmosphere quite right for every scene in the film. Some, like those with the Dursleys and the Weasleys at the start, do not seem long enough to fully bring across the flavour of the book. At other times what is happening is not properly explained, which would be confusing for those who have not read the book - parts of the climactic battle especially seem merely convenient rather than miraculous - while in the middle the movie gets a bit slow. Parts of this are not Columbus' or the screenwriters' fault  the movie is a long one already and getting across the richness of detail a book has in just a few hours is always difficult. Unlike in the first movie they did feel confident enough to make some sensible changes to the sacred text, such as adding to the book's action scenes and cutting out some minor details, but I do feel things could have been done better, perhaps by dwelling on some things a little more, cutting out some minor plotlines, and adding to the atmosphere of some scenes by using bit more music and some more imaginative camerawork.
However I should not get too negative, as this is an enjoyable and exciting movie. The special effects and sets are marvellous and one of the ways in which it is an improvement on The Philosopher's Stone' is because of Daniel Radcliffe's performance as Harry. He still does not completely capture what I imagined the young wizard to be like, but he is livelier and more charismatic than he was in the first movie. The rest of the cast are very good, and there are two delicious performances from Kenneth Branagh as Lockhart and Jason Isaacs as the arrogant Lucius Malfoy. Seeing Richard Harris's final appearance is quite poignant too, as there is a quaver in his voice that suggests he was not a well man. Finding a replacement for him will not be easy.
7/10