Passable thanks to some good casting and improved special effects, but it's a slight step down from "The Sorcerer's Stone."

Rating: 7/10 (23 October 2010)

I will give Chris Columbus this much: he succeeded in making a 2.5 hour film feel 30 minutes long. Never while watching "The Chamber of Secrets" did I feel bored or impatient, as one scene after another fired away with the latest revelation of the "Harry Potter" universe. Yet as the picture went on it didn't feel like it was adding up to a whole lot. For all of the events and discoveries that occur within the film, the direction feels less inspired, the script feels less assured, and for all of the horrors that are occurring within the school, there doesn't always seem to be a whole lot of jeopardy. That takes away from what could have been a massively entertaining epic.
This film picks up right where #1 left off. Harry is having a miserable time with the Dursleys, and to make matters even more confusing for him, he receives a strange visit from a house-elf named Dobby (well voiced by Toby Jones) that he mustn't attend Hogwarts because if he does, his life will be in danger. Harry manages to escape and get to school anyway (although very unconventionally), but as soon as he arrives, a series of strange events begin to occur immediately. When some students begin getting attacked by an unknown monster, Harry quickly turns into a prime suspect, and he, Ron, and Hermione work relentlessly to track down the culprit.
I mentioned Toby Jones earlier, and that brings me to some great casting choices this film has. First off, Jones brings an honest, well-intentioned, earnestness to Dobby, which is a very good thing, considering that Dobby could have been easily portrayed as annoying. Also inspired (and quite funny) is Kenneth Branagh as the self-centered and incompetent Defense against the Dark Arts Teacher, Gilderoy Lockhart. Then you've also got Jason Issacs as the icy Lucius Malfoy (he holds back no contempt against Harry Potter and Arthur Weasley), Julie Walters and Mark Williams as the endearing Mrs. and Mr. Weasley, and Christian Coulson as the power hungry Tom Riddle. And don't forget the good retentions from the first film, including Tom Felton still relishing his role as the snarky Draco Malfoy and Robbie Coltrane holding strong as the semi-father figure Rubeus Hagrid.
Although those performances shine, some others don't. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, nor Emma Watson are a whole lot better here than they were in film #1. Part of that problem is because the script by Steven Kloves doesn't feel as sharp. He doesn't seem to build up to the sense of jeopardy the school is in as well as he did previously. Okay, he didn't do it terrifically then either, but at least it was better. Too many scene transitions feel abrupt as well. And the revelation on who opened the Chamber of Secrets doesn't pack nearly the punch that it should because the person at fault is underdeveloped.
Adding to that, Chris Columbus's direction feels less inspired. In the first film, he had an honest interest in the world of "Harry Potter," and was keen to reveal all of its wonders. Here, he seems stuck on that mode, when the story calls for more "sinister" direction. Hogwarts still feels like a warm, confiding place to be (although the picture tone is a little yellower and drier than in the previous film), and the sense that something awful is trying to emerge from underneath doesn't get through.
I also recall saying in my previous review that had it not been for John Williams' film score, it would have been a 7, not an 8. Well, in this film, there felt like there was too little of his wonderful music. There's nothing wrong with silent scenes, per say, but when the script and direction aren't always good and you don't have great music to listen to anyway, something feels lacking.
Is anything better? Yes. The special effects are more polished this time around. The best example comes during the Quidditch game. The movements by the students on their brooms feel far more realistic this time, or at least, as realistic as you could possibly make Quidditch. Before, they felt jerky and computer animated. Now, they feel gradual and human calculated. You get a feel for the turn of direction, the maneuvering through the underground barristers, and the resistance of air at any given point. Also well realized are Dobby the house elf (not quite Gollum-realistic but still well-integrated into the scene), the Weasleys' flying car, and the monster in the film's final battle. These were improved despite a small slashing to the budget.
Do I recommend "The Chamber of Secrets"? For the most part, yes. There's too much talent around for the film to go wrong, and some select scenes (the Quidditch match and the climax, for example) work terrifically well. But overall, this simply does not feel as fresh as "The Sorcerer's Stone," or as good. Let's hope that, by the time part 2 of "The Deathly Hallows" rolls around, this will remain the weakest "Harry Potter" film.