So who done it then? Ken Branagh? The bloke with the cat?

Rating: 2/10 (4 December 2002)

Spoilers within
Am probably going out on a limb here & risking barrages of abuse but from the second my back side sat in front of the "Auto Windscreens" Advert until when the words come up at the end I didn't have the slightest clue what was happening.
Now I'm in my 20's, got a degree, do crosswords & pub quizzes so I'm not completely stupid but I'm starting to realise that I am a bit thick with fantasy films & when God put me on this planet, he never intended for me to appreciate them. As soon as I hear the lines "But where is Thorac, 3rd son of ... Twattius" or someone, I'm dying to shout out "I don't know. I don't care where he is" Then realising they're going to start looking for him I'm thinking, "Look fellers, just leave him alone, we can all save ourselves half hour & be home by the 2nd half of the football."
Nearly three hours, Harry Potter lasted & the whole thing went way over my head. There was this kid about 7, further along in our row who kept asking "what's happening now mummy"? To everyone else in the cinema he was a right pain up the arse, but to me he was a diamond. What few bits I did understand was thanks to him asking & 'mummy' explaining.
I'm not for one minute saying it was crap. It may even have been quite good if I knew what happened. There was a while in the middle where I rubbed the old hands with excitement as it has a touch of the Agatha Christies about it & looked like it was building up to a Whodunnit. But that lasted about 30 seconds. In the end I'm led to believe the villain was a book. Oh, closely assisted by a dead bloke. Not Ken Branaghs character (who I never really saw the relevance of) or Robbie Coltrane (who again was excellent) but a book.
Some more intellectual criticisms were that much of the opening seemed to be merely repeating the first film, and then at the station when the entrance was closed were they stranded from the alternative world? No. They just took the car & somehow ended up there. This was probably explained, but I missed it & it seemed to defeat the purpose of the entrance. The quiddich game & as interesting as it looks, seems of little relevance in enhancing the plot. We're supposed to cheer on Harry and / or his school team (whose name escapes me) against the baddies' but I don't bond enough with any of them to gain pleasure when they win or are awarded extra points. The 'Malfoy' character for instance is for me, is just about the best in the film (as with the 1st film).
The problem I see is that Harry Potter does not seem to know whether it wants to market itself as a film for kids, teenagers or adults. Consequently it seems to want to do all 3. There were several 'bloody hells' and a plot I'm convinced no 8 year old could fully grasp. Therefore the film has be open to some criticisms that wouldn't otherwise apply to a traditional childrens' film. I'm a little dubious of anyone, that is so into Wizardy that they can churn out endless books, characters, stories and ideas about the subject. Rightly or wrongly, for me JK Rowling verges on 'Trekkie-ism'.
The scenic shots & the cinematography in general was pretty impressive but I think Chris Columbus should stick to exploring & colonising natives from Haiti. Fair play he was superb at that, but I've just not got the imagination for Wizards, giant dragons, trap doors or people whose names end in 'ius' and consequently cannot appreciate this sort of film to anywhere near the level it is supposed be viewed at.
A low 4/10