Who says sequals are never as good as the original??

Rating: 10/10 (16 November 2002)

When I saw "Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone", I was very impressed. I thought it was awsome and I saw it numerous times in the theater. When I went to see "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets", I was wondering if it was going to be as good.
If any of you havn't seen this movie yet and you liked the first one, you won't be dissapointed. This is just as good, if not better, than the first. Just like the first, it was pretty faithful to the book (it can't be exact because then it would be 4 hours long, which I wouldn't mind). Infact, it was probably more faithful. The special effects are awsome and of course, the quidditch (spelling?) is the best part of the movie. Yes, it is darker and a little scarier than the first (especially if you have archnophobia), but Ron (Rupert Grint) always comes through with the best lines. And the actor who played professor Lockhart (can't remember the name at the moment) was brilliant. Nobody could have played him better.
To sum it all up, the acting was good (you could tell that the kids had improved from the first movie), the story was good, it was funny and a little scary (the spiders are freaky in this movie), but in the end, this has got to be one of the best movies i've ever seen. I gotta go see it again.