FILM: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets.

The last movie to have that "Dickensian" feel to Hogwarts. Also the last one that is really a glorified children's movie at heart. After this the kids Harry, Ron and Hermione would become real teenagers and later young adults. Here Hogwarts is still a somewhat wondrous magical experience rather then a Gothic dungeon.

It's astonishing to see now how much changed visually to the entire series when Cuaron took over. Not just little details, like the Womping Willow and Hagrid's hut being basically at the grounds of Hogwarts, at times it genuinely feels like a different universe.

The plot, like all of the films actually does not hold up to close scrutiny. Let me see, no one apart from Voldemort has been able to find The Chamber Of secrets for years, and Harry finds out just by asking Myrtle? Really? The entrance to The Chamber that has secretly existed for about 1000 years is in a girls lavatory? There's a tap with a snake on it? Really? Have taps existed for a millenia in the Wizard World?

But COS is still a kiddie film, so such niggles aren't that big of a deal...yet.

And yes Potter fans, it is indeed a kiddie film. The 3 stars are kids. And it has kiddie stuff like Ron's father asking Harry what the function of a rubber duck is.

It's a slow film though, T's not until 40 minutes that the plot actually starts. Unlike the later films Columbus does not want people to get confused. So when Dumbledore and McGonnagal appear, Harry Potter says there names, so everyone knows who these people are. In 2002 it looks condescending, but the latter films could have benefited from a similar technique.

This is also the first of the films to favor it's plot over the characters. Harry's alienation from his fellow students and friends is not really explored.

The acting is very good though. The kids manage to be a little better then in the first film, especially Radcliffe. Who's very strong when facing Tom Riddle alone.

Kenneth Branagh is hilarious as probably the most useless wizard and teacher ever seen. Jason Isaacs is properly slimy and Nazi-like and the regular cast of British thesps is again in good form. With Rickman being wonderfully unpleasant. Richard Harris now seems so slow and ponderous though that I'm not surprised he died shortly after (I did wonder if Gambon gave Dubledore a slightly Irish brogue as a tribute).

Special effects are a massive improvements over the first film.

The music.

I wonder, if JW had more time for it, would he have composed something very different? On one hand his previous sequel for a Chris Columbus film was also in many ways an adapted score for Home Alone. On the other hand he pretty much ditched most of his themes from the first 2 films when he did POA.

The score, for the most part works well enough in the film. Sometimes it's odd hearing slightly awkward re-arrangements of music from the first film. But I do think the style of Philosophers Stone fits in this film, when it would not have fitted in POA.

Still, I do like this film. It's ridiculous plot is not yet so murky that casual viewers cannot follow it. And you can watch this film without having seen the first one, and without having to watch any of the others for it to make sense. It's a good looking film too.

*** out of ****

[Jay 37,374]

This is also the first of the films to favor it's plot over the characters. Harry's alienation from his fellow students and friends is not really explored.

That aspect is explored in some wonderful deleted scenes. If you still have the disc, definitely check them out

[fommes 153]

Great review, Steef. Recently watched it too; I love they took Weasley from The Fast Show, and Branagh is priceless.

[Quintus 5,399]

Chamber of Secrets is the second one isn't it? I thought it was really poor.

[Jay 37,374]

I love they took Weasley from The Fast Show

What?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

he's talking about Ron's father Jason.

That aspect is explored in some wonderful deleted scenes. If you still have the disc, definitely check them out

Watched them once. They were Ok as I seem to remember.

[Jay 37,374]

There's one scene when Harry overhears students in the library talking about him, and another where he goes outside with Hedwig and sits on top of the castle, in thoguht, while Hedwig flies away

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The film might have been stronger if they included that and ditched things like the Cornish Pixie class and the weird ending of the whole school cheering for Haggers.

[Demondm810 399]

I love it. There is a more magical feel to it now, even 9 years later. Ghosts are still present, giant spiders, a basilisk, much darker tone than Philiospher's Stone, blood on the walls! Love the music, love everything about it. It's the longest too, isn't it? Kenneth Branagh and Jason Issacs are pitch-perfect. Lots to love about this film, but it IS definitely a kiddie movie. I even love the pretentious, bombastic ending to Reunion of Friends. That crazy scene is it's weakest point, IMO. All the cheesy awkward glances and big hugs. I'll admit Stefan, the number of stars at the end of the review was not what i expected after reading the text

[fommes 153]

Hey - where's my post in response to Steef's?

[Demondm810 399]

I agree with Jason, the extended edition has some great scenes.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I love it. There is a more magical feel to it now, even 9 years later. Ghosts are still present, giant spiders, a basilisk, much darker tone than Philiospher's Stone, blood on the walls! Love the music, love everything about it. It's the longest too, isn't it? Kenneth Branagh and Jason Issacs are pitch-perfect. Lots to love about this film, but it IS definitely a kiddie movie. I even love the pretentious, bombastic ending to Reunion of Friends. That crazy scene is it's weakest point, IMO. All the cheesy awkward glances and big hugs. I'll admit Stefan, the number of stars at the end of the review was not what i expected after reading the text

I'm sadly no AlexCremers. I can forgive a movie a number of flaws if I feel entertained while watching it.

The kiddie tone would mostly disappear for the third film, except for a few scenes that feel backward in combination with the rest of the movie (that monster book, trying to eat Harry. His aunt turning into a balloon with Williams' comedy music)

One of the most real and touching moments of all the films is in Chamber of Secrets though.

Neville up in a lamp, asking 'Why is it always me? "

Hey - where's my post in response to Steef's?

The mods likes to move posts to the appropriate threads. "Where they are supposed to be."

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yes, but since they are not in the film. I can't really review them.

[fommes 153]

Well, I'm always happy with Jason structuring this so I'll forgive him one slip-up

I just said, nice review! I love it how they took Weasley from The Fast Show cast, and Branagh is priceless.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I just wondered. What blood did Ginny use to write on the wall?

[fommes 153]

Maybe it was that time of the month.

[MSM 126]

I just wondered. What blood did Ginny use to write on the wall?

The book says, if I remember correctly, that it was red paint.

I am still excited by having seen DH7.2 yesterday. I haven't had that with a movie in a long time. I think I will go a few times more to see it.

[Demondm810 399]

Rubbish! It was clearly mudblood.

[MSM 126]

Rubbish! It was clearly mudblood.

Rubbish! Read the book.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Why should he, Potter fan!

[MSM 126]

Why should he, Potter fan!

Muggle.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The point is. You should not have to resort to a book to make the film clear. If you do, then the films has a flaw.

Hermione identifies it as blood, and no one in the film corrects her at any point.

[MSM 126]

The point is. You should not have to resort to a book to make the film clear. If you do, then the films has a flaw.

Hermione identifies it as blood, and no one in the film corrects her at any point.

It's alright to think Ginny used her own blood or Ms Norks' blood, even better

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Speaking of the plot not holding up to close scrutiny, I've always wondered: Voldemort intended to be reborn from the memory in the diary. So, teenage Voldemort. If he had succeeded, would they still have brought Voldemort back with the method in Goblet of Fire? Would there then be TWO Voldemorts? What a weird storyline.

[MSM 126]

Speaking of the plot not holding up to close scrutiny, I've always wondered: Voldemort intended to be reborn from the memory in the diary. So, teenage Voldemort. If he had succeeded, would they still have brought Voldemort back with the method in Goblet of Fire? Would there then be TWO Voldemorts? What a weird storyline.

No, he is just a very real memory of the younger Voldemort. He is as unreal as the ghostly Harry and Hermione from the Horcrux.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

No. that's not what the movie suggests.

Tom Riddle is, in some way, feeding of Ginny's life energy to be reborn.

[Incanus 5,716]

Pretty spot on review Stefan.

[MSM 126]

The main problem I have with CoS is the talking spider. Verisimilitude for me stops at talking animals.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

What really annoys me about this film is that Columbus decided to make everything even more theatrical than in the previous entry. Every line, every action is overdone (the duel between Snape and Lockhart and takes at least three shots (does an owl's entrance to the Dining Hall really need to be set up? I thought it was supposed to be an everyday event). That kills the pace and makes the story even more confusing: everything looks important. I'm glad other directors decided to ditch this approach.

Also, Hermione interrupts a class with McGonagall to ask a totally unrelated question about the school's history and all the ever-correct teacher does is say "Very well", forget what lesson she was teaching and start talking about the Chamber of Secrets. Really? What school is this?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

People like to bash Chris Columbus for these films, but it has to be said that he got the casting in the first film absolutely spot-on.

[MSM 126]

People like to bash Chris Columbus for these films, but it has to be said that he got the casting in the first film absolutely spot-on.

I agree. Also I loved the cinematography and the pace was perfect, IMO. The extended scenes e.g. the entering owl gave Williams wonderful opportunities for the music to flourish, much like flying Hedwig in the first film.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

What really annoys me about this film is that Columbus decided to make everything even more theatrical than in the previous entry. Every line, every action is overdone (the duel between Snape and Lockhart and takes at least three shots (does an owl's entrance to the Dining Hall really need to be set up? I thought it was supposed to be an everyday event). That kills the pace and makes the story even more confusing: everything looks important. I'm glad other directors decided to ditch this approach.

Also, Hermione interrupts a class with McGonagall to ask a totally unrelated question about the school's history and all the ever-correct teacher does is say "Very well", forget what lesson she was teaching and start talking about the Chamber of Secrets. Really? What school is this?

really, you never asked a teacher an unrelated question. what world are you from? Hell life is just exactly like that, you want an example, look at virtually any thread and see how a single comment or question can turn the thread on it's ear.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

Well, but when you are class, where time is limited and are surrounded by other people, it's just rare for a teacher to drop the lesson at hand and actually answer something that doesn't have anything to do with what everybody else is focused on.

Telling you to wait until the class is over is way more common.

The extended scenes e.g. the entering owl gave Williams wonderful opportunities for the music to flourish, much like flying Hedwig in the first film.

Yeah, that's cool for us, but does it make a better film?

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Well, but when you are class, where time is limited and are surrounded by other people, it's just rare for a teacher to drop the lesson at hand and actually answer something that doesn't have anything to do with what everybody else is focused on.

Telling you to wait until the class is over is way more common.

The extended scenes e.g. the entering owl gave Williams wonderful opportunities for the music to flourish, much like flying Hedwig in the first film.

Yeah, that's cool for us, but does it make a better film?

I guess you had a more structured class experience than I did. We were allowed a bit more interaction. And yes I'm talking about 6th and 7th grades, the equivalent to years 1 and 2 at Hogwarts. Our nuns, while strict disciplinarians were very open in the class structure. We were not bound by structured lesson plans.

[Jeff 10]

If I remember correctly, Ginny woke from her trances wondering why she was covered in "red paint," but it may have actually been the blood from the roosters she was bewitched to kill.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Not in the film.

[Jeff 10]

If it's not stated in the films it reverts back to the books by default. And in this case it wasn't really important enough to state in the movie.

[As Hagrid enters great hall people start clapping one by one.]

Harry: Wait!![crowd goes silent] Ginny, you never explained which substance you used to make those markings on the wall!

Ginny: Oh, I just cut myself and used my own blood.

Harry: Oh, carry on then.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

If it's not stated in the films it reverts back to the books by default. And in this case it wasn't really important enough to state in the movie.

Wrong! This suggest you need to read the book to understand certain aspects in the movie.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

If it's not stated in the films it reverts back to the books by default. And in this case it wasn't really important enough to state in the movie.

Wrong! This suggest you need to read the book to understand certain aspects in the movie.

That is true in all the films. There are parts that go unexplained that are well explained in the book.

The most obvious is the Marauders map in POA. It's never explained in the films and it caused many non book fans to question.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

Yes. It's called a plot hole.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Yes. It's called a plot hole.

yes but one that could have been closed in less than one minute. A simple statement from Lupin that he was the Moonie of Wormtail, Moonie, Padfoot and Prongs.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

That's not actually important.

to the story as presented in the film.

There's no need to explain were the Maurauders Map came from, like it's was not necessary to explain were the invisibility cloak came from in the first film.

The problem is, that up until the shrieking shack part, the films has been going in a deliberate pace, and suddenly it goes into Warp 6, while throwing huge amounts of plot exposition at you.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

the explanation of the cloak is well handled, and the explanation is short and incomplete as at this stage none of us are aware that it is the cloak of invisibility, part of the deathly hallows. It's just another beautiful part of a larger tapestry.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

No. The cloak turn up in the first film when it's needed for the plot. No explanation is ever given until 9 years later, when the cloak no longer matters.

Why were the 2 films called Deathly Hallows anyway while they hardly feature them. I can't even recall if they had any real relevance to the plot?

[Jay 37,374]

I haven't seen the last movie yet, but The Elder Wand at least is a pretty important part of the end of the story...

[JoeinAR 1,949]

No. The cloak turn up in the first film when it's needed for the plot. No explanation is ever given until 9 years later, when the cloak no longer matters.

Why were the 2 films called Deathly Hallows anyway while they hardly feature them. I can't even recall if they had any real relevance to the plot?

the cloak is given to Harry on Christmas Day, and latter Dumbledore reveals that he gave it back to Harry having had it in his possession when Voldemort killed Harry's parents.

as to the Deathly Hallows having any real relevance to the plot, it's told in the marvelous animated sequence in Part one and the Wand is mentioned and destroyed in Pt 2, the stone is revealed in part 2, having cursed Dumbledore and sentencing him to death, and revealing Harry's lost loved ones to him in his walk to Voldemort in the forbidden forest. Of course the cloak is always ever present.

[Jeff 10]

If it's not stated in the films it reverts back to the books by default. And in this case it wasn't really important enough to state in the movie.

Wrong! This suggest you need to read the book to understand certain aspects in the movie.

You absolutely have to read the books to fully understand and appreciate every detail in the movie. You do not, however need to read the books to follow the movie or to enjoy the movie. Why do you need to know the substance Ginny used to write her messages on the wall? You can infer that it is blood of some kind, but it doesn't matter.

But that's just an example of many details that are left out of the movies which are not important to the plot - they're not plot holes.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

the cloak is given to Harry on Christmas Day, and latter Dumbledore reveals that he gave it back to Harry having had it in his possession when Voldemort killed Harry's parents.

as to the Deathly Hallows having any real relevance to the plot, it's told in the marvelous animated sequence in Part one and the Wand is mentioned and destroyed in Pt 2, the stone is revealed in part 2, having cursed Dumbledore and sentencing him to death, and revealing Harry's lost loved ones to him in his walk to Voldemort in the forbidden forest. Of course the cloak is always ever present.

Was it ever properly explained in the movie that Harry's invisibility cloak is in fact the last of the Deathly Hallows? I think it was hinted at, but I can't remember.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The movies state one of the Hallows was an invisibility cloak, but never specifies that it's the one Potter got in the first film.

Also, in HBP we see the Elder wand in Dumbledore's desk a the end of the film, and in the next one it's in his tombe.

[Richard Penna 3,695]

That's not actually important.

to the story as presented in the film.

There's no need to explain were the Maurauders Map came from, like it's was not necessary to explain were the invisibility cloak came from in the first film.

When Lupin takes the map from Harry and starts telling him off for using the map (if I remember correctly - I haven't seen the film for years), I can imagine non-readers thinking "so how does Lupin know what the map is and what it does"?

It would literally have taken one extra line in that scene to remove that ambiguity.