Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

[Brian G Turner]

Finally saw it - fairly good for a while, while it creates a complex web of events..

Then, suddenly, it just rushes through - without doing anything, Harry Potter is suddenly given all the information he needs after knowing next to nothing.

So he goes off to face a terrible foe - then "Deus Ex Machina" comes into play (twice) so that Harry can defeat it.

Basically, it's a case of Harry Potter having to do almost nothing - things happen to the protagonist, rather than the protagonist actually doing anything. Which is not a good way to run a story.

Despite the rush, it actually still manages to get drawn out at the end with some pointless vaudevillian villian stuff that lengthens the film into a pointless 2 and a half hours.

The first film was filled with mystery and exploration. Harry was a mystery, and we shared a sense of discovery.

The second done is good up to a point - then suddenly goes the way of a pointless Victorian melodrama. There's no real reason for anything at the end, the plot is monstrously weak, and although there's good fun the exploration of various magical theme and background details, the entire story seems horribly rushed and improvished, with no real thought gone into referencing itself.

A very weak film, in my opinion.

 

[dwndrgn]

Before I comment on your critique, I have to ask...have you read the books?

 

[Brian G Turner]

Nope - so my comments apply strictly to the film. I wouldn't be surprised if the screenwriter ran out of time.

 

[jerchar]

I have read all 5 books of Harry Potter and I must admit it's the 2nd one I liked the least, but I thought the movie was OK, didn't reach the quality of the first one though. I'm impatient to see the 3rd one, I heard that Sirius Black will be played by Gary Oldman (great).

 

[dwndrgn]

After seeing your post last night I decided to watch #2 over again and I can see where you are coming from, the books goes into more detail but as with any movie adaptation, shortcuts have to be made for time. However, I would have to say that you should also consider the type of movie it is and the audience.

First, it is a 'hero' movie. #1 introduced us to Harry, had us follow his first foray into magic and the magic world, making friends, learning new things etc. #2 basically is one of those movies where we know the hero and know he will triumph in the end - not a whole lot of suspense to deal with. I can think of a million 'hero' movies where the audience knows that the hero has shot 10 bullets already but will always have another for that last heroic shot...we don't expect a whole lot, just a fun bit of entertainment.

Second, the movie is aimed at a younger audience. Now, I don't necessarily agree with this, but movie makers tend to think kids aren't smart enough to see the things that you and I might notice. To some degree this is true. But I feel that often they (movie makers) underestimate the intelligence of their audience.

So, while there were 'convenient' clues for Harry to find and he figured things out pretty quickly once he had those clues, I still enjoyed the movie for what it was. I really loved the Dobby character and the 'animated' car was great. I even really loved Ron's breaking voice and pure panic in any situation.

BTW I asked if you had read them just out of curiosity. I've read them all and enjoyed the lot. You might want to give them a whirl.

 

[dwndrgn]

I have read all 5 books of Harry Potter and I must admit it's the 2nd one I liked the least, but I thought the movie was OK, didn't reach the quality of the first one though. I'm impatient to see the 3rd one, I heard that Sirius Black will be played by Gary Oldman (great).

Me too. I'm a little worried about the Dumbledore character though. I know that Richard Harris passed away but I can't recall if he passed after the shooting of the third film, during or before. I can't imagine who would be able to portray that wisdom and quiet strength as he did.

 

[jerchar]

I do agree with Dwndrgn, Dobby was just lovable. I am looking forward to the forthcoming movies, as he comes up every so often. My favourite charachter isn't Harry but Ron, and I must say that the scene in which he panicks when they have to follow the spiders is just memorable. Did you read book no. 5 when the girl called loony something falls in love with Ron and he doesn't catch the drift????

 

[jerchar]

here is the new Dumbledore

 

[dwndrgn]

Yes, Ron is my favorite too, he seems like your next-door neighbor, a regular guy. Sometimes though he can be really oblivious!

So the new Dumbledore has the look. We'll see if he can do the 'presence'.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Oh, I'm simply over-critical of everything! The first film I simply found much stronger as story. I really enjoyed that.

The second, though - everything is just far far too convenient from the moment you-know-who is petrified - the note, the blinding, the sword...

 

[iKwak]

When is the estimate of the next release in the theatre?

 

[jerchar]

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

Release Date: June 4, 2004
Studio: Warner Bros.Director: Alfonso Cuaron
Screenwriter: Steven KlovesStarring: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Gary Oldman, David Thewlis, Peter Best, David Bradley, Julie Christie, Robbie Coltrane, Alfie Enoch, Tom Felton, Pam Ferris, Dawn French, Michael Gambon, Jimmy Gardner, Richard Griffiths, Joshua Herdman, Matt Lewis, Hugh Mitchell, Devon Murray, Katharine Nicholson, Chris Rankin, Alan Rickman, Fiona Shaw, Maggie Smith, Timothy Spall, Jim Tavare, Julie Walters, Jamie Waylett, Paul Whitehouse, Emma Thompson (cameo)
Genre: Action, Adventure, Fantasy
MPAA Rating: Not available
Official Website: HarryPotter.warnerbros.com

 

[dwndrgn]

It's so far away...sigh. Oh well, at least we will have the next LOTR episode to see before the end of this year. I like having things to look forward to

.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Gary Oldman...Dawn French...Richard Griffiths...Timothy Spall....Paul Whitehouse - - - crikey, some notable British names in there.