Quick Movie Reviews
Rating of
3.5/4
Logan D. McCoy - wrote on 11/27/2022
It's runtime is certainly cumbersome, but "The Chamber of Secrets" makes sure that almost every minute of it is wisely spent developing its compelling mystery and main character.
Rating of
3/4
Matthew Brady - wrote on 01/18/2014
In his second year at Hogwarts a dark force terrorizes the students and Harry becomes a suspect. This movie is more corning then the first movie with the visual effect's and the writing but I don't hate this movie I actually liked the movie.
Rating of
2.5/4
worleyjamers - wrote on 06/29/2013
Probably the weakest in the series. A lot like the first film. Highly entertaining and well-done!
Rating of
3.5/4
mitchellyoung - wrote on 05/12/2012
This is a slightly darker and more mature sequel to the magical first film, with a more fearsome villain and hints at the greatness of the film series' conclusion. It's not my favorite of the Potter films, but it's adventure-packed and features some great visual moments, particularly the Basilisk fight.
Rating of
2.5/4
Moviehead - wrote on 04/01/2012
Like all Harry Potter films it can entertain you but it's not great.
Rating of
3/4
Unknown - wrote on 06/15/2011
Slightly better than the first film. It's still one of the most faithful book adaptations I've ever seen, like it's predecessor, but it also retains that kid-friendly-ness and lack of emotion. The third act is more dangerous and surprising, though.
Rating of
3/4
PsychoKing1227 - wrote on 05/01/2010
This was a decent sequel and had better performances by Rupert Grint and Emma Watson. Daniel Radcliffe still left something to be desired, but overall, not a bad casting decision as he blossoms later, outshining his fellow cast members, but as of "Chamber of Secrets," I'd have to say he was the least impressive performer. Kenneth Branagh offers his own unique charm and delight in his role as Professor Lockhart, doing justice to the literary character, as he often does.
Rating of
2.5/4
Zombified - wrote on 12/27/2009
One of the better adaptations, "Harry Potter and the Camber of Secrets" brings to life one of the better books series I've read. The story was good, and from what I remember, doesn't miss the big picture of the book. The acting is good, using most of the same actors from the first movie. The magic that the book had was really brought to life through the imagination and ideas of the directing and acting crew. The characters in the film were almost exactly as they were in the book, which made for a great experience watching. I can't remember any details in particular that made the movie different from the book character wise. I loved the adaptation more than the other Harry Potter movies.
Rating of
2/4
Gabe - wrote on 07/13/2009
As it should be, the worst of the books became the worst of the movies. As the kids grow, so does their acting ability, which was very weak in the first film. But, this one is only so-so because of two things, the source material was average at best and Chris Columbus's directing was no good. He tried to turn every moment he could into a Hallmark moment, when he should have just let it be.
Rating of
2.5/4
TheWolf - wrote on 07/24/2007
As a follow up this was good. To create a well made sequel, even if it is off of a famous book, is not an easy challenge. The effects were well done, and the adaptation to screenplay was decent. Unfortunately this is also one of Richard Harris' las roles. He performed very well as Dumbledore and he gave the character a certain charasmatic charm.
