alcantaraj-16594 "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" is as magical as its predecessor, "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone." All praises I had from the first film (acting, storyttelling, everything else) stayed in the second film. As for flaws, this second HP film has some1.) IT'S TOO LONG!! The first 30 minutes of the movie could have been shortened to 15 minutes as those scenes did not need to be that long. 2.) Too much & too "on the nose" set-ups/exposition. A lot of things were explained/set-up for upcoming scenes. Some were very obvious while others made the film 5 minutes too long. Such scenes include: the "baby trees" teaching scene where the teacher said they can unpetrify students, Justin telling Harry he's muggle-born and Ron's broken wand. 3.) What's up with the Weasley car!? They never explained that. Overall, if not for the 3 reasons above, this film could have been y good as its predecessor. Sadly, it's slightly not as good. It's still great, though

Minahzur Rahman I was very eagerly excited to see this after the success of Philosopher's Stones. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets didn't disappoint me one bit; in fact, it's almost as similar to the first one. The story about the "Chamber of Secrets" was really interesting. The movie felt just as dark, or maybe even more darker than the first one, and that was a good thing I feel. It's the suspense that got me to like Chamber of Secrets. The characters were further developed, and that was important since the series would obviously continue with Prisoner of Azkaban. Before seeing the movie, I remember my teacher reading the book to our class, and I found the book to be really delightful! It's a great movie to watch along with the Philosopher's Stones especially during the Christmas period. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets was a fine Harry Potter movie.

invisibleunicornninja This is one of the more forgettable Harry Potter movies. Sure, the acting is good and the effects are believable and the cinematography is well-done, but the plot is bloated and full of infuriating holes. And that is all I have to say about this nothingburger.

Hermione Granger This is not as whimsical or warming as the first Harry Potter movie, but it's different in a good way. Here, we get a bit dark and begin to see more adventure, as well as go deeper into Voldemort's rise and the main outline of the whole books/movies. The acting and CGI are way better compared to the last one; acting was good but CGI a bit cheesy in the first. Here, though the CGI for the ghosts isn't perfect, we have well-done CGI for an enormous snake called the Basilisk. With the actors and characters back from the last movie, you can see that the actors are truly finding the character they're playing and how to play them better and stronger. The new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher is hilarious; Kenneth Branagh did a superior job. The house elf Dobby is annoying at first but likable at the end. We're introduced to Draco's dad, Lucius Malfoy, who seems deadly and like he has much more to him than it seems. Though not all of the movies are, I think this one is a good match for the book. A lot of it is just like I imagined.Of course, it's not all perfect--nothing ever is. We still have witchcraft, and though we only see the shadow, blood pours out of the Basilisk's eyes. In the end, though, it is definitely a must-see that is thrilling and enjoyable, one of the few movies I wish to watch over and over again.