 | |
List Price: $14.97 | | Label: Warner Home Video
Salesrank: 1400
Released: December 11, 2007 |
| Our Price: $5.35 |
| Used Price: $4.90 |
|
MPAA Rating: PG (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Media: DVD |
|
Editorial Review:
The next installment in the Harry Potter series finds young wizard Harry Potter (DANIEL RADCLIFFE) and his friends Ron Weasley (RUPERT GRINT) and Hermione Granger (EMMA WATSON) facing new challenges during their second year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry as they try to uncover a dark force that is terrorizing the school.
Description of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (Widescreen Edition):
First sequels are the true test of an enduring movie franchise, and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets passes with flying colors. Expanding upon the lavish sets, special effects, and grand adventure of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, Harry's second year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry involves a darker, more malevolent tale (parents with younger children beware), beginning with the petrified bodies of several Hogwarts students and magical clues leading Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) to a 50-year-old mystery in the monster-laden Chamber of Secrets. House elves, squealing mandrakes, giant spiders, and venomous serpents populate this loyal adaptation (by Sorcerer's Stone director Chris Columbus and screenwriter Steve Kloves), and Kenneth Branagh delightfully tops the supreme supporting cast as the vainglorious charlatan Gilderoy Lockhart (be sure to view past the credits for a visual punchline at Lockhart's expense). At 161 minutes, the film suffers from lack of depth and uneven pacing, and John Williams' score mostly reprises established themes. The young, fast-growing cast offers ample compensation, however, as does the late Richard Harris in his final screen appearance as Professor Albus Dumbledore. Brimming with cleverness, wonderment, and big-budget splendor, Chamber honors the legacy of J.K. Rowling's novels. --Jeff Shannon
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (Widescreen Edition) Reviews:
Director Is Still Trying To Adapt the Book 
2009-10-29 - Like the first, the sequel suffers from being too long and literally trying to adapt the book. It worked for Lord of the Rings and they STILL cut out a lot from the books (though they did embelish a little in Two Towers by bringing in the Elves at Helm's Deep but I digress). The young cast has aged a little, clearly for the young men (they're voices are starting to get deeper). Though, to me anyways as I haven't read the books in a while, it gets a little tiring of Ron Weasley being reduced to the comedic sidekick. I know he is one, but not all need to be used for comedic relief. The elder cast is still perfect for their respective roles and Kenneth Branagh is excellent as the ego-centric Lockhart. Again, they could've trimmed up a few things; Harry didn't need to look at every little thing in the Weasley's home (despite the fact that he's not used to magic homes), Ron's slug scene could've been eliminated, some characters that're important in the novel (like Justin and Colin [who at least is important in later books]) are glanced over and are only petrified as that's what happens to them in the book. Still no Peeves (the one character I'm glad they decide to cut out as he adds nothing to the story) and instead of they're ghostly Magical History teacher giving the speech on the Chamber, its McGonagall, which I think is a better switch as they're history teacher is hardly ever mentioned once or twice in the books anyway. Action scenes and CGI are better in this than the last, Dobby and the Basilisk being the highlights of the computer charcters. And hardly any new music from John Williams, who's music from the first film is pretty much tracked to this.
Review 
2009-10-24 - The item in question arrived here on time and in one peice. They were prompt and no problems arose
Not bad if you can moderate your expectations 
2009-10-05 - This is a fun movie even though it suffers from some of the vices of the first movie in the series and not participating in the virtues of the subsequent films.
There are some things that are better in this film than the first. In particular, Daniel Radcliffe evidences enormous improvement as an actor. And because there is less set up in this one than in the first film, they are able to delve more directly into storytelling. And as in the first film, Hogwarts is rendered memorably. Still, the film is in many ways a disappointment. Chris Columbus's direction was as weak in the second as in the first and either he or the film's editor had to take responsibility for the terrible pacing in many of the film's scenes. On every level, all subsequent films would be better directed and edited. One might quibble over the script, but not the direction and editing. Future films would not drag in individual scenes like in this one.
I do, however, have a lot of problem with the script for this film. Any adaptation of a novel by a movie has to make compromises. Still, ultimately the script has to function as an independent entity. The problem here was the abrupt and inelegant shifts from one scene to another, with no foreshadowing of what would come later or thematic repetition. Few parts of the screenplay resonate with other parts of the screenplay. Now, this very possibly is not the fault of the screenwriter. Directors and editors can radically alter screenplays during the course of filming. so unless we could see the original screenplay and to what degree it was preserved in the filming it is hard to blame the screenwriter. We blame the director. If what was filmed was the writer produced, a writer should have been brought in to fix it. I suspect that the director made changes. Who can say for sure. But one thing is for sure: the film has almost no narrative flow. And as an adaptation of a novel is does a poor job of maintaining its key themes.
Luckily, the movies got much, much better. THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN is by any standard a great film, the best directed film in the series, while the later films were buoyed by very substantive stories. The movies are not nearly as good as the books. That is pretty much par for the course. There have been very, very few movies in the history of film that were better than the novels upon which they were based, except in cases where the novels were not very to begin with.
One of the more humorous sidelights of the film was that some Russians took offense at the film, imagining that the elf Dobby was intended to look like Vladimir Putin. Some Russian lawyers for a while even contemplated taking legal action. There appears to be little justification for such an action. Whatever resemblance between Dobby and Putin would be strictly physical and Dobby in no other way would appear to refer to Putin. I personally think the easily offended lawyers needed to bash their heads a few times on their desks as penance for their silliness.
Harry Potter and the Ultimate Edition Includes.
2009-09-25 - The following is on this gift set.....
*Each Ultimate Edition Includes
New 1 hr feature from Creating the World of Harry Potter (an 8- hr documentary that reveals the filmmaking magic behind all 7 years) *Theatrical and Extended Versions of the Films *Over Two Hours of Special Features and *Magical Collectibles.
Excellent Fantasy Adventure
2009-09-18 - Excellent Fantasy Advanture! Can anyone tell me if the new Ultimate Additions have more footage than the original Blue Ray version?
