Order by:

Add your comment

Do you want to let us know what you think? Just login, after which you will be redirected back here and you can leave your comments.

Comments 1 - 13 of 13

Siskoid's avatar


Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets was way better than the first film in the series - less of the horrid adoptive family, a more coherent story, a better villain - but still suffers from the same problems as the first's bloated, faithful adaptation. It's much too long at 2 hours 40 minutes (are you KIDDING me?!!), and you can easily see where they could have trimmed at least 40 minutes. For example, there's yet another Quiddich scene that isn't really integrated into the film's plot. It's just there because it's synonymous with Harry Potter. And it's not the only culprit. Kenneth Branagh's poser of a wizard has some good moments, though by now, I'm pretty sick of Santa Claus/Bumblebore's wispy voice and preferential treatment of certain students; I know it's sad the original actor died before the third film, but bring on Michael Gambon, he won't be such a caricature. Nevertheless, I'm warming to the series now that the world has been set up, but I'm nowhere near a place where you could make me say it's a good movie.
8 years 11 months ago
fetzu's avatar


I am ashamed of having seen this (until the end)..
12 years 3 months ago
Earring72's avatar


Pfffffff, that was a long 2 hours and 40minutes. Didn;t enjoy the first one and the second on wasn't much better. Have no idea what i was watching......
2 years 1 month ago
IreneAdler's avatar


Another nice Harry Potter movie! Loved Snape and the spiders (although I'm really scared of spiders)... nice one.
10 years 9 months ago
HarryPotterisshit's avatar


This is stupid, kiddie, long, boring. I mean KID VS BIG SNAKE (BASILISK) REALLY? so cliche.....
7 years 10 months ago
richjenkins28's avatar



The Romans had a plumbing system. Not that far fetched.
And kind of an odd point since everyone there knows magic.
8 years 10 months ago
CinemaDump's avatar


One of the lesser Harry Potter films in my opinion. It's no disaster or anything, but definitely not as good as the first.
9 years 1 month ago
Mudskipper's avatar


my favorite
12 years 11 months ago
Edwinem's avatar



seriously, he needs to die
13 years 6 months ago
Deanita's avatar


In my opinion, there are almost no really good film in Harry Potter franchise (only Prisoner of Azkaban did it) especially with this one. The VFX looks so terrible especially with CGI Dobby, also for acting too. All three main children character can't act anymore.
8 years 1 month ago
saydin7's avatar


man i am torturing myself.2 out of 6. these movies gonna kill me i think.
14 years 1 month ago
neocowboy's avatar


Apparently Hogwarts was built 1000 years ago but Salazar Slytherin's entrance to the Chamber of Secrets is entirely constructed around indoor plumbing.

It is also mentioned that the Chamber of Secrets had been extensively searched for over the years, but at the end Fawkes flies them directly out of the cave system the chamber resides in via a gapping fissure in the grounds around Hogwarts.

And while I'm at it, was Lucius Malfoy really going to use the killing curse on Harry at Hogwarts in broad daylight? If so why did he take so long to do so? It seems to me that if you were in such a fit of rage that you would risk life in Azkaban you wouldn't slowly take 10 paces up to the victim, elaborately raising your wand menacingly and casually speaking a ranged curse that he can cast nonverbally. -_-


The Roman aqueduct based piping is not the same as modern indoor plumbing. Secondly, magic is not an all purpose excuse for plot holes or anachronisms. If anything it only poses more questions; why would wizards have plumbing - a muggle invention - when they could just cast aguamenti whenever they needed water? It's the same with mechanical locks. Why do they have them if they can be opened with a spell first years can cast?
9 years 6 months ago
Dieguito's avatar


12 years 10 months ago
View comments