Generally favorable reviews - based on 35 Critics What's this?

User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 441 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring: , ,
  • Summary: This second installment in the Harry Potter series finds young wizard Harry Potter (Radcliffe) and his friends Ron (Grint) and Hermione (Watson) facing new challenges during their second year at Hogwarts as they try to discover a dark force that is terrorizing the school.
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 23 out of 35
  2. Negative: 1 out of 35
  1. 100
    Brimming with invention and new ideas, and its Hogwarts School seems to expand and deepen before our very eyes into a world large enough to conceal unguessable secrets -- What a glorious movie.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    Darker and more dramatic, this account of Harry's troubled second year at Hogwarts may be a bit overlong and unmodulated in pacing, but it possesses a confidence and intermittent flair that begin to give it a life of its own apart of the literary franchise, something the initial picture never achieved.
  3. Reviewed by: Ty Burr
    Moves the franchise even closer to Indiana Jones territory, with bloodcurdling action scenes and a passel of climactic computer-generated slime beasties unparalleled in their potential ability to -- I'm quoting from both book and film here -- '' rip, tear, rend, kill. ''
  4. Scenes that should have been cut are included, so as not to disappoint anyone. What could have been a small, sweet and genuinely scary film is instead a full hour too long and many millions too fat.
  5. 63
    It remains an expertly assembled companion piece to its source material, with charms you can't overlook. But the great Harry Potter should be casting a more powerful spell.
  6. 60
    A well-chosen cast helps make the wild notions convincing, and director Chris Columbus presents it all in an attractive, thoroughly watchable package. But try imagining a universe in which the Harry Potter series existed only in film form.
  7. Big, dull and empty -- nobody associated with this production appears to have thought hard about storytelling.

See all 35 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Negative: 18 out of 136
  1. Apr 16, 2011
    Well written, wonderfully cast, and flawlessly flowing, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets offers suspenseful thrills, honest emotion, and an obvious respect for JK Rowling's masterpiece. Expand
  2. AdnanA
    Jul 19, 2008
    Again this movie has also been criticized for following the book too much. Personally, I think staying true to the book is the strongest point of the movie. Staying with the book imparts the same magic of the book which has created the Harry Potter phenomena. The story... well I don't have to say anything about that because the success of this franchise has already proved it. Acting... couldn't be better. The trio, Daniel, Rupert and Emma were born for these roles. All the adults are perfect for their roles and create the same attitude and personality as their characters have in the books. Direction... Warner bros did a very smart thing by giving it to Chris. A person like him knows how to make a family movie which not only entertains but remains in your memory forever. Even though many have criticized Chris for making such a kiddish movie but I think that as this is the first year you have to stay with the kiddish atmosphere as the children are only 12. Visuals... for a 2002 movie it's visuals are excellent. Even today they look fantastic! Overall I'd rate this movie an A because the book created the world and the characters but the movie has created the true images of the Harry Potter world. Expand
  3. ck
    Aug 3, 2009
    Not a kids movie.
  4. DexterJ.
    Mar 17, 2008
    A great movie full of excitement and fun.
  5. Dec 30, 2012
    This movie, like the first, was very well done. Also like the first one, there were some major and minor differences; however, not all of these seemed to work as well. Obviously it's impossible to include every aspect but there were some things that I think they could've/should've done differently. The most glaring example is how they butchered the ending of the movie. That didn't happen even remotely that way in the book. They made the Harry Potter character look kind of dumb with the way he reacted in the chamber whereas in the book, the things that happened weren't necessarily in his control and he had to react in certain ways in order to survive. Also, they cut out quite a bit of the process Harry, Ron, and Hermione took in discovering the secret. Still, they ultimately got the gist of the book and didn't really leave out anything too major. The acting of the students was drastically improved so the movie flowed smoother. I just thought they could've done a much better job with the book-to-movie adaptation of the ending. Expand
  6. TomK.
    Aug 19, 2007
    The second film is not much better than the first film, it's still childish and not matching the book's environment, but it's still enjoyable as a film. Expand
  7. Jun 28, 2013
    Boring as hell. Painful to sit through this. My Lord, it is a good thing they changed directors even though they were just as horrible too. Read the books, not this poorly acted adaptation. Expand

See all 136 User Reviews