Chamber of Secrets review: a step up, but the plot falls apart

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets came out roughly 24 years ago, and I think it's a step up on the first film in nearly every way. It's the funniest Harry Potter movie, its effects hold up well, and it does more with its story and characters. But it's far from perfect, and the more you think about its plot, the less it makes sense.

Some fans love this movie for its tone and for how it follows the first film. Others see it as the black sheep of the franchise, given the direction the later films took. I want to look at how its production compares to Sorcerer's Stone, how its story compares, and how well it has aged.

Chamber of Secrets started filming three days after Sorcerer's Stone opened

Principal photography began on November 19th, 2001, just three days after Sorcerer's Stone was released. Chris Columbus returned as director and Steve Kloves returned as writer. That made Chamber of Secrets the only film in the franchise to be produced and released within a single year of its predecessor. Warner Brothers was targeting a November 2002 release, so the team had only one year to make it, which is not a lot of time.

The clear positive was that shooting back to back saved the studio money and the crew time. The locations used for the first film could be used again, which is why Hogwarts feels so consistent across both. That's also why the budget was 20% smaller than the first film's, even though it feels grander in scale. Second unit work was said to have begun three weeks before principal photography. As far as I'm aware, this didn't put extra pressure on the crew. If anything, it made the whole project one long movie they worked on for an extra year.

Kenneth Branagh landed Gilderoy Lockhart after Hugh Grant was reportedly the top choice

Most of the cast returned, and the most significant addition was Gilderoy Lockhart, the new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher. Hugh Grant was reported to be the top choice. When that didn't work out, Rupert Everett and Jason Isaacs were considered. The role eventually went to Kenneth Branagh, one of the best working actors of our time. Isaacs, despite losing out on Lockhart, was offered Lucius Malfoy, Draco's father. He was initially hesitant but accepted.

Tom Marvolo Riddle was the other major addition. James McAvoy and Eddie Redmayne were both considered, but Christian Coulson won the part. Redmayne would later star as Newt Scamander in the Fantastic Beasts films. Mark Williams joined as Arthur Weasley, Toby Jones voiced Dobby, and Shirley Henderson played Moaning Myrtle. Despite playing the ghost of a 14 year old, Henderson was 37 during production. You would never notice that while watching the film.

Columbus wanted better effects, and they still hold up

Columbus had a strong desire to improve on the first film in nearly every respect, including both visual and practical effects. I have to applaud him, because this movie holds up fairly well. Dobby was entirely digital and still looks excellent. At times it feels like Daniel Radcliffe is looking off into space because Dobby isn't there, but Dobby still looks great. Many of the spiders and certain shots of the basilisk also hold up very well.

The practical effects were arguably even better. The most notable puppets and animatronics were Fawkes the phoenix, the mandrakes, Aragog and the basilisk. Aragog was said to be the toughest for the production team to create, eventually needing 15 people to operate it at once. The Whomping Willow was also said to be a mix of digital and practical effects.

A reported lice outbreak was the one big obstacle on set

I mostly stand by the idea that there wasn't much strain on the crew, but there was one big obstacle. Reportedly, there was a massive lice outbreak on set, and apparently it became so widespread that production was delayed for a few days. Principal photography wrapped in July 2002, just four months before release.

John Williams returned to compose the score during a remarkable year in which he also scored Minority Report, Catch Me If You Can and Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones. The marketing push was big again. The first teaser came out in June 2002 alongside Scooby-Doo, and another EA video game arrived just before the film. Reports were that Chamber of Secrets LEGO tie-ins ran into big shortages because of demand. Only the first four books had been released when the film opened on November 15th, 2002.

Columbus nailed the feel of Harry Potter

Chamber of Secrets is a conflicting movie for me. On one hand, I love it, and not in a guilty pleasure way. It's a fun movie that gives me everything I want from a Harry Potter movie. On the other hand, and this is more a criticism of the book, the story makes less sense the more you think about it. It also introduces things about the Harry Potter world I find jarring.

Because it was filmed back to back with Sorcerer's Stone, the two share the same feel, and I love that feel. These first two may not be my favorite films of the franchise, but Columbus is my favorite director of it. These movies have a warmth the rest don't, and when I read the books, I picture these two films rather than the later six. He nailed the feel of Harry Potter, which I've argued is the most important part of this franchise. The strong effects and lifelike sets matter too, because immersion is so important in fantasy. If everything looks fake, you won't immerse yourself in the world easily.

Harry and Ron get the character work Sorcerer's Stone lacked

The first film lacked character development because its focus was establishing the world. With that done, this one gives the characters more depth, mostly Harry and Ron. The film series butchers Ron, making him seem the weakest and most cowardly of the three, which to be fair he kind of is in the books. That usually comes from Hermione saving the group as the smartest. With Hermione petrified in the third act, Ron and Harry have to figure things out themselves, and that adds to Ron.

Harry benefits most. I've seen people call this story filler because little of it is consequential, besides the diary being retconned into a Horcrux. That's partially true, but the Harry material is important for the rest of the series. This is where we first learn Harry and Voldemort are connected. A 12 year old sharing a connection with the man who murdered his parents is compelling, and it makes Harry insecure. His scar means people think of Voldemort when they see his face, being a Parselmouth draws him toward Slytherin, people wonder if he's the heir of Slytherin, and the Sorting Hat already told the school he'd do well there.

While preparing this piece, I saw someone point out a detail I'd missed. In the flashback, Dumbledore asks Tom Riddle if there's anything he'd like to tell him, and Tom says no, word for word the exchange Harry and Dumbledore had earlier. Apparently this wasn't in the book, so it's a clever addition. The real climax of Harry's arc comes after he defeats the memory of a 16 year old Voldemort, when Dumbledore confirms their similarities but says what separates them is how they act. Harry asked not to be put in Slytherin, something Voldemort clearly wouldn't do. It's not the most in depth arc, but it's important, and it carries into the later movies.

Muggle-born hatred and Lucius Malfoy widen the world

Maybe the biggest ways this film expands on the first are the scope of the world and the mystery. Rowling understands not everything needs revealing at once, and Chamber of Secrets shows a little more. Its biggest introduction is Muggle-born wizards and the hatred toward them, which becomes the entire focus of Voldemort's crusade by the end of the series. The movie does a decent job introducing that.

Lucius is an interesting and entertaining character, but what he represents matters more than who he is: he's the first real Death Eater we see. That ties into learning about Voldemort's past as a student. I like how this movie expands the world.

The mystery is the biggest improvement on the first film

The mystery was the weakest part of Sorcerer's Stone, though I don't blame Rowling, since setting up the world mattered more. With the world established, this film can tell a more in depth, more clever mystery. It starts right away, with Dobby warning Harry that something bad will happen at Hogwarts. Then the portal to the train stops working, and at Hogwarts Harry hears whispers and blood is written on the wall.

The way Harry and his friends uncover clues is more fun too. Logically, Hermione's Polyjuice Potion plan is kind of stupid, but it's creative and leads to funny moments. Entering the diary to see the past is a creative way to give Harry information. Then there's Aragog, a giant talking spider whose sequence turns into a perfectly executed action sequence. It's not the mysteries themselves but how Harry and his friends solve them that makes the franchise fun. In the ending, Harry fights a basilisk with a sword and stabs the diary with its tooth. "A wizard fighting a giant snake with a sword is awesome."

Gilderoy Lockhart is my favorite character in the franchise

I can't emphasize enough how much I love Lockhart. "Every scene with him is comedy gold." His ego is so large that I can't help but admire it. His first instinct on meeting Harry is to give him a free copy of all his books. In his first class, he has a painting of himself painting himself. It makes these movies so much fun to watch, because I can't help but picture how much shame I would have if I were in Lockhart's shoes.

Making a 12 year old help sign your fan mail for four hours in detention made me laugh so hard. Many of my friends say the graveyard scene in Goblet of Fire is the best scene in the franchise, but I don't know how, when the Cornish Pixie scene exists. Lockhart releases the pixies on his students and runs away. The movie has plenty of other laughs: the running joke with Ron's owl, and Malfoy casually dropping the biggest slur in the wizarding world, which is wrong but executed so funnily. Lucius is extra in the way Snape is, putting his hands on the kids in his first scene and attempting to kill Harry right outside Dumbledore's office. I know many people hate how that's executed, but I find it so funny.

The plot makes less sense the more you think about it

I stand by the mystery being a strength, but the story weakens under scrutiny. Lucius puts the diary in Ginny's cauldron so she'll do Tom Riddle's bidding, apparently knowing it can manipulate its owner. He wants Muggle-born students dead or petrified, so Ginny opens the chamber and writes on the walls that it's been opened. As a nitpick, the villain announcing the plan makes the mystery easier. Without that message, Harry would have had to discover the chamber himself. And why would Voldemort give Lucius his diary before his first "death", which I think is explained later?

The real problem, in this film and Sorcerer's Stone, is that the mysteries aren't solvable. Besides one shot of the diary going into Ginny's cauldron, you couldn't guess it was her, though maybe that shot is enough and I'm wrong. You also couldn't tell the diary manipulated her, because Harry has it too and isn't manipulated, despite being only a year older. If Lucius was targeting Muggle-borns, why was Dobby scared for Harry, who isn't one? And conveniently, the bathroom Hermione uses happens to hold the chamber, and Ginny threw the diary exactly there for Harry to find.

Fawkes saving Harry shows one of Rowling's biggest flaws

For the second film in a row, many things magically happen for Harry to defeat the villain, and this is one of Rowling's biggest flaws as a writer. In Sorcerer's Stone, Harry had no plan, Quirrell died by touching him, and Dumbledore explained afterward that his mother's protection did it. Here, Harry enters the chamber with no plan to stop the basilisk and is beyond blessed that Fawkes attacks it, gives him the sword, and heals him with its tears.

Harry did kill the basilisk through his own effort, but my point stands. We see Fawkes earlier, which is the bare minimum of setup, and only afterward learn Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore brought him. The climaxes don't hit as hard knowing things always go Harry's way, and I wish that had been improved from the book. This is also the only entry where the Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher has nothing to do with the main plot. I love Lockhart, but beyond humor and being an obstacle for Harry and Ron, he's irrelevant, which feels a little lazy from Rowling.

Why does Slytherin exist at Hogwarts?

My other major complaint applies to the whole franchise, but this is where it becomes clear. Nearly everyone in Slytherin is a terrible person, the house is built on hatred for other witches and wizards, and many families were directly tied to Voldemort's attacks. Later we learn most Slytherin parents are still Death Eaters. Most jarring to me is Deathly Hallows, where at least in the book McGonagall makes Slytherin students choose between defending the school or siding with Voldemort. If you're worried students will side with your school's enemy, they shouldn't be students there.

It's a bit of a lazy comparison, but I can't help thinking of a school for Nazis in 1960s Germany, with parents who were in the SS and students wanting Hitler back, all excused as cultural difference. I ask myself whether that's a fair comparison. Even McGonagall's history lesson makes Salazar Slytherin a bigot, so why would the other three founders build a school with him? I will never get over this. If Slytherin had been removed and those associated with it publicly shamed, the events of the series could have been avoided.

How did Lockhart ever get hired?

Some questions are more fun than serious, since this is a kids franchise. Maybe the biggest mystery is how Dumbledore hired Lockhart. Students and even teachers seem to know he's a fraud, and this is Defense Against the Dark Arts, not some joke class. There's a theory, which I've discussed before, that Dumbledore lets Harry get away with reckless things to prepare him to fight Voldemort. If true, Dumbledore would prioritize this class, and hiring Lockhart doesn't. Late in the film, professors jokingly tell Lockhart to go find the chamber, while students are being petrified. And why would a grifter take a job that puts him in a position to be exposed?

Four more reasons Hogwarts is a dangerous school

I'm continuing my list of reasons Hogwarts is dangerous, which reached four with the first film. Five: students are being petrified. Imagine a child writing home that a basilisk is loose, that looking it in the eye kills you, and that it already killed a student, Moaning Myrtle. Six: professors are useless at solving problems. Dumbledore says "Hogwarts is no longer safe" and does nothing until more students are petrified. Shouldn't solving this be the teachers' job rather than Harry's?

Seven: students can drug other kids. Hermione slips something into cupcakes, and Crabbe and Goyle pass out. It's funny they never report it, but if the sexes were reversed and a boy did this to two girls, that would be really bad. Eight: Hogwarts lets grifters teach important classes. During the Cornish Pixie scene, the pixies hang Neville up and knock down a giant dinosaur model that could have fallen on a student, and Lockhart runs away. It's like hiring someone that incompetent to teach drivers ed. I think Chamber of Secrets makes more of a case than the first film for why Hogwarts is unsafe, and things only get worse from here.

Chamber of Secrets takes the top spot in my ranking for now

The film scored 82% on Rotten Tomatoes with an 80% audience score, and 7.5 out of 10 on IMDb, slightly lower than the first movie. It grossed 878 million dollars, less than the first film, but still a massive win for Warner Brothers and the second highest grossing movie of 2002.

I'm ranking every Harry Potter movie, and I definitely like this one more than the first. So for now, Chamber of Secrets takes the top spot on my list.