Nitpicking Movies: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

After the smashing success of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, the franchise needed a strong follow-up. Failure to keep the momentum could have caused the film series to stumble, as happened with Disney’s ill-fated attempt to adapt all seven Chronicles of Narnia. Fortunately, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets did the job well.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets provided a strong second chapter that continued the trend of staying mostly true to the novels that served as source material. It showed that Warner Brothers had struck gold with the casting of Daniel Radcliffe and demonstrated the progressively darker tone that sequels would take.

It also has several things that make me scrunch up my face and go, “Huh?” So, as with its predecessor, I’m going to launch into a series of nitpicks about this film.

Read more at the Screamsheet!

Nitpicking Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (or Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone for we dumb Americans) is my favorite film from the Harry Potter series that I’ve seen because it’s the story that feels the most like an introduction to a magical world rather than yet another fantasy tale about a chosen one facing off against a great evil. Like all the films, it does a pretty good job of adapting J.K. Rowling’s original work and features an amazing cast that not only introduced the world to the likes of Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson but also included such great stars as Maggie Smith, Alan Rickman, Robbie Coltrane, Richard Harris, and more. It’s a fun time and a good movie, so now I’m going to spend some time whining about nitpicky details.

Read more at the Screamsheet!