Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)

The tale of the boy wizard continues in the second film based on J. K. Rowling's best-selling series of books.

Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) is back at Hogwarts School with best friends Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson).

But this year, a new threat lies in wait for the trio. It appears someone has opened the fabled Chamber of Secrets, and released a monster on the school, and several students and staff have become petrified (as in frozen, not as in scared).

The worst thing is, as far as most people are concerned, Harry is the prime suspect. He and his friends must not only clear his name, but also find the real culprit and even - if they can - help those who have been petrified return to their normal state.

It really is wonderful to follow Harry and his friends for their second year of wizarding school. The main trio have grown significantly in their abilities, not just their characters’ abilities, but in their own acting abilities.

Screenwriter Steve Kloves again returns, and has done an incredible job of adapting this, the second book in the series, to the screen. The book does lend itself quite well to a film adaptation, nonetheless Kloves has done an amazing job yet again.

The cast as I mentioned are all fantastic, in particular newcomer to the series Kenneth Branagh as new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher and egotistical celebrity author Gilderoy Lockhart.

Sadly, this film marked Richard Harris's final performance as headmaster Albus Dumbledore, as he passed away shortly after filming, but before the film's release.

Production designer Stuart Craig returns as well, and again has done a great job bringing Rowling's wizarding world to the screen. Coupled with magnificent visual effects, everything on screen is just perfect, and so reminiscent of the beauty of the books.

Composer John Williams has outdone even himself with the score, expanding on his existing themes from the first film here, and creating something that remains connected to the first film but also stands on its own as a unique entry into the world of cinema.

Chris Columbus, who had also directed the first installment, returns for this one, again bringing a real unity to these first two films, something which wouldn't really happen again in this series until much later. He has a real gift in directing the younger members of the cast, and his love for the source material shines through in every scene.

I really enjoyed watching this again in order to write this review, and will no doubt be watching it again soon.

7 out of 10.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)

Based on the worldwide bestseller that started a phenomenon, this film is a true delight, and a joy to review.

Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) lives with his aunt and uncle and cousin. They keep him in the cupboard under the stairs, and mistreat him constantly.

On the evening of his 11th birthday, a strange visitor - a incredibly large man named Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane) - tells Harry that he is a wizard, and he has been accepted to study at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.

Upon arriving at school, Harry learns there is so much more to his life than he ever knew. Not only does he come from a well-known wizarding family, he himself is famous as “the boy who lived”, the boy who defeated one of the most powerful dark wizards ever - Voldemort, or He Who Must Not Be Named - as a baby.

There is much for Harry to learn in his first year: the rules and gameplay of wizarding sport Quidditch, at which he is a natural of course, dealing with difficult teachers such as Potions master Professor Snape (Alan Rickman), and most importantly, the value of his two closest friends, Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson).

One of the first things I must say about this film is that the casting is absolutely fabulous. This (and indeed the future films in the series) is a veritable ‘who’s who’ of British acting greats. Be it Richard Harris as Dumbledore (later replaced when he sadly passed away after the second film), Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall, Zoë Wanamaker as Madam Hooch (the flying instructor), or any of the rest of the cast, there are some amazing performances here. (Obviously, I will be reviewing the remaining films in the franchise, keep reading in coming months for those).

Another point I want to make is the quality of the adaptation. Screenwriter Steve Kloves has done an incredible job of translating J. K. Rowling’s novel to the screen. Almost everything that happens in the book happens in the film. It does help that the first book in the series is rather short, and apparently simple (though fans will know by now there was a lot more going on in that book than we knew at the time!), and doesn’t have a lot of complex subplots as later books did.

The score by John Williams is absolutely magical, no pun intended. Of course, any score by John Williams is bound to be good. One only has to look to the later films (and even the later Fantastic Beasts franchise) and hear Williams’s themes and leitmotifs used and re-used to know just how iconic and brilliant they are.

Director Chris Columbus has made a truly magnificent film here. Columbus works especially well with young and/or inexperienced actors, and has been able to bring out the best in his young cast particularly. He would go on to direct the second film in the series as well, before pulling out to make room for other directors, in order to spend more time with his own growing children.

I realise that in the United States, this film was released with the title ‘Harry Potter and the Sorceror’s Stone’, but as any sensible person would realise (particularly by now, with all the books and films finished), the Philosopher’s Stone is an actual verifiable part of alchemical history and a vital element of this book/film and indeed later parts of the series, while the Sorceror’s Stone is nothing, and refers to nothing.

This may not have been the best film in the series, but by being the first, it was our first introduction to Harry Potter and his adventures, and as such, is a very special and important part of the series.

8 1/2 out of 10.

Mrs. Doubtfire (1993)

Based on the novel 'Alias Madame Doubtfire' by Anne Fine, this family comedy continues to delight me each and every time I watch it. Again. And again.

Daniel Hilliard (Robin Williams) is an out-of-work actor who has just been told by his wife (Sally Field) that she wants a divorce, because he isn't the man she fell in love with any more. He now only gets to see his children (Lisa Jakub, Matthew Lawrence and Mara Wilson) every second weekend, which to him doesn't feel like nearly often enough.

When he hears that his wife is looking to hire a housekeeper to clean, cook and also look after the children after school, he decides to pose as a woman, Mrs. Doubtfire, and applies for the job himself in order to spend more time with his kids.

Enlisting the help of his brother (Harvey Fierstein) and his brother's live-in boyfriend, who work as make-up artists, he transforms himself into this new character, and manages to fool everyone, at least for a while.

While working for his ex-wife, he enjoys being near to the children, but unfortunately, they don't know it's him under the outfit and the make-up, so it doesn't feel the same as it did, anyway. He also has to contend with his wife's new beau - old flame Stuart Dunmire (Pierce Brosnan).

I won't say any more about the plot. If you haven't seen this film yet, first of all, what is taking you so long? But seriously, if you haven't seen it, make sure you take the opportunity as soon as it presents itself; you won't regret it.

Robin Williams is perfect in the roles of both Daniel and Mrs. Doubtfire. Of course, his ability to perform brilliant improvised comedy is no secret, and he makes more than the most of every single opportunity in this film. There are so many brilliant moments that I'm sure were never in the script, but just came out of his mind on the day.

The rest of the cast are good, too. Sally Field and Pierce Brosnan of course have been acting for decades, and they bring a wealth of experience to their roles. But even the kids - relatively inexperienced when this film came out - take to their roles well.

The script does differ significantly from the original novel in many ways. I think the main reason for this is that the novel is very British, and the film made for a very American audience. This isn't necessarily bad, but if you've read the novel, don't expect the film to be the same. And if you've seen the film, don't expect the novel to be the same either. Other than the basic premise of a man posing as a woman to see his kids, the plots of the two mediums do not really align at all.

Chris Columbus, who directed this film adaptation, has put together a great film. There are a lot of great comedic moments, but also a lot of heartfelt moments, particularly towards the end of the film. Then again, this should come as no surprise to anyone who has seen any of Columbus's other films: this is something he can do really well.

All that being said, I will always love this film, and will continue to watch it on at least an annual basis. I encourage you to do the same; it will make you laugh and will touch your heart every single time.

9 out of 10.