Harry Potter returns to Hogwarts this holiday season with “Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets,” a paint-by-the numbers three hour yawnfest that makes one long for the more “inspired” days of Chris Columbus’ directorial career.
Sadly, Columbus’ directorial innovation peaked with “Home Alone” and its subsequent sequels, which makes it even more questionable why J.K. Rowling and the folks at Warner Brothers ever gave their most lucrative franchise to this man in the first place.
Trade publications, interviews and crappy Letterman shows have all been used as platforms to declare this new Potter movie the evil, dark brother of the first. I can say this is true. The movie is very dark, but not in any good way, subtext be damned.
Gone from the film are the book’s eerie moments, where Harry questions his identity and possible similarities to he-who-must-not-be-named. Instead we get three hours of mood lighting and crappy voice overs of the evil that is currently stalking Hogwarts.
As the film opens, Harry is back at home with his evil uncle, aunt and resident fat-brat (a staple of any children’s movie and a character that has clearly lost any fun in the translation from page to screen).
Eventually a Jar-Jar clone shows up in the form of a House-elf named Dobby. The CGI is seamless, but the character, much like the one in the book, is annoying beyond belief.
And so, after a flying car ride, a whomping willow encounter, and some other stuff, we finally get to the plot: something is turning Hogwarts students to stone.
By way of extremely bad timing worthy of an episode of “24,” Harry becomes the main suspect in the student stonery. Of course, we as the audience know this isn’t true, because we’re not morons in a movie made for 8-year-olds.
Let me clarify something, I love the “Harry Potter” books. But the movies are horrible. J.K. Rowling has written some wonderful stories. Chris Columbus has made two tepid, uninspired movies. And frankly, anyone who says they haven’t read the books because they’re for kids probably doesn’t read anyways.
It is a shame that one of the most laudable literary series to come along in years has been turned into nothing more than a big studio money making machine. It is true that J.K. Rowling wanted to have a say in the films’ direction, but surely a director could have been found that would’ve created a “film” while remaining true to the source material (witness Peter Jackson’s “Lord of the Rings”).
So, as we eagerly await “The Prisoner of Azkaban,” the movie series now stands at a cross-roads. Columbus is bowing out, and “A Little Princess” director Alfonso Cuaron is stepping in to helm. Considering that this guy’s previous film had the word “princess” in the title, there may be no hope for the Potter franchise.
Why isn’t Warner Brothers outsourcing the Potter series to an edgier set of directors? Come on, studio big shots, you know that the kids are going to see it if it was called “Harry Potter and the Amazing Potato,” so why not actually try to get some credibility in the process?
Imagine an “Azkaban” directed by Darren Aronofsky, or a “Goblet of Fire” directed by Sam Raimi. Is it wrong to expect more from movies that already have their story set in stone? Its not like these people are breaking the bank on screenwriters.
Unfortunately, the Harry Potter movies will likely continue to remain true to the books at innovation’s expense.
But please, J.K. Rowling, release the next book already.
Leave a Reply