REVIEW Magic required: How long will children sit still?

'Chamber of Secrets' offers more Quidditch and a look into Hogwarts past, but overall, the movie's just too long.
By MILAN PAURICH
VINDICATOR CORRESPONDENT
If director Chris Columbus was really serious about making "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" the kiddie equivalent of an Indiana Jones-style cliffhanger, how could he let his movie drag on for a decidedly non-"Indy" 161 minutes?
Since Columbus has undoubtedly seen every one of Steven Spielberg's rousing I.J. adventures (Spielberg once served as the Champion native's fairy godfather by producing Columbus' "Gremlins," "Goonies" and "Young Sherlock Holmes" scripts), he should have known that Mr. "E.T." often had the good sense and common courtesy to wrap things up at under two hours.
Asking audiences -- particularly youngsters, who make up the bulk of the "Harry Potter" fan base -- to sit for nearly three hours borders on child abuse. Of course, last year's "Sorcerer's Stone" ran on and on with no complaints from the peanut gallery, so maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree. But as an adult with no strong emotional attachment to J.K. Rowlings' boy wizard, "Chamber of Secrets" wore me out.
Some improvements
In many ways, though, this is still a considerable improvement over last November's "Potter" outing. For one thing, the back-breaking exposition that hobbled the original movie is mercifully dispensed with. Columbus and screenwriter Steve Kloves wisely assumed that anyone who buys a ticket is already up to snuff with Hogwarts School of Wizardry and Witchcraft, Quidditch, and the world according to Harry.
The occasional halting tentativeness of "Sorcerer's Stone" that made it seem like the world's most expensive audition reel ("Am I doing this right, J.K.?") is absent as well, and "Chamber of Secrets" feels like a stronger, more confident work overall. I guess having made the second highest-grossing film of all time is a pretty strong morale-booster.
Since the character of Harry Potter (played once again by vanilla-wafer bland Daniel Radcliffe) is fully cognizant of his heritage and supernatural powers, he can now get on with the business at hand.
A second-year student at Hogwarts, Harry remains best friends with Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson) and, once again, it's this daring trio's adventures that constitute the bulk of the movie's action. The kids' biggest discovery this time is Hogwarts' fabled Chamber of Secrets where a hideous monster is said to reside. After a series of bizarre incidents (including the petrification of Hogwarts pupils), Harry himself must enter the chamber to battle the beast and rescue Ron's sister Ginny (Bonnie Wright).
Just like in "Sorcerer's Stone," "Chamber of Secrets" is basically one epic-scaled action setpiece after another. There's more Quidditch (suitably impressive this time); a deliciously spooky nighttime forest scene where Ron and Harry ward off some malignant jumbo spiders; a crackerjack sepia sequence involving former Hogwarts pupil Tom Riddle who once bravely journeyed into the forbidding Chamber; and lots more.
New and old
Along with the return of series regulars Professor McGonagall (Maggie Smith), Hagrid the Giant (Robbie Coltrane), Professor Snape (Alan Rickman) and Albus Dumbledore (the late Richard Harris), "Secrets" introduces a few new characters as well. Kenneth Branagh cuts a dashing figure as preening egotist Gilderoy Lockhart, and Jason Isaacs (last seen as Clark Devlin in "The Tuxedo") is wonderfully malevolent as Lucius Malfoy, father of Harry's arch-rival Draco (Tom Felton). Considerably less welcome is CGI creation Dobby the elf, who could turn out to be the Jar Jar Binks of the "Potter" franchise.
While stuffed to the gills with fun and memorable moments, what ultimately makes "Chamber of Secrets" less than the sum of its parts is its wearying length. Producer David Heyman should have told Columbus that sometimes less can be more, and explained to Kloves that it isn't necessary to include every punctuation mark from Rowlings' books when adapting them. (I shudder at the thought of future sequels, since Rowlings' "Potter" tomes just keep getting longer.)
Film buffs -- as opposed to "Potter"-philes -- will probably have to wait until Alfonso ("Y Tu Mama Tambien," "A Little Princess") Cuaron's "Prisoner of Azkaban" for a truly magical Harry Potter experience. In the meantime, "Chamber of Secrets" will suffice as a step in the right direction until "Azkaban" arrives in summer 2004.
One final note: "Potter" completists should make a point of sticking around until the movie's end credits are over for a witty postscript involving one of the characters. By that time of course, everyone else will be streaming out of the theater for a well-earned bathroom break.
XWrite Milan Paurich at milanpaurich@aol.com.