The Tomatometer rating – based on the published opinions of hundreds of film and television critics – is a trusted measurement of movie and TV programming quality for millions of moviegoers. It represents the percentage of professional critic reviews that are positive for a given film or television show.
From the Critics
From RT Users Like You!
The Tomatometer is 60% or higher.
The Tomatometer is 59% or lower.
Movies and TV shows are Certified Fresh with a steady Tomatometer of 75% or higher after a set amount of reviews (80 for wide-release movies, 40 for limited-release movies, 20 for TV shows), including 5 reviews from Top Critics.
Percentage of users who rate a movie or TV show positively.
J.K. Rowling's bajillion-dollar Potter franchise picks up steam again with the much-anticipated release of the second film based on her children's series. Unfortunately, much of that steam is blown off early.
While it still falls short of becoming the classic fans so badly want it to be, the film is livelier and better overall than The Sorcerer's Stone, mostly because J.K. Rowling got all that tiresome exposition over with the first time out.
Not only are the special effects and narrative flow much improved, and Daniel Radcliffe more emotionally assertive this time around as Harry, but the film conjures the magic of author J.K. Rowling's books.
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets is deja vu all over again, and while that is a cliche, nothing could be more appropriate. It's likely that whatever you thought of the first production -- pro or con -- you'll likely think of this one.
It's smartly produced and slightly more streamlined than Sorcerer's Stone, its predecessor, but at almost three hours it's still too slavishly faithful to its source and will no doubt try the patience of Muggle moppets.