December 15, 2002

Harry Potter

The Harry Potter books have kids around the world in their grip with their supernatural characters. It is no wonder then that the second movie in the Harry Potter series titled The Chamber of Secrets is topping the box office. As in the previous film, Daniel Radcliffe — who has been in the news for quite some time for his smashing performance as Harry — has again done justice to the pivotal role in the movie.

The two-and-a-half hour film takes the viewer in to the world of witchcraft, magic and action. Harry remains the only one who is capable of facing the new challenges during his second year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft, with the help of his friends Ron (Grint) and Hermione (Watson). Here they are trying to “discover the dark force that is terrorizing the school” and the teachers have no clue how to tackle this unnatural situation.

But there is one drawback. No effort has been made to give a brief background about the history of Harry Potter. For newcomers, the proceedings may prove to be a little confusing and annoying at times, as anyone who is not a diehard Potter fan will be totally unacquainted with the subject matter of the story. This is a part of a series and one can only enjoy it if the first Potter flick The Sorcerers Stone, has been viewed. For Harry fans though, every minute of the movie is full of thrills. A must watch for youngsters and those young at heart. —Azeem Haider

Treasure planet

Treasure planet is an animated, adventure-filled adaptation of the Robert Louis Stevenson novel Treasure Island. The Disney flick is a unique spin on a classic story which has delighted readers for generations, and the movie should delight young viewers as well.

The story begins with 15-year-old Jim Hawkins (voiced by Joseph Gordon), a young lad who dreams of space exploration and hates being stuck on his planet, especially after his father ditches him. Things change, however, when he happens to fall upon a dying pirate’s solar map that shows the exact coordinates of Treasure Planet — a legendary place where there is said to be untold riches. He is also warned by the pirate to watch out for “the cyborg” (half man, half machine), who will stop at nothing to get the map. Despite the warning Jim takes a chance. The youngster, along with family friend Dr Doppler (voiced by David Hyde), commissions a sparkling galleon with a variegated alien crew to find the planet. On board, Hawkins meets the cook John Silver, a cyborg who takes the young man under his wing and shows him a thing or two about space travel. Jim is at first suspicious of Silver but soon trusts the charming guy. That is until Jim finds out that Silver is indeed the disobedient cyborg he was warned about.

This ultramodern twist to the classic novel would be delightful for lovers of science fiction. The end result is an enjoyable movie for all. —Nazia Mirza

Frida

Movies about controversial figures always generate a lot of interest and Frida, the bio-pic depicting the colourful, yet tragic life of Mexican artist Frida Kahlo is no different.

Selma Hayek plays the role of the frail and bent painter who had a stormy marriage with fellow artist and communist Diego Rivera, played by Alfred Molina. The tiny Frida and huge Rivera are totally different in every way, which is why theirs is an on-and-off relationship that surprises many. Both Frida’s and Rivera’s work is influenced by personal eccentricities, turmoil and the political upheaval that takes place around them.

This is clearly Hayek’s most demanding and meaty role of her career and she is impressive in it. The cast is star-studded with Antonio Banderas, Geoffrey Rush, Ashley Judd and Saddron Burrows adding spice even to minor roles. Frida is an epic and the Mexican setting adds a charming touch to it, along with a soaring musical score to match the mood.

If you know who Frida Kahlo was, you will find the movie intensely watchable. And if you don’t know who she was, you will still find the movie interesting and will want to discover more about the real person the story is based on. —AS

The private life of Sherlock Holmes

Billy Wilder’s distinctive, irreverent slant on the world’s greatest “consulting detective” holds up reasonably well 32 years on; you wouldn’t expect anything directed by Wilder and scripted by his long-time associate IAL Diamond to be anything less than funny and watchable, and this is both.

Yet it doesn’t feel like the work of a dyed-in-the-wool Sherlock buff. The heavy-handed opening gag about Holmes and Watson looking like a couple of gays seems grounded in a simple belief in the essential comic effeminacy of all limeys and Wilder’s initial inspiration is clearly not so much Conan Doyle as My Fair Lady with Holmes and Watson as Professor Higgins and Colonel Pickering splutteringly enduring a mysterious, amnesiac woman in their bachelor establishment. There’s a disapproving housekeeper, played by the inimitable Irene Handl, saying “yays” for yes, and Stanley Holloway appears as a gravedigger. There’s plenty of fun though, and hints of Buchan and Childers, as the trio pursue their quarry to Inverness, shadowed by some dodgy German-speaking monks. Christopher Lee is a crisply disapproving Mycroft and Robert Stephens, as Holmes, is splendidly debonair. —Dawn/The Guardian News Service.

It had to be you

There are some movies which are unceremoniously dumped directly into the video market without being actually shown in cinemas. It had to be you falls in this category. The movie is sweet and extremely light and didn’t deserve the video treatment.

The star couple (Natasha Henstridge and Michael Vartan) are shown about to get married to different people at the beginning of the film. They meet each other a few days before their respective weddings. Predictably, both start taking interest in each other. Everyone around tries to convince them that they are a perfect pair and the ones they are getting married to are complete misfits. Despite this, they remain faithful to their decisions. What follows is nothing new as has been witnessed an incalculable number of times in movies — both get married and live happily ever after in the end.

The movie seems to be stretched out and resultantly, the pace is slow. Also, the script lacks depth as the respective fiances have no role to play — despite the fact that they are the hurdle between the two lovers. Natasha’s fiance is never even seen on screen! Had their characterization been etched out properly, the movie would have been more interesting. Mild comedy makes the film a little interesting. Vartan and Henstridge don’t have much chemistry, nor do they really look interested in what they are doing in the movie. With a little attention given to some of the drawbacks, this might have turned out to be a successful venture. Not recommended for viewing. —Azeem Haider