The first Harry Potter film, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, was hampered by having to be an introduction to Harry’s world for people who’d never read the works of JK Rowling. So its limitations could be forgiven. But now that the basics have been set up, Chris Columbus, the director, has no excuses: it’s show time, and he must dazzle or die.

Of course, he could make a stinker — at least from a critic’s point of view — and still have a smash hit on his hands. Yet, though Harry Potter may be critic-proof, Chris Columbus isn’t. Every director in Hollywood wants critical credibility, no matter how much money their films have made. And now that Alfonso Cuarón, the director of Y tu mamá también, is set to direct the next Potter film, this is Columbus’s best shot at showing the world what he’s got.

He certainly starts off well. Poor Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is a virtual prisoner in suburbia, living with his cruel cousins, the Dursleys. His uncle, Vernon (Richard Griffiths), is determined that Harry will never go back to his beloved Hogwarts school, or see his “freaky” friends again.

Feeling he doesn’t belong in the “normal” world, Harry longs to escape. Back in his bedroom, he finds Dobby — a small, bug-eyed and much-abused elfin creature who looks like an extra from Star Wars. Dobby warns Harry not to go back to Hogwarts, for his life is in peril. What follows is a nice comic scene of British surrealism in suburbia, involving a mischievous Dobby, a large cream cake and a stuffy matron. It’s a tribute to Columbus that he can take such a corny comedy setup and make it charming.

Once Harry is rescued by his mate Ron (Rupert Grint), in his dad’s flying car, they zoom off to Hogwarts like two joyriders in a child’s wonderful dream — and crash-land in a tree that tries to kill them.

To everyone’s delight, Harry is back, but he soon discovers that all is not well. He hears strange voices; spooky warnings about a secret chamber are written in blood on the corridor walls; and students are found in a coma of petrification. Who has opened the door to the chamber of secrets, why have they done it, and what sort of evil lurks inside? Harry’s good friend Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane) is under suspicion, and his beloved Hogwarts is on the verge of being closed down. (Harry must be the only kid in fiction ever to come to the rescue of his school.) So Harry the wizard becomes Harry the amateur detective.

Even though The Chamber of Secrets is regarded by Potter fans as the weakest of Rowling’s novels, there’s good news for parents dreading that Harry afternoon at the cinema — this is a far better film than the first one. (The bad news is that it goes on for far too long.) It has more personality and better effects, and allows more screen time for the adult characters.

For grown-ups, there’s the pleasure of watching polished performances from Richard Harris, Maggie Smith and Alan Rickman — and the addition of Kenneth Branagh as the wonderfully foppish celebrity narcissist Gilderoy Lockhart.

While young fans will love the big set pieces involving the Quidditch match and a dark forest of giant spiders, for me it’s the small stuff that works best — the screaming mandrake roots, or the Cornish pixies let loose in class.

There is one problem, however. If you have never read one of Rowling’s books, and you are meeting Harry on the big screen for the first time, you’ll think: “Who’s the nerd?” And yet, watching Chamber of Secrets, we do see a wonderful hero in action — and her name is Hermione Granger (Emma Watson). Why couldn’t Rowling have made her the centre of the story? She’s a Nancy Drew diva — a fearless fox with a first-rate brain — who is the best cinematic role model for girls since Sharon Stone in Basic Instinct. But, alas, Hermione is just a girl, and Rowling is one of the old school, believing that action tales mean boys take the starring roles.

Paradoxically, Harry is a star in a film that satirises the shallowness of celebrity culture and mocks the snobbery of the English class system, as personified by the young Eminem look-alike Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton).

Hold on: Harry is hardly a hero for a meritocratic Britain. He owes everything to who his parents were (ie, famous magic folk). He was practically born with a silver wand in his hand. And, as a student of magic, he’s a tragic underachiever. The boy has been at the best public school for wizards and witches this country has ever produced — and a year later, he can manage only to do a couple of spells! But the real trouble with Harry is still Daniel Radcliffe. Sorry, but he’s such a mediocre actor: one capable of crude reaction shots, but unable to articulate his character’s emotions. We never sense his fear, or see the ordinary Harry transform himself into a hero. This is partly the fault of Chris Columbus. Unfortunately, he’s just a competent film-maker who can, at best, create entertaining films; he just doesn’t have that X factor that creates movie magic.

Everyone is saying that this is a far darker film than the first one, but it’s dark without being disturbing. All the great children’s films that adults enjoy, from Bambi to Star Wars, have a traumatising moment you can never forget. But nothing really bad happens in Potterland — at least on screen. Like an overprotective parent, careful not to upset the kiddies, Columbus always plays safe. What we’re left with is an enjoyable film that exudes a cheery, cosy, Dickensesque, “Come stand by the fire, young master”, Christmassy feel. And that’s fine for slumping in front of the television, but a classic kids’ film should take you to the edge of your seat and leave a bit of you there, scared and stranded, for the rest of your life.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets PG, 160 mins Two stars

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets opens nationwide on Friday

Explore Student

• News

• Student Life

• How To Get A Job

• Gap Year

Times recommends

• University black hole as applicants surge
• Students to be offered 'no-fee degrees'
• Women are outperforming men at university