Xander's Reading Log

05/14/2025

Review: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

	Before I get into details, I cleared up something I was curious
about earlier. Harry's birthday is July 31, and Hogwarts years begin
on September 1. At least in the books. My guess is that in the movie
universe, school start is on August 1 instead. Early in the second 
book, Harry is rescued from his aunt and uncle's house by Ron and his 
brothers, who come to get him in their father's (illegal) flying car. 
He spends the rest of the summer at the Weasleys' house. The 
introduction of the Weasleys' house in this book raised an interesting 
thought in my mind. I'm curious about the spaces and locations in this 
world. I don't believe the location of the house is ever described, but 
it might easily be in the middle of nowhere, as they have access to 
magical methods of transportation, and don't have much need to live in
proximity to other civilization. Until this point, the only magical
locations described have been the Hogwarts campus, Diagon Alley, and
platform 9 3/4. As far as I am aware, all these locations take up real
space in the physical world. That is, Wizards and Witches are not
living in extradimensional areas, one could walk straight from London
to Hogwarts on foot if they knew the location. But the magical areas
are hidden from Muggles with spells that alter perception. But then
again, it is possible in this world to enchant things such that they
are bigger on the inside. There are many examples of this throughout
the series. Maybe a lot of magical spaces have this kind of thing going
on. Does Diagon Alley take a whole street's worth of space in the
Muggle world? Curious to know how this all works out. Most of the
series takes place at Hogwarts, but we know that students and faculty
at the school make up a very small portion of the greater community.
And that's just witches and wizards; there are all sorts of other
magical races and species. There are also enough wild magical creatures
described that there must be vast areas of wilderness that are habitat
to magical creatures. My question is, where is all this? Is the life
of an adult wizard one of slipping between the Muggle world and small
enclaves of magical world that you hear about by word of mouth? What
about other magical species? Where do they live? The lore in the books
is a bit lackluster on this front. Now back to the plot. Harry is with
the Weasleys in Diagon Alley to get his new school supplies, and they
have an encounter with Lucius Malfoy in the bookstore. Lucius is being
provocative as per usual, and Arthur Weasley actually tries to
physically attack him, throwing himself at Lucius. It was quite an
embarrassment for him and ended up in the paper. This was removed
from the movie, only words were exchanged. This book strengthens the
portrayal of Slytherin as the evil house. I was kinda surprised with
how straightforward this is, it does seem weird. I kinda thought it
would be a thing of "yeah Slytherin is the only house to produce dark
wizards, but we can't judge them all from that, and some of them are
alright". But that isn't how it is at all, every single Slytherin in
the whole series is just nasty. There isn't a single one who is
alright. You begin to see a divergence between the book characters and
the movie characters at this point. Particularly I would say that book
Hermione and book Ginny are very different from movie Hermione and
Ginny. Something you totally miss in the movies is that Hermione was
not cool. She was a nerd, wasn't particularly good friends with any of
the other girls in her house, and she was thought of as a know-it-all,
which I don't think is just resentment at her skills, because when you
actually read the books, she was often extremely tactless with showing
off. She was also, at least for the first several books, described as
not being particularly pretty. Book Hermione has a very good
personality arc and comes into her own throughout the series, to be
one of the most admirable characters by the end. Movie Hermione is
kinda just a girlboss from the start, which robs her of her character.
A funny Hermione tidbit from this story was that she was just as
enamored by Lockhart as everyone else for most of the book. But in the
movie they made her be the one who sees through him and doesn't
understand why all the girls are so crazy for him. I don't have a lot
to say about the overall plot of this book, it was a nice little
mystery culminating in a dangerous climax at the end, same format as
the first book. It was creative the way the basilisk attacks were
contrived so that no one was killed by it, but the creature could not
be identified until Hermione solved it. I had a gripe with how large
the snake was in the movie. It was supposedly sliding through the pipes
in the school unnoticed by anyone except Harry, in the book I imagined
a large but realistically sized snake, like an Anaconda. The movie
Basilisk is completely ginormous; its round body is as tall as a child.
I don't recall seeing five-foot-wide pipes around Hogwarts, and I can't
really suspend disbelief enough to buy that a 12-year-old could defeat
that thing with a sword, even if it was blinded. But if it were a more
typically sized large snake, sure, that's totally believable. This book
gives a lot of pleasure to read after the first book, because it really
feeds you. It expands on more details about Hogwarts and the magical
world, introduces new creatures and characters and lore. That said, the
plot is kinda nothing. It is the most irrelevant book in the series. I
remember that it is later revealed that destroying Tom Riddle's diary
with the basilisk fang had great significance, but I don't know if JKR
even had that bit planned yet when she wrote the book. Besides that,
this book does nothing at all to advance the overall plot of the story.
Voldemort's rise to regain his power is at a complete standstill for
the entire year, and nothing in the book directly leads to the events
of his rise. For that reason, it feels like a filler book. The only 
purpose being to introduce new concepts and characters that would be
used in the story later on. For this reason, I am ranking both the book
and movie lower than the first installations.
BOOKS:
1. The Philosopher's Stone
2. The Chamber of Secrets
MOVIES:
1. The Philosopher's Stone
2. The Chamber of Secrets
I will update these lists with each new book and movie as I write
these reviews.

05/12/2025

I have finished the first four books + movies now, I've been keeping
notes as I go, I'm finally going to take the time to write about Harry
Potter and The Philosopher's Stone. I don't really know how to write
book reviews, so I'm just going to go over things that stood out to me
and the differences between the book and movie. I will try to keep a 
ranking of all of the books and movies as I go. Right off the bat in
the first chapter, you have an opening scene that did not exist in the
movie. In my mind, Harry Potter always opened with Dumbledore, Hagrid,
and McGonagall dropping him off on his uncle's doorstep. But this is
only how the movie starts, in the book you have a scene a few days
before that follows a day in Vernon Dursley's life on the day when
Voldemort was defeated by the Potters. The wizarding community was so
excited they didn't know how to act, and were making appearances in
public. Vernon noticed this, and was uneasy, as he was of course aware
of their existence and suspected that he knew what these people in the
funny clothes were. He also heard whispers of the name "Harry Potter",
which, if he remembered correctly, was the name of his recently born
nephew. He tried to pretend he hadn't heard this. What I found myself
thinking a lot in the early scenes of this story was, how many Muggles
must be aware of the existence of magic? You have Petunia Dursley,
whose sister is a witch. Then she marries Vernon, who is aware of the
situation. I don't know this was something they ever told Dudley about,
but he was obviously aware by the end of the first few chapters. And
not everyone is like that family of course, when you think about all
mixed wizard-muggle families that must exist, surely the word would
spread? I think the answer to this is that yes, it inevitably would,
but it hasn't yet because the story takes place relatively early in the 
information age. Were the universe to continue to present day, I see
absolutely no way that the existence of magic would be able to remain
secret from the rest of the world until 2025. Let's continue through
the story. The book and movie match pretty well through the events of
the summer, up until Hagrid arrives to hand-deliver Harry's Hogwarts
letter. This is where there is a divergence, and it is one that I
believe to be important to the storyline. The day Hagrid arrives is
Harry's birthday. He even brings a cake for him. I don't know if the
exact day is mentioned, but the books repeatedly state that his
birthday is in July, and if I recall correctly (I haven't gotten there
yet in my read-through), this ends up being relevant later on? I think
there was some sort of prophecy about someone born in July? Anyway,
Hagrid kidnaps Harry straight from his aunt and uncle and takes him to
Diagon Alley to buy his school supplies. In the book, he returns him
afterwards to the Dursleys' house, where he waits the rest of summer
(and has to convince his uncle to drive him to the train station). But
in the movie, Hagrid leaves him straight at the train station, and he
goes straight to school. This would imply that school starts in July,
which does not seem right. I am curious to see if the rest of the
movies are consistent with this change, always having the first day of
school be right after Harry's birthday, instead of weeks later. The
movie shifted around a few character introductions as well. In the book
Harry and Draco Malfoy meet that day in Diagon Alley, which is a month
before he meets Ron and Hermione. I do think it speaks to his character
a bit that he sees Draco for who he is and rejects him then and there,
compared to the movie, where he already has a friend by the time they
are introduced. Then when he does meet the Weasleys, it is outside of
platform 9 3/4, and they help him get onto the platform. He introduces
himself right there, and they realize he is the famous Harry Potter
before entering the platform. This is significant because Ginny is
there, and immediately becomes infatuated with him. In the movie, he
does not introduce himself at all at that meeting with the Weasley
family, but Ron finds out who he is later on the train. I remembered
from the movie that when Harry is being sorted, he whispers "please not
Slytherin", and the hat, very loudly, is like "oh, you don't want to
join Slytherin?" and I always thought that was weird because like,
everyone around would've been able to hear that. But in the book, it
does explicitly say that the sorting hat speaks telepathically to the
person wearing it. So people couldn't hear. Good to know. Later on, the
gang has heard that the mysterious package being hidden in Hogwarts has
something to do with Nicholas Flamel. They spend hours in the library,
pouring over books, trying to find something about this Nicholas Flamel
guy, but can't figure out who he is. The whole time, Harry is CERTAIN
that he remembers the name from somewhere, but can't put his finger on
it. Then he opens a chocolate frog, which contains another Albus
Dumbledore card, and he realizes: the card mentions Dumbledore's friend
Nicholas Flamel, the man who synthesized the philosopher's stone. In
the movie, the method of discovery is totally changed, Hermione just
finds him in one of the books. Then there is the baby dragon plotline.
Hagrid has this dragon egg, and the gang are in class with Slytherin
when it is about to hatch. Hermione talks a little too loudly about
this, and Draco Malfoy overhears, and quietly follows them to Hagrid's
cabin and witnesses the dragon. The gang hatches a big plan to sneak
the dragon away, with the help of some friends of Ron's brother
Charlie, who studies dragons. One night they put the baby dragon in a
big box, sneak it up to one of the towers in the castle under Harry's
invisibility cloak, and Charlie's friends meet them there on
broomsticks and fly away with the dragon. The movie rendition of this
story makes no sense at all. First of all, it doesn't show the scene
where Malfoy overhears them talking about the dragon, so he's just
randomly there at Hagrid's window to witness it, I guess he was just
stalking them because he felt like it. Then he reports it, and the
dragon is taken away to Romania. Same outcome, but the entire story
where they smuggle it out doesn't happen. Fine I guess, except in the
book, the kids are caught in the castle alone at night after smuggling
it out, which leads to them getting a terrifying detention and losing
150 points for Gryffindor. In the movie, they are just randomly in the
castle at night. It literally isn't explained at all. it just cuts to
a scene where the three of them are walking in the castle and get
caught. Then the movie also glosses over how big a deal this 150 points
was. In the book, there are months where everyone in the school hates
them, they become outcasts. I know that people criticize that final
scene where Dumbledore awards Gryffindor exactly the amount of points
they needed to win, but it makes more sense in the book, where they
somewhat unfairly lose 150 points, and then those are simply awarded
back. During the gang's detention, where they help Hagrid in the dark
forest, Harry encounters the spirit of Voldemort feeding on the blood
of a slain unicorn. Voldemort moves to attack him, but at the last 
second, a centaur appears and drives him off. In the movie, this was
some INSANE plot armor. The centaur just happened to be right there,
and if he hadn't been then the whole series ends right there. It was
not as far-fetched in the book, in the book they meet the centaur
earlier in the night and he talks about how there are dark things in
the forest, and he will be waiting around nearby. Now let's talk about
the final scene, the gauntlet of challenges to reach the philosopher's
stone. I think both Ron and Hermione kinda get snubbed in the movie.
Starting with the chess game. In the book, this is all Ron. He's the
one who is good at chess, and he is the only one who knows how to win
the game. In the movie, when they are close to winning, they kinda have
Harry be like "yeah, I see it too", like he also knew how to win. It's
just a minor thing, but in the book, Harry could not have won the game
without Ron. But Hermione's snub is even worse, the movie COMPLETELY
removes her task. They must pass through a fire, and there is a set of
potions, one which lets you walk through the fire, and several of which
kill you. There is a logic game that reveals which potion to take. The
task cannot be solved with magic, you must have the mind to solve the
puzzle, which Hermione does with ease. This task does not appear in the
movie at all. Then at the climax, something I think is significant is
that in the movie, Harry just kills Quirrell. He completely turns to
dust. In the book, he is just holding him off, and Dumbledore arrives
and subdues him. This seems important. As far as I remember, Harry does
not at any point kill anyone until Voldemort himself at the end of the
series. In the movies I guess he gets his first body at 11. I also 
recall that later in the series there was some sort of creature that
could only be seen by someone who had witnessed a person die. In the
movie universe, Harry ought to have been able to see those starting 
with movie 2, seeing as he killed Quirrell. Now that I've gotten 
through all my notes on the plotline, there are a few general things I 
noticed. Peeves the ghost is completely removed from the movies. I 
suppose he isn't really important to the plot, but he is quite a 
prevalent character. I also thought the movie made McGonagall a lot 
nicer. She seems very kind and motherly. In the books, she is not nice. 
She is strict and means business. She is ultimately on the gang's side 
and always has their back when it comes down to it, but she is not 
nice. And my final note, Harry, Ron, and Hermione did not start out as 
a trio. I forgot about this in my recollection of the story. Ron and
Harry are friends from the start, but Hermione is that weird girl in
Gryffindor. She doesn't join them as friends until quite a bit into the
first book. Overall, I think this book was very good as a children's
book, but doesn't quite live up to being the first book in an iconic
series. You can tell that the whole series wasn't fully planned out at
the time of the first book's release, nor was the worldbuilding all
fleshed out. This first book takes on a more typical tone of all the
lesser-known fantasy magic books I read as a kid, it doesn't take on
the iconic Harry Potter feel until later on in the series. My thoughts
on the movie are very similar: it is a good movie and a good adaptation
of the book. It would be much better as an adaptation if only one book
existed, however. Knowing that there were six more movies to come, I
would've made different choices about what details to include and
exclude from the movie, knowing what would end up being important to
the plot later on.

03/28/2025

When I was just learning how to read, Harry Potter was all the rage. So 
as soon as I could read well enough to get through books, I wanted to 
read them. I read the series at age 6-7, and as a result I don't really 
remember much about them at all. I saw all the movies a little older, 
so everything I know about the series is from those, but it's still 
been about ten years. In recent years I've avoided the franchise for 
obvious reasons, but I finally decided to revisit the series now that I 
am old enough to actually comprehend what I'm reading. I will also 
watch the movies as I'm going, after I finish each book. I currently 
have the first two books in my possession, and only two chapters 
remaining in the first book, so I plan to finish it + watch the first 
movie tonight, and tomorrow I will leave a review and a comparison 
between the book & movie.