Commentary: Is Harry Potter magic waning?

WASHINGTON, Nov. 18 (UPI) -- As the second and much-anticipated Harry Potter film, "The Chamber of Secrets," opened last weekend to sold-out audiences, all the magic, wizardry and witchcraft in the world could not keep the franchise firmly on track.

A grueling non-stop and frantic shooting schedule managed to produce only two films out of the seven of J.K. Rowling best selling books, relating the life and times of the boy wizard. This appeared to be taking its toll on both the stars and the director.

As a result, the third planned film, "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban," will not be released in 2003 as originally planned because the parents of Daniel Radcliffe, the 13-year-old star who portrays Potter, have asked for a recess. They, as well as the parents of co-star Emma Watson, who plays the precocious young witch Hermione Granger, want their children to attend regular school. Radcliffe has been accepted in a "top-drawer" school, and his parents would like him to attend the first semester. For the past few years, the "Harry Potter" kids were tutored on the set.

"The Prisoner of Azkaban" is now scheduled to come out in 2004, a year after its originally planned release date.

Chris Columbus, the director of the first two "Harry Potter" films has also announced that he found the 16-hour workdays too grueling, and wanted to spend more time with his family who moved from San Francisco to be with him. Columbus will be replaced on future "Potter" films by Alfonso Cuarón, director of "Y Tu Mama Tambien," though Columbus plans to remain on the set of "The Prisoner of Azkaban" to ensure smooth transition.

Furthermore, the death earlier this year of one of the central characters of the film, actor Richard Harris, who plays Professor Albus Dumbledore, will add even more to the disruption while leaving some rather large shoes to be filled. But there is speculation a replacement has already been found: Ian McKellen, who plays Gandalf the Grey in "Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Rings."

Having said that, the Harry Potter magic remains a potent attraction to moviegoers. "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets," which opened in the United States last Friday, brought in an estimated $87.7 million this past weekend. This comes close to the first Potter movie which netted $90.3 million in its opening weekend in the U.S. last year.

This year, the students of Hogwarts School of Wizardry -- Harry, Hermione, Ron and all the others -- are a year older, as they are in Rowling's story. Unable to enter the magic station at Platform Nine-and-three-quarters that will take them to Hogwarts, Harry and his friend Ron return to school aboard a magic flying car. The rest of the plot consists of the usual plans by the malevolent Lord Valdemort -- he who must not be named -- to return and reclaim his rightful place as the Supreme Evil One.

Ardent fans of the Harry Potter series will be thrilled by more spells -- most of which seem to backfire, literally -- creepy crawlies of all sizes who try to devour our wizardly heroes and an evil giant snake with whom Harry battles in the closing scenes of the 2-1/2-plus hours of the film.

Some film critics have reported that this episode, aimed at an audience that grew a full year along with the cast and characters, is somewhat scarier than the first. I failed to find any truth in that. As a matter of fact, I found this episode somewhat funnier with Kenneth Branagh portraying the incompetent and deceitful Professor Gilderoy Lockhart, whose only true magic consisted in making others loose their memory.

Unlike the original of the series, "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," which was pure unadulterated enchantment, I found the "Chamber of Secrets" highly predictable and at times downright boring. That, however, did not seem to be the general sentiment on opening night in a movie house packed mostly with children who watched with all due attention and awe. Could it be that it was only I who has outgrown Harry Potter in the last year?