Movie Monday: Night at the Museum Battle of the Smithsonian

1 06 2009

Alright, well, my girlfriend was really excited about this one. I was too, because I, like her, loved the first Night at the Museum movie and am actively pursuing buying the book one day.

That being said, for those of you who who frequent Fox News, let me restate the movie in question, as you are accustomed:

Pictured: A worthy sequel. Also, take that, Bill Oreilly.

Pictured: A worthy sequel. Also, take that, Bill O'reilly.

Well, I went into this movie with my reservations, having seen many mediocre reviews and heard that the movie was almost unbearable from the critics.

However, I found the movie really enjoyable! The movie held true to the themes included in the original, made more sense than ninety percent of sequels, and didn’t exclude any of the characters from the first film.

Again, spoilers in green. Watch that, if you are so inclined.

The movie starts with the entire original cast intact, from Stiller as the night guard turned business man Larry Daily, his son, and all of the exhibits, including Robbin Williams as Teddy Roosevelt, Owen Wilson as Jedidiah, a miniature of a wild west cowboy, the list goes on and on.

The movie starts with Daily having made it big with the inventions he had made to make his job as night guard easier.This is especially cool because it shows exactly how much bearing the first movie had on the plot of this one.

Then, shortly after, we receive a helping of character story, filling in the gaps between the movies and showing how the characters interact at this point in time.

Instead of being hokey, the plot plays by the laws of the first movie, as well as introducing new characters to the set, such as the brother of the Pharaoh from the first movie, expanding on the powers of the life-giving tablet and further drenching the movie in historical references and cultural art.

I have a couple of problems with the movie, the most prevalent being the next few points.

1. At the end of the movie, a huge stained glass window has been destroyed and in no way repaired, and it isn’t explained whether the Smithsonian even notices or cares.

2. It’s never clear whether Kah Mun Rah, the pharaoh’s brother, is a wax exhibit or an actual mummy, like the pharaoh from the first movie was.

3. The movie uses one very cheesy, over used line of the hero besting the villain in combat and the villain asking “Who ARE you?” to which the hero gives an anti-climactic answer (in this case, “I’m the Night Guard.”) which I could have done without.

4. Lastly, I came up with some very good jokes that the movie missed out on, like the miniatures lecturing Napoleon about how he has no right to feel small next to them.

Other than those points, other than a couple of quirky continuity moments, the only real problem I had was that the trailer used clips I found quite amusing that didn’t make the final cut, which I was annoyed by.

Of course, I won’t blame the movie for that. That’s marketing’s fault.

In the end, GG gives “Night at the Museum 2” a 8 / 10

Let it be said my girlfriend wanted me to give it higher. She’s a history nut.

Until next time, may greatness be thrust upon you. -GG




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: