I remember being enormously charmed by the first Night at the Museum, so I was excited when I saw they were coming out with a sequel. Then it came out at the same time as 5 other movies I wanted to watch and it just passed me by. It quietly left the theater before I really knew I had missed it. So I've only now just finally sat down to watch it. The holds list for this movie was gigantic at the library, so it's taken me a few months to get it. Here is my impression.
It was mediocre film. Part of the joy of the first one was its freshness. He works at a museum where the magic golden tablet brings everyone to life at sundown. There were people pulled from history that you never expected to be able to meet, and instead of being terrible or impressive or anything that they have become through the eyes of history, you saw the essential humanness of every one of them. Ben Stiller's character, Larry, grew and matured through his experience in the film, and you left with a great warm, fuzzy feeling.
I'll admit I haven't watched the first one in a while. I cannot believe it came out in 2006. That seems so long ago! Perhaps it's been since then that I actually watched it. All I remembered was that it was a really good movie. So I was a bit startled when this one started out with Larry being a hugely successful entrepreneur and owner of his own made-for-TV business. I didn't remember that from the first one, which shows that the first lesson in watching sequels is to watch the first one first.
He goes back to the museum and discovers all the exhibits are being packed up to be sent into storage to be replaced by holographic, talking images of themselves. It seriously cheapens the experience. So Larry decides to fight to get them back and ends up following them down to the Federal Archives under the Smithsonian in Washington, DC to save them.
This is where it turns unbelievably predictable. This would be a great family film because kids would be too naive to see what was coming Every time you meet a new character. I felt like they were just sticking characters in there so they could play off their stereotypes. Or like with Amelia Earhart, so they could create strange new ones for them.
Most of the old favorites are back--Jed, Caesar, Sacajawea, Dexter the monkey, and others. New characters include the old Egyptian prince's older brother, Kahmunrah, who acts as the nemesis in this one, Al Capone, General Custer, Ivan the Terrible, and Napoleon Bonaparte. You can begin to see some of the stereotypes already, can't you? Al Capone was in black and white, strutted around like a tough guy with his machine gun, and was a stereotypical mobster. Custer had has familiar giant moustache and was decidedly stupid and overconfident. Napoleon was short and obsessed with height. He was also, of course, French, so they got some French jokes in at his expense as well.
Amelia Earhart was one of the weirdest characters of them all. She was very flirtatious, obsessed with her relationship with Larry, and even kissed him a couple of different times. I'm sorry, but a romance between a night guard and a wax figure just isn't believable. I mean, you don't really even want them to fall in love because that's just awkward. So while I love Amy Adams, I felt that this role was really poorly written. Why is Amelia kissing Larry again?
And then there's Honest Abe (the statue in the Lincoln Memorial). Another stereotype they took too far. He states quite clearly that they make a cute couple and demands that it must be true because he's Honest Abe. He says several things that are meant to poke fun at his inability to lie, but the feel disingenuous and predictable.
The overall credibility of the movie just wasn't there for me. They ran around to all the different parts of the Smithsonian (it stretches over several buildings around the Mall), acting like it was no big deal. In and out of front doors at night like there was nothing to it. Do any of these other museums have night guards? Do they even have locks on their doors? Then, just how convenient was it that he was carrying the tablet with him everywhere he went so that he was awaking everything he met. Very convenient.
It all felt very formulaic and specifically calculated to create the most jokes. Not the best jokes, just the most. Like I said, good for families, not good for a single person sitting at home, trying to watch intelligent entertainment.
The one part I really enjoyed was an interaction between Ben Stiller and Jonah Hill as a security guard in the Smithsonian (during the day, of course). I feel that those two have very similar, natural kinds of comedy that meshed well in the scene. They were appropriately funny and I suspect there may have been a bit of ad-libbing in there. They had good comedic chemistry and really, it was the highlight of the film (sad to say it peaked so early on...).
Overall, this movie was a little too feel-good for my tastes. Make me feel happy inside, but do it in a way I'm not expecting, please; don't insult my intelligence. I have to give this movie just one rainbow and a horse's arse.
Rating (out of five rainbows and ponies): One rainbow and the back end of a pony
Conclusion: HAPPY ENDING
No comments:
Post a Comment