Rating:

2.5 out of 5
Short version: Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian is a mildly funny and harmless family film about on par with the first movie.

Screen Rant reviews Night at the Museum 2
What’s there to say about the the sequel to the first Night at the Museum? It’s a bit of fluff, something to take the kids to where you might be mildly entertained without having to worry about anything offensive where your kids are involved.
| |
The story picks up a few years after the first film, with Larry Daley (Ben Stiller) now a successful businessman. He has a knack for infomercial-type inventions and is doing very well – financially anyway. He still visits the museum from time to time to visit with his night-animated buddies, but not as often as he used to. It turns out that most of the museum pieces are being replaced by newfangled holographic projection versions, with the current ones being shipped off to storage at the Smithsonian, to be crated forever.
He attempts to intervene but it’s a case of too little, too late – but of course the day is not lost. One thing leads to another and Egyptian prince Kahmunrah (Hank Azaria) is awakened with thoughts of world domination on his mind. In the process we once again meet Robin Williams as Teddy Roosevelt, Owen Wilson as Jebediah Smith the pint sized cowboy, along with new characters General Custer (played well by Bill Hader) and Amelia Earhart (played by the forever cute and perky Amy Adams).
This film seemed to be more about the performances than the actual story, and there was an interesting conglomeration of characters here. The oddest of the bunch had to be Hank Azaria as the Egyptian prince… he was quite the odd combination here – being just a bit older than him and with the fact he’s always been known as a comedic character actor, I was struck by how he buffed out for the role. What made it weirder was the fact that for some reason the voice they chose for his character was a bad Boris Karloff impersonation with a lisp thrown in for good measure.
Funny? Maybe. Weird? Most definitely.
Beyond that Amy Adams was perky to the point of annoyance (for me, anyway) but the old style skin-tight pants she wore kind of made up for that (what can I say?).
I enjoyed Bill Hader’s performance as Custer and brief cameos by Ricky Gervais and Jonah Hill were both quite funny. However as usual (for me) Ben Stiller just seemed… odd. He has a flavor of humor that while I don’t hate it, I just don’t get it and it doesn’t work for me.
Thankfully it’s a fairly short film, clocking in well under two hours. It’s not awful, but nowhere near great – kind of take it or leave it film. But if you’re a parent with some little ones and you’re hungry for movies to take the family to without worrying about anything offensive, it’s a good one to go see. For anyone else, you’ll need to be a Ben Stiller fan – otherwise it’s a definite rental.




33 Comments
Great review…..while I was suprised to enjoy the first…I think I’ll wait for this film on dvd.
Good, unpretentious, level headed, review Vic. I’m sick of people blasting kids movies for things like immature humor, they’re for kids of course the humor will be immature.
Vic, date tomorrow, are there any good movies for that? This seems like the only option, but the reviews are pretty bad, what do you think, should I watch this with my date??
Fluff is an excellent word for a movie like this. It’ll probably be best remembered in the long run for actually beating out Terminator 4 in the box office…
I went into this movie with the lowest expectations and came out happily surprised. Not an amazing movie by any stretch, the first 20 minutes or so were slow, but as soon as he got to the Smithsonian, things picked up and I even found myself laughing in places. Overall, I came out with a smile on my face feeling utterly entertained, and in a season of summer blockbusters, what more can I ask for?
Spot on review Vic, although I think I would have upped the rating to at least a “3″.
I liked the first one a lot and this one was on the same level as the first. A good, clean family movie that was entertaining. Also, it had very good special effects without them being a distraction.
Thanks, guys – like I’ve said before, I try to review films within the context of their genre.
Vic
@Vic
And a fine job you do, sir.
Extremely boring and not all living up to its name.
Damn, so it seems like half the comments point to no, and half the comments point to yes.
If I shouldn’t bring my girl to see this movie, what else is there? Was hoping for something cute and funny…
@Ken J
Well, I guess I’m biased because I liked it, but yes, take your girl to see it, it has some nice comedy performances in it from some decent comedic actors, some of the jokes hit the mark, some of them fall flat and while it’s somewhat predictable, there’s a lot of unpredictability in there which is nice. I would like to sway you by giving you examples of the best bits, but unfortunately a) telling you about them will spoil the impact of them and b) they mostly happen at the end anyway. You both, should like it as long as you’re not going in expecting something amazing. Go in, turn your brain off, enjoy.
And if you don’t, then you can come back here and blame me.
LOL, thanks, it doesn’t seem like I have much of a choice anyhow looking at the other movies out now…
Exactly. The only reason I went to see Night at the Museum 2 was because I’d already watched everything else worth watching and it was a toss up between this and Angles and Demons.
This won simply because it started an hour earlier than Angels and Demons and I couldn’t be asked to wait around in town for another hour. I don’t regret the decision (I’m starting to sound like a promoter for the movie… really, it’s not that good, but I was pleasantly surprised and came out smiling, so that’s something).
C’mon Ken, you don’t want to take your date to “Drag Me to Hell”? That would let you know what kind of girl she is right off the bat!!
Seriously though, Night at the Museum would seem more lighthearted than Angels and Demons. Of course, you COULD just take her to see Star Trek. 
Don’t think she’s into action or sci-fi, lol.
A much better film than Star Trek, IMHO.
Look up most popular baby names, 1984: Brundon!
@Dave
Um… wow.
Vic
where are the plot holes? No plot holes ???
Plot holes,,,,?
I will be going to see this movie even though I haven’t seen Star Trek yet. I don’t want to see that first and THEN see Star Trek.
I think that Ben Stiller is very talented and he’s great at changing his personality per movie. I know he does a lot of the same characters over and over but then he’ll do a drama, or a different kid of of comedy. Tropic Thunder. I laughed my ass off at that even though he was playing his usual muscle bound, dopey character. Still loved him.
Smithsonian is just for fun and mostly aimed at kids with a few winks here and there for the adults. So if you take your kids to see it, you don’t have to feel tortured like some of the other kids movies. Shrek did a lot to cross the boundry between adults and children. In fact, I really feel it was more directed at adults. It’s nice to see movies being made that adults can enjoy too. It used to be torture. Pokemon? Worst movie ever but the kids loved it. YUCK!
Ok, point belabored so I’m done.
On a side note: A shout out to Ken J!
hey hey, lol.
I think think that this movie deserved better than the 2.5, I took my fiance to see it for it to be her first imax movie and she enjoyed it. it is a great family movie for non offensive entertainment and also to perhaps attract interest in aspect of history for children. Not award winning, but i think a 3 out of 5
It always burns me up when reviewers comment on something they don’t get and it reveals their lack of movie chops. Hank Azaria’s Karloff impersonation was dead-on and for a purpose: Karloff played the original dead-Egyptian-prince-come-back-to-life-in-a-museum in 1932’s “The Mummy.” I have always thought that Azaria resembled Karloff and when he decided to put it all together as a delicious in-joke for fans-in-the-know, I clapped with delight in the theatre. What a treat! Professional reviewers should do their research.
@Zibe
Sorry, for me it was a take it or leave it movie, but I did indicate quite strongly that it’s a good family-friendly movie to bring the kids to.
@Dorothy
Thanks for pointing that out, it’s an interesting bit of trivia, but I try to review movies for the average person and to me it seemed more than a bit overdone.
Vic
Dude, what the heck, were you not listening to Owen Wilson’s character at the end of the movie…… nothing offensive for children…… try explaining his line, in THX movie quality with no background music to an 11 year old !!
This movie is garbage and the pre-views for the next 6 months…even more garbage….. at least we’ll see public library’s on the rebound
Aw C’mon!!I saw it on opening day and I loved it!!!
Sure it was silly,but come on!!
It was supposed to be that way!!
Plus,Ben Stiller;Owen Wilson;Hank Azaria and Bill Hader make a great comic foursome and Amy Adams is beautiful;smart and funny!!!
@Vic
OMG! We’re the same age and you didn’t recognize a Karloff impersonation?! Now I’m even more depressed that the doc said I have arthritis in my knee. So that’s in addition to the arthritis in my spine. That must be why I recognized Karloff – I’m a lot older than I thought. Bones don’t lie.
@Guest
And you call yourself a Guest!
@prtvr
I *did* recognize it. I pointed it out specifically as a matter of fact. What I didn’t recognize was the original movie reference.
Vic
@Vic
Did I make you snappy? I didn’t mean to. Sorry about that.
Not snappy at all, don’t sweat it. Just pointing it out.
Although today DID suck…
Vic
For you too? I got a cortisone injection in my left knee. Arthritis in the joint, arthritis in the spine. Doc said that I just got lucky in the gene pool. Oh well. What’s that saying? “I complained about not having any shoes until I met a man with no feet?” Something guilt inducing like that.
Here’s hoping for a better tomorrow for both of us!
What's your opinion? Leave a Reply!
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!