Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian (2009) User Reviews

The Smithsonian gets a treasure

[bkoganbing · 6/10 · 14 July 2018]

In this sequel to Night At The Museum, Ben Stiller now a millionaire who does motivational infomercials still finds time to visit his old friends at the Museum of Natural History where he made their acquaintence while working as a night security guard there.

But with his millions he can't stop changes as the Museum is now going for interactive exhibits and many are being packed away and sent to the National Archives, some for exhibit in the Smithsonian.

So Stiller goes back into action and visits the archive which is lots of underground space between the Capitol and Lincoln Memorial.

I wonder myself in both of these films was Stiller really visiting Madame Tussaud's with all the historical figures coming to life.

Theodore Roosevelt's connection with the Museum Of Natural History is well known and Robin Williams is back as our rough riding 26th president. Others are back and new ones added.

Hank Azaria is brilliant as the Egyptian prince whose incantation caused all these exhibits to come to life after sundown. He sounds like he was channeling Boris Karloff.

Amy Adams is a feisty feminist role model Amelia Earhart who gets kind of interested in Stiller. They make a good team.

As for them getting together. A gambit that Meet Joe Black and Bing Crosby's A Connecticut Yankee In King Arthur's Court used is applied here. You have to see the film to see what I mean.

A few good laughs in this nice family entertainment film.

Automatons, Possessed Statues, or "Real" Humans? Answer: Possessed Statues.

[BabelAlexandria · 7/10 · 14 May 2020]

This is a fun movie, no different from its predecessor really, except the threat of "death" for the exhibits being moved to Washington, and thus unable to come to life at night through the magic of the tablet. So what is the status of these walking, talking exhibits anyway? They seem somewhere in between automatons, which can move but don't have personalities, and "real" humans, who are always animated, not just at night. The solution, I think, is to consider the Opening of the Mouth Ritual, especially given the movie's ancient Egyptian thematics. That involved animating a statue with the soul of the departed. So the Teddy Roosevelt statue, for example, would be possessed by the soul of Teddy Roosevelt.

We enjoyed that this took place in the Smithsonian, as we were planning to visit D. C. for the Cherry Blossom festival. Then COVID-19 happened!

Seb's rating: 7 stars Sienna's rating: 7stars Paul's rating: 7 stars.

Stiller Going Strong

[ajaymittal · 7/10 · 20 May 2009]

In a world where unnecessary sequels are plaguing the movie world and are seemingly released for little other reason than to milk the 'cash cow', Night at the Museum 2 is a refreshing exception (unlike Meet the Parents 2,3,4...). It's arguably better than the first.

Although better on different levels…The historic characters are not just new and improved but also come with a greater comic value. In what the film lacks in a relatively mundane storyline, it compensates with a wonderful underlying message/moral. There's also a love story again but what struck me as more potent was the greater bond that exists between the rest of the characters; Larry and Jedediah, Jedediah and Octavius etc. The score/music was noticeably better as well, very listenable. Of course the whole picture was far more 'epic' and I, for one, am a fan of this. On the face of this, its a comedy blended perfectly with action like a cocktail of strawberry and champagne – and very much like Tropic Thunder (although on a different level of course). Hank Azaria was brilliant as Kahmunrah especially in the way he could turn from serious evil to light-hearted joker in the blink of an eye. Speaking of which, him and his trio of evil helpers were fantastic together, as am sure you'll all agree.

The one downside is that too many of the best comedy moments were shown in the trailers, so kind of dampening the effect of many of the genuinely funny moments. But there's still enough to keep you chuckling away! So should there be a third? If they can continue to make people laugh whilst rummaging through their popcorn during the action scenes, I'd day why not? After all, what is life without a bit of fun?

Funny sequel as amusing and spectacular as the original

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 25 July 2010]

Entertaining film with adventures, action, amusement and full of imagination and fantasy . This sequel concerns about the divorced father named Larry (Ben Stiller) and his son , now he's a successful manager and left his job as night vigilance at Museum of Natural History of New York City. But his allegedly easy life results to be a roller-coaster when encounters what an Egyptian pharaoh (Hank Azaria who also plays The Thinker and Abe Lincoln) threatens to kill Jedediah (Owen Wilson). Again the ancient animals,beasts,historic personages and miniature are brought to life originating wreak havoc and complications for the unlucky ex-night watchman. Thus several animals and historic characters come to life , like a Tyrannosaurus Rex, a giant octopus ,monkeys, besides Neardenthal cavemen, Vikings, Attile(Patrick Gallaher) and the Huns, Sacajawea(Mizuo Peck), Teddy Roosevelt(Robin Williams)and Octavius(Steve Coogan) and a cowboy(Owen Wilson) , Octavio (Steve Coogan) and George Armstrong Custer (Bill Hader). The peculiar personages of the Museum that Larry watched are being replaced by holograms and sent to Smithsonian Museum , the biggest of world located in Washington. There ours friends along with Abe Lincoln,the Thinker and some flying Angels confront evil pharaoh (Hanz Azaria), Napoleon (Alain Chabat), Ivan the Terrible (Christopher Guest), Al Capone , among others . Meanwhile Larry Daley falls in love with the famous heroine Amelia Earhart (Amy Adams) .

This blockbuster displays action, adventures ,fantasy and an enjoyable father-son relationship . This fantastic film starts splendidly and goes on in a real sense of wonder and magic , winds up an overlong bombastic wild ride made by means of magnificent special effects and with an exciting final pursuit . Spectacular images and computer generator set pieces action with several known personages and animals can not erase the charm of characters and ideas especially in the hands of peerless casting . Glamorous and luxurious cinematography by John Schwarzman and moving musical score by the composer of the previous film , Alan Silvestri, Robert Zemeckis's usual musician. The picture is marvelously realized with phenomenal production values and well directed by Shawn Levy . Shawn is an expert on familiar genre as he proved in ¨ Cheaper by the dozen¨,¨Pink Panther¨,¨Just married¨ and of course ¨Night at the Museum I¨. The film contains numerous scenes have you on the edge of your seat with a stunning array of overwhelming images to be enjoyed for all family.

somewhat cute and funny but overall disappointed

[prillyisyourfriend-1 · 6/10 · 23 May 2009]

The first Night at the Museum is one of my favorite movies and I had high hopes for this one but what happened??? First, the bad: there were several characters that I was really disappointed to see did not have big (or at least significant) parts especially Ricky Gervais and Owen Wilson. Ricky Gervais (Dr. McPhee) really added to the humor in the first movie, but he just seemed so serious and boring in this sequel. And I thought Owen Wilson's part was kind of disappointing too. Ben Stiller's character just didn't seem as into it as before. I can't quite put my finger on it but there was definitely something lacking.

The good: the effects were amazing! I loved all the animated characters (the moving paintings and how they could go inside them; the Einstein bobbleheads and the Jonas brother cupids, the black and white Al Capone, etc.). One of my favorite scenes was when they went inside the black and white painting. Another favorite was the little arguments between Larry and Brandon (Jonah Hill) and Larry and Kahmunrah (Hank Azaria). Probably the funniest scenes in the movie. By far the best character in the movie: Hank Azaria as Kahmunrah. And the lisp was just a genius touch. Another funny but rather unimportant character was Napoleon. I thought Ben Stiller and Amy Adams were cute together. But that's pretty much it. I wasn't impressed by Adams' performance. It was just so-so. I mean, when has she NOT played a bubbly character?

It just didn't seem as... magical compared to the first movie. I was pretty letdown because using the Smithsonian, the movie could have had a lot more potential.

Poorly manufactured sequel that stays bearable with a few good characters

[Movie_Muse_Reviews · 4/10 · 8 January 2010]

The first "Night at the Museum" worked despite conventions for a few reasons, but the main one was that it eased into its premise of museum exhibits coming to life and didn't take it for granted like "Night of the Museum 2: Battle of the Smithsonian" does. I'm actually surprised the writers of the first film wrote this sequel, because Thomas Lennon and Robert Ben Garant handle these characters like they're someone else's creation and they can butcher them all they want.

"Night at the Museum 2" sucks the magic out of the original and overdoses on characters as well as meandering sarcasm and awkward humor. Save some bright spots in character acting from a delightful and plucky Amy Adams and some bright spots from Hank Azaria and Christopher Guest, "Smithsonian" will disappoint most defenders of the first film -- except kids and anyone else who'll bite on an outrageous premise.

Ben Stiller stars again as Larry Daley, only our beloved night security guard has randomly become a mastermind of As Seen on TV products. That decision alone completely destroys the continuity between this film and the last, forcing Larry's story to be something totally different than the single dad trying to be a role model for his son. Now son is hacking into the Smithsonian Institute floor plans to direct his dad to the location of the tablet that brings things to life at night. See the Museum of Natural History is going digital and all the beloved characters of the first film are shipped to the national archives in DC, only that naughty monkey brought the tablet with him and so the Smithsonian has come to life.

Our source of conflict is the Pharaoh at the Smithsonian, Kahmunrah, played by Azaria doing his best Stewie Griffin impression, who wants the tablet to unleash his army, so he gets help from Napoleon, Ivan the Terrible (Guest) and young Al Capone. At least director Shawn Levy realized the asset they had in Azaria and had him voice a couple other key statues that come to life later on. Azaria's too good for this film, really, but he plays at its level instead of pushing it and even manages a few of the better laughs when he puts a major diss on Darth Vader.

Then there's Amy Adams, the lone diamond in a sea of forced comedy and excessive cameos. It might seem like loving Adams is the "it" thing, but she brings the imaginative spirit sorely lacking in the film as Amelia Earheart. Every time she speaks it literally feels like the film gets more believable because she's such a convincing spirit. She also gets to work her best Katherine Hepburn impression to boot.

But "Smithsonian" is more defined by its disappointments and synthetic sequel material. Lennon and Garant try and include too many characters between the old ones and the new ones and the film just feels chaotic. It's like a contest to see how many new ideas of different things they can bring to life from paintings and photos on the wall to historical monuments in DC.

Worst of all, it's completely rushed. Understood that we get the coming-to-life premise and we aren't going to be surprised by it, but they take all the fun out of it. Levy figures a shot a piece of the statues of Amelia and Bill Hader's Col. Custer are adequate foreshadow, but they're not. Daley just cons his way into the archives and the story rockets right into the Smithsonian with a few quick facts about what it is to provide context.

"Night at the Museum 2" does just about everything we used to be terrified of sequels doing in the '90s -- overdoing it and diverting from the core values that won some love for the original because that film wasn't just about things coming to life.

~Steven C

http://moviemusereviews.com

Another Night at the Museum

[fanofbatman-1 · 6/10 · 26 May 2009]

Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian is the second film in the Night at the Museum series. While it isn't much different than the first film I have to say it isn't quite as good. Ben Stiller was pretty good but I don't think anybody else really stuck out. One thing I that disappointed by was the lack of screen time for Steve Coogan and Owen Wilson, or Octavius and Jedediah. In the first movie, they stole the show. But in this movie, they are underused like most of the others in the cast. Night at the Museum 2 has its funny parts, but seems to lack the charm and fun of the first movie. It's a worthy sequel that meets the standards of the first movie, but doesn't exceed them. You might want to wait for it's DVD/Blu-Ray release, but seeing in theaters is good too. Thanks for reading this review.

Night at the Museum: Battle of the Underdeveloped Plot and Characters

[saarvardi · 5/10 · 22 May 2009]

There's an old saying in Hebrew that claims that if you try and catch as much as you can, you'll end up having nothing at all. After viewing Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian, I can sadly say that the same can be said when regarding this lesser sequel to the 2006 smash hit.

Even though most film critics despised the original movie, the first Night at the Museum was actually one of my favorite films of that year. For me, the film worked on two levels. First, by waking the inner-child in all of us and making us feel the magic Ben Stiller's character Larry experiences once the exhibits in his museum come to life in all their glory in front of him. Second, by telling a very straight-out and heart warming coming of age story of a grown-up divorced man who has to take control of his life and get his act together (with the museum working more as a metaphor of sorts). I also related to the additional educational values the film had to offer, another theme I felt received a lesser emphasis in the sequel.

In the second installment of the Night of the Museum series, much of the initial magic is already lost from the get-go. We already know the artifacts come to life and how, and the general feeling of suspense is gone. To make things worse, the whole story feels convoluted and unreal. We're expected to believe that Larry has turned from a no-good night guard at the museum in the first film to this mega-successful businessman in the second installment during the course of only a few years (and after being a virtual nobody for the vast majority of his life). I mean come on, Hollywood - Where did the charming loser from the first film go so quickly? Stiller's Larry is hardly likable at the beginning, and once he learns that his lovable exhibits/friends are moving to the Smithsonian museum (after the Museum of Natural History closed for technological renovation) things start happening so fast, that his motives for leaving his comfortable job to help rescue his friends are left undeveloped and unconvincing.

The main course of this sequel is of course the special effects created by the two museum's re-animated exhibits, with the evil Egyptian Kamunrah (The Simpson's Hank Azaria) acting as the main villain who operates the evil Smithsonian exhibits who strive for world domination yadda yadda yadda. Some effects are cute (Al Capone's gangsters brought back to life in black and white, the heroes entering an old painting, the Lincoln memorial rising from his chair, amongst others) and some are once again undeveloped and underused. At times, it seems so much is happening on the screen, that you don't really know where to look or who to concentrate on. Many returning characters from the first film are outrageously underused (including Robin Williams' Teddy Roosevelt and Owen Wilson's Jedediah) and many comedians who are brought specifically for the film contribute blink-and-you-miss-it performances, including Ricky Gervais and Jonah Hill). The only true contribution for the film is the lovely Amy Adams (Enchanted), who portrays a fluffy re-animated Amelia Earhart who seems more lost than ever.

To sum things up, I'd say that Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian may have been cute at times, but it was mostly useless, as it really didn't add any significant notion to the elements presented in its predecessor. While that film felt like an instant classic to me, this one felt more like a quick money-grab with a lot of missed potential.

Exceeded my Expectations

[bjohnt · 8/10 · 22 May 2009]

When I saw the trailer for this, I was pretty excited. I loved the whole premise of the first one, and having a sequel opened up whole new opportunities. I was excited when I saw all these famous characters from history being mashed together, Al Capone, Napoleon Bonaparte, Amelia Earhart, to name a few.

I walked into the theater not expecting to much, but when I left I was very happy with it. They handled every characters personality beautifully, and the inside jokes were hilarious. I don't want to give much away, but trust me, you'll laugh. It tackles many themes like, a house divided cannot stand, the way to happiness is doing what you love, don't dwell on the past, etc. For a family flick they handle this jumbled cast of characters with complex personalities amazingly. They threw away most of the characters from the first movie to make way for the newer characters, which I didn't like that much, but how many characters can you throw in a story to have it make sense?

This film is an amazing example of a movie made for kids and adults. Kids will enjoy the silly humor, and the monkey. While adults will laugh at the onslaught of in-jokes, and trust me, there's a lot.

All in all, this was a great movie, blew me away. The highlight for me was Hank Azaria, that lisp kills me every time.

More of the same stuff

[changmoh · 6/10 · 21 May 2009]

The 2006 original was a fun-filled fantasy trip to the Museum of Natural History in New York. It was a blast for both the kids and the adults when the exhibits, especially the T-Rex and President Teddy Roosevelt, come to life that Night At The Museum.

This sequel basically shifts the action to the Smithsonian Institute in Washington DC where we get more of the same "Jumanji"-type action - without much cerebral input into the plot. In fact, the whole second installment looks uninspired and uninspiring. We don't feel for the characters, not even Ben Stiller's Larry Daley as he tries stir up another frenzy among the animated exhibits. As a sequel, it is rather stale because it does not have a plot that is engaging enough for its stunts. The gags are mostly repetitive - like Kahmunrah's lisping, Amelia's 'ready-for-anything' attitude, etc. There is never a sense of danger in the proceedings - and Larry's presence in the story seems superfluous.

The action remains a comic book adventure - and the mandatory twist at the end merely helps to ease our way out of this juvenile treat.

Rather average follow-up to an entertaining film

[TheLittleSongbird · 5/10 · 25 April 2011]

I really liked the first Night at the Museum, not bowled over, but very entertained. It had great special effects and it was great to see childhood legend Dick Van Dyke again. I was looking forward to this sequel, hoping for the same sort of entertainment. This is not a terrible film by all means, but as a sequel and film I couldn't help feeling disappointed.

Granted, the special effects were absolutely wonderful, and the cinematography, locations, costumes, sets and editing striking. Granted, the score was rousing and fun, and most of the direction solid. And granted the actors give it their all, Ben Stiller is solid if occasionally going overboard, Amy Adams and Hank Azaria are absolute hoots and Robin Williams returns as Roosevelt and along with Azaria is the standout of the actors playing the historical figures.

However, the recurring support cast aren't given much to do excepting Robin Williams, Owen Wilson is rather annoying, Napolean and Al Capone are written as quite badly-written caricatures and don't get me started on the Jonas Brothers, their presence added absolutely nothing to the proceedings and they were not funny at all. And if only there was a story and script that were consistently engaging, but the script and sight gags are very hit and miss and the story is thin, and these are further disadvantaged by the overlong length, tacky ending and too many scenes that drag.

In conclusion, watchable but quite average. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Good Adams, solid SFX, bored Stiller, poor plot = better than the first film but not by much

[bolt76 · 7/10 · 31 July 2009]

The only reason this film gets a positive comment from me is Amy Adams. Without her sparkling performance, this would have been basic cable fare, albeit with good production values.

The plot works like clockwork and everyone except Adams seems on autopilot. I feel at least Stiller could have made more of an effort.

There are very few laughs until half way through the movie. There's some clever stuff with paintings and photos, and a better script could have done something truly magical with the idea.

Bottomline: an improvement over the first film but not by much.

6/10

A respectable family movie

[bobertdos-1 · 7/10 · 25 May 2009]

I know this is always a risky statement, but I am going to say it was better than the first. I usually write very defensive comments for the movies I see, but I don't feel that's overly necessary here. The strength of Smithsonian, for me, was the same thing others think was its biggest weakness: casting. People complain about there not being enough emphasis on the original characters, but I think the new flavor Levy brought was both needed and thoughtfully implemented.

The humor was generally well-placed, juvenile and repetitive perhaps, but well-placed nonetheless. Bringing the Smithsonian to life called for slightly increased creativity and I think the writers were at least aware of that. People may say more could have been done, but then you risk the problems associated with compressing excess material in an hour and forty-five minutes.

They introduced the right balance of the old elements that worked with the first, combined with new elements they were careful to not blow out of proportion.

Well played! Larry Daley got a good homecoming!

Disappointingly flat for a comedy

[Gordon-11 · 12 August 2009]

This film is about the battle between various exhibits to save the world from evil power.

"Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian" unfortunately falls way short of my expectations. The first "Night at the Museum" was good, as the idea was novel and it was packed with fun adventures. That story unfolded nicely, like removing the wrapping paper to reveal pleasant surprises.

The sequel does not achieve the same. It has a flat and boring plot. Nothing unfolds but just happens for no reason. There are little fun moments, and the supposed jokes fail to make anyone laugh. The childish arguments that happens not once but twice in the movie are simply annoying. Furthermore, moving statues lost its novelty. The "new" elements in the movie are lifted straight from "Harry Potter" films and "The Mummy" films, making "Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian" so lame. Most parts of the movie bored me.

Clever and colorful but not quite as good as the original...

[Doylenf · 6/10 · 3 June 2009]

Before the credits are even over, one gets the impression that all of the sight gags from the original NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM are going to be transferred to The Smithsonian from The Museum of Natural History when the move is made, but fortunately, that's not true. There are some very clever touches to this sequel and the story itself varies considerably.

The touches include such historical figures as Al Capone (only seen in B&W although surrounded by color), Ivan the Terrible (nicely played by Christopher Guest), Amelia Earhart (crisply played for comic effect by Amy Adams), and George Armstrong Custer. All get the laughs intended, including Darth Vader who may or may not be historical but is certainly well known to fans of this sort of spoof.

And last, but not least, is the astonishing job done to allow Abraham Lincoln to walk about freely after getting up from the Lincoln Memorial and interacting with others for the grand finale, still keeping his sculptured appearance intact, thanks to Hank Azaria.

The most imaginative sequence of all has the famous B&W photo of a sailor kissing a girl in Times Square on VJ day, magically entered by our hero and his companion (Earhart) so that they become part of the celebrating crowd in that B&W sequence. When Ben Stiller leaves behind his mobile phone the sailor retrieves it, wondering what it can possibly be. Clever bit.

But mostly, it's a sketchy sort of plot that has all of the familiar goings on in the original film repeated in different ways by many of the original characters. And again, the zany antics all revolve around getting hold of that tablet. However, among the newer creations, Hank Azaria does a commendable job of bringing his ancient Pharoah to life. He's a man who wants to bring to life an "Army of the Dead" so that he can use the powerful tablet for his own selfish means. Azaria makes the right decision to play the character in Boris Karloff's voice, even down to the Karloff lisp. He's a standout in the supporting cast.

Kids should love it. Once again, no expense has been spared to bring the Smithsonian and the other museum to life and this time there's a nice twist to the story with the Earhart character endearing herself to Stiller in time to give the ending a romantic feeling. One of the disappointing aspects--Ricky Gervais doesn't get to be as comically effective as he was in the first film.

In many ways, not quite up to the original, but still provides a good measure of entertainment although there are times when almost too much is going on.

More lighthearted fun.

[lewiskendell · 7/10 · 15 May 2010]

I really like this series. I never expected to enjoy the first Night at the Museum as much as I did, but I was pleasantly surprised by how funny it was. It could have just been a phoned-in kid's movie, but it ended up being one of the uncommon live-action family movies that's truly enjoyable for all ages. I think that it and Enchanted are the only two recent movies that fit that bill.

I had heard that Battle of the Smithsonian doesn't quite live up to the original movies, and in some ways, that's true. A few (well, slightly more than a few) of the jokes fall horribly flat, some of the characters are extraneous and unnecessary, and the story has to jump through several hurdles just to provide a reason for this sequel's existence. But with all that, I still really liked it.

Adding Amy Adams and making her a main character was an absolutely brilliant idea. The woman has never been less than perfect in any movie that she's been in, and I can't think of a better actress to play Amelia in a lighthearted way. Plus, an entire trilogy could be dedicated to her butt in those pants. Good Lord! Hank Azaria was fantastic as well, and most of the biggest laughs of the movie involve him. The other new additions are either less noteworthy or not noteworthy at all, but those two alone made Smithsonian worth watching.

I'll admit that Battle of the Smithsonian was a little too busy and too crowded, but I still found myself laughing and laughing. I'd put it only a bit behind the first movie in terms of quality, and on my scale that makes it a success.

Fun, Adventurous but not that big of a deal

[bearfaceproductions · 5/10 · 22 May 2009]

Honestly, I knew that this movie wasn't a big of a deal from the start. The movie is a little action packed and somewhat fun, but in comedy this movie fails. I did get a few chuckles but not much else and I barley heard the audience laugh. This movie's plot is not that good neither. However the movie had some new things to offer, which were very well made. The special effects were very well made, this was one of the reasons that this movie was fun. The children might find this movie very fun since its made especially for them. Ben Stller should stop doing these movies because the first one was the one that had many unexpected things but the plot in this movie is very well known and the ending is very obvious.If you plan on watching this movie, take the kids and leave your adulthood at door but don't expect much else. I still think that the first movie was better than this one.

Great Film!

[mg200963 · 10/10 · 20 May 2009]

We went and saw the Night at the Museum premier yesterday in Tampere, Finland. The action in the museum was non stop. It didn't drag and it was interesting. Amy Adams as Amelia Earhart looked great in her flight pants. The action was non-stop. One good aspect was that it t was completely clean, for example no fart jokes or weird adult humor that pretty much ruins it for kids and makes the parents feel uncomfortable when it is on the screen. It was age limit 11 which means 9 with a parent in Finland. This was probably because of violence when they are chasing each other through the museum and some of the characters which appear briefly in the movie which real little ones may fin scary – but no where near as scary as Valdmort in Harry Potter. It featured many technical aspects of the Smithsonian so in addition to being entertaining, people go away with the take-away of learning something new. Great film! Go see it with the kids or with yourself.

Amy Adams saves the day

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 18 October 2013]

Larry Daley (Ben Stiller) has moved on from his night watchman job. The American Museum of Natural History is closed for renovations. The exhibits are moved to the Smithsonian in Washington where they must battle the forces of evil Pharaoh Kahmunrah (Hank Azaria) for the Tablet of Ahkmenrah.

Basically it's a story looking for an excuse to bring in new characters and a new location. A lot of the charm is missing mainly due to the fact that many of the characters are separated and reduced in role. There is one great addition. Amy Adams is fantastic as Amelia Earhart and she makes a great duo with Ben Stiller.

Ben without Robin

[kosmasp · 6/10 · 16 August 2009]

What is really important when you do a sequel? Apart from the already established characters, it is absolutely necessary to introduce new faces, new people, who will have room to "evolve" (no pun intended). And Night 2 tries hard. But it is a bit of a shame, that in the process beloved characters suffer and don't the screen time they deserve to get in this one.

Cameos plus improvised dialogue included. One particular scene sticks out, also shown in the trailer, where Ben Stiller acts as if he would touch something in a museum, although that ain't allowed. The mentioned scene seems a bit too long, but serves the story in the end. It is a nice fun ride and a few bumps along the road are normal. The jokes work (most of the time) and some fun characters make great short appearances (bobble heads anyone?). And since the movie was somewhat successful, I'm sure there will be another sequel.

Not as great or fun as the first

[geniuskentyk-1 · 6/10 · 9 July 2010]

It's hard to believe it was 3 years ago that the first "Night at the Museum" film was released. It feels like it was just last year that I watched the first movie, which was fun, humorous, and had heart. I was disappointed that "Battle of the Smithsonian" was such a bad film compared to the first. This time around, the museum is bigger, there's more characters, and there's a slightly bigger threat and villain(s). Yes, the museum is bigger in this movie (the Smithsonian is actually composed of a bunch of museums), but we only really get to see about two of the museums. There's a lot of characters, and the important ones from the first film come back, but they're not really used. Our favorite characters from the first movie are, for 99% of the film, trapped and locked away by some of the villainous exhibits from the Smithsonian. So basically, the big ensemble cast of comedians are underused and are wasted. The new characters and villains are entertaining at some points in the movies, but they also feel underused. Most of the focus is on the pharaoh villain, while Ivan the Terrible, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Al Capone remained as the pharaoh's dumb lackeys.

Another thing I felt was lacking in this movie is the threat level. Ben Stiller's character never seems to be really threatened by the pharaoh. Whenever Stiller's character gets captured (which is about 2 or 3 times), he looks bored and calm. He doesn't react as if his life's threatened. Also, the villains never act like they're really going to kill anyone. The villains just act like children. This movie uses A LOT of SPECIAL EFFECTS. Sometimes the special effects are used for no real point. For example, the fact that now paintings in the museum come to life. This didn't seem to happen in the first movie, so it feels like the filmmakers were milking the power of the "magical tablet" until they ran out of ideas.

One of the only things in this movie that was worthwhile was Amelia Earhart, played by Amy Adams. Her character is so lively and spontaneous that she brings the movie to life (only when she's in the scene). Amy Adams' character is the only important exhibit on Ben Stiller's side against the enemies. Over the course of the movie, the two fall for each other. It's kind of weird if you think about it, since she's made of plastic and he's human. And I don't understand the ending where Stiller meets a character resembling Amelia Earhart and seemingly falls for her. Does this mean that its okay to love someone else that looks like your other love?

Overall, the movie was a waste and a disappointment. It's a fun family film, and it did keep my attention (although I felt really tired halfway into the movie – maybe that was because it was like 11 or 12 at night). The movie is entertaining and its fun to watch everything in the exhibit, but it wasn't that "good." Also, I do like the ending, which reveals the fate of all of the exhibits from the original museum. Oh, and the Teddy Roosevelt bust (the brown one) had a pretty funny part, even though it only lasted for less than a minute.

Enjoyable but the first film is far, far better.

[planktonrules · 6/10 · 9 January 2022]

The first "Night at the Museum" movie was fantastic...far better than I could have hoped for and it was very entertaining. While this first sequel isn't bad, it lacks the heart and originality of "Night at the Museum". Now, I am not saying it's bad or you shouldn't see it....just don't expect the same quality or enjoyment level of the first.

In this highly contrived plot, most of the lovable characters from the first film are being sent to the Smithsonian in Washington, DC and the collection is to be stored in their archives. Apparently, the putzy director of the New York Natural History Museum is replacing these items and changing the entire museum. What makes it more tough to believe is when Larry (Ben Stiller) learns of this and is able to EASILY sneak into the Smithsonian to try to retrieve the collection AND stop a nutty ancient Egyptian from taking over the world.

Even more so than the first film, to enjoy this one you just need to turn off your brain and watch it without questioning what you see. And, on that level it works very well. Still enjoyable and still worth seeing...just not rising to the level of "Night at the Museum".

Everything that's wrong with movies today

[intelearts · 4/10 · 3 June 2009]

NATM2 is not terrible by any stretch of the imagination - but the special effects are so in your face all the time that there's never a chance to enjoy the amazing wizardry.

For us it was just too fast ', too frantic, no-one got any development, and all the actors have become line givers for the next piece of hocus-pocus.

Plot was fine, ideas abundant, some even really good - but we left feeling a) breathless and b) stuffed.

Much too much, even for the shortest most demanding attention span. The film replaced movie magic (And it has the makings of it) with slight of hand tricks.

At best fluff, at worst, a real headache. Sorry, but the kids found it all too much too...

Fun, Exciting and Underrated

[brendan-ralph · 7/10 · 19 August 2010]

A lot of these reviews had to make me want to sign up and back this movie, for one thing a lot of people here are judging it by the quality, as children's movies goes this is fun, and it IS a children's movie. you should just go into the state of mind that you will know that you'll have a good time. if you have an hour and forty minutes to kill and still want to watch this? then go ahead. It brings back a lot of magic back into movies and the great thing is about the movie is also the all staring cast. they all work well and know what they are doing, this helps the movie and helps parents and older people to be interested with the movie as well since it has the minds of Ricky Gervaise and Ben Stiller. so don't judge movies by reviews even ones here and even mine, just see it if you want and feel free to enjoy it as i did. if you liked the second then you'll love this as it's set in the Smithsonian so you know there's gonna be more mayhem and comedy. these movies are unique and enjoyable.. and indeed underrated.

The Battle to Stay Awake

[Simon_Says_Movies · 4/10 · 12 June 2009]

At the very least, the follow up to the comedy hit Night at the Museum could have directly copied its predecessor and still made the green. But in attempting to one-up itself, Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian directly copies its predecessor in spirit, while simultaneously being even worse in practice than the already obnoxious original.

I have quite literally never seen a film flaunt its budget so shamelessly. Museum 2 slides from unnecessary effects sequence to unnecessary effects sequence, many of which aren't even that impressive. Add in about fifty too many characters, a dull lead, tedious pacing and stale humour and you have an experience that strangely I cannot call outwardly bad but is simply banal and monotonous in the worst way. Even the central players, Ben Stiller as Larry Daley and Amy Adams as Amelia Earhart, can't have more than 20 minutes of screen time each. It is as if the filmmakers went to the Smithsonian wrote down every single display and said "alright, lets fit these all into the movie". The whole film feels like it was sponsored by the Smithsonian and that flaw infused with the inflated budget leads to an endlessly fragmented endeavour. As if it was simply the aforementioned exec reading off the list of exhibits for the entire running time.

The plot is actually non-existent. The tablet of Ahmunrah from the original has been shipped to the Smithsonian along with all his faux friends from the Museum of Natural History in NYC, where Daley has moved on from to become an inventor. After finding out the news he then rushes to Washington to save them. But a struggle erupts between the bad and good displays as they come to life during the night. End plot and let the battle begin. All I can say is thank god that Hank Azaria is in this film (he plays the evil Egyptian conqueror Kahmunrah) because is he was absent this would have been utterly, utterly disastrous (more so than it already is). I believe I laughed exactly four times (in addition to Azaria's scenes), once at a fairly inspired 300 reference, at a cameo from Jonah Hill, a sequence with some bobble-head Einstein's and a few gags with Larry and his flashlight. That is about a laugh every half hour in a film that was already far too long.

At the very least when you have a movie like this there is a chance for redemption with a strong lead, which Stiller does not supply. He is doing it for a paycheque and boy does it show. Adams as Earhart is fine (but actually a tad slutty) and the budget also seems to also have covered cheques for about every single comedian working in Hollywood from stars of The Office, to Bill Hader, Ricky Gervais, Steve Coogan, Robin Williams, Owen Wilson, et al. Cameos, famous exhibits, effects, and the 'story' all combine into nothing; a tedious, soulless and uninspired film that somehow manages to squander the cast effortlessly. The only battle I will ever admit to being associated with was the battle to stay awake.

Read all my reviews at: simonsaysmovies.blogspot.com