Night at the Museum 2: Battle of the Smithsonian Reviews

Page 1 of 1387
Super Reviewer
½ June 29, 2009
Not bad. I dont usually like Ben Stiller. But this served as a perfect segue into my activities in DC with my girls. We are going to be exploring the Smithsonian and this movie got them so excited to go.
Super Reviewer
January 14, 2010
After seeing the first film, I was worried that they would just be milking the story for extra cash, and while that probably is the only reason this was made, at least they cared enough to stay true to the first. The story builds as all of the statues are shipped to Washington DC where they will be on display for more of the world to see, which makes for a bigger and better "Night at the Museum" if you will. This film improves on story and back tracks on comedy, leaving a film that's neither better or worse than its predecessor. Overall, it has it's moments once again and I felt a little more attached to these characters than I did in the first, but there is just something special missing from these films. I fear it misses the Chris Columbus style of direction. In the end, "Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian" is dumb fun just like the first.
TheDudeLebowski65
Super Reviewer
August 18, 2013
Sequel to Night of the Museum is a mediocre attempt at capturing the essence of the original. Although the first was never anything great, I found it quite amusing in some areas, but in others the film fell apart. That is mostly the case with sequels, they try to amp up the stakes, and in turn, they fail to capture what was truly engaging from the original. This is a mediocre sequel, one that should have been much better than what we got. Although the original was never anything great, or highly memorable, it was a fun film to enjoy with the family. This on the other hand is a tiresome, uninspired film that wastes its potential. The jokes here are bland and there is never anything interesting to really make this film worth your time. I really was disappointed with this film, but I much preferred the original. Even if the first wasn't perfect, it was a fun and highly entertaining film worth seeing. Night at the Museum 2: Battle of the Smithsonian has a few laughs here and there, but never anything substantial to make this a worthwhile family film. This isn't an awful film, but this is more like a movie that needed more work than anything else. The ideas were there, but the script, I felt was underdeveloped and needed work to make this sequel standout. As it is, this is quite forgettable, and is worth only seeing once, and I think it's a shame because there were parts here that worked, and given a rewrite or two, this sequel would surely have been lots of fun. However it ends up being a mediocre, tiresome affair that leaves a lot to be desired.
Directors Cat
Super Reviewer
October 28, 2011
Battle of the Smithsonian makes Night at the Museum look like Citizen Kane as somehow they've managed to throw in even more unneccesary CGI, Characters, painfully bad jokes and un funny slapstick. The one word honestly that would describe the entire film as a sequel or as a stand alone is, unnecessary.
Super Reviewer
½ May 22, 2009
The follow up to Ben Stiller's hit goes by the motto: bigger, larger, more. And the idea to take it to the Washington Smithsonian museums, where you do not only get historical figures come to life, but also paintings and planes is actually pretty fun. There is plenty of action and quite a few fun sequences, but fact is: the plot isn't much to write home about and a few gags and ideas just don't work. The singing/rapping angels are particularly stupid. Of course, the film is too fast and eventful to ever bore you, sometimes you even forget to look for the many flaws. The really sweet ending even makes you think you've seen a better film than it actually is. For what it's worth: Children certainly will have a lot of fun with this, but there is very little for adults here.
Super Reviewer
½ November 8, 2008
[My predicted rating: 3]

An entertaining follow up to the first, time has moved on, so we're in with the new and almost out with the old, introducing new characters (along with old). It was of course the introduction of Amelia Earhart that carried the film and whilst it was easy watching, it wasn't a touch on the first.
theunknownhobo
Super Reviewer
August 25, 2011
I genuinely enjoy this whole franchise and think that the sequel although good, will never match the honest hilarity and hijinx of the first movie.
jamers2011
Super Reviewer
August 16, 2010
This film is not that bad, even if it is the exact same movie as the first. Amy Adams is superb!
DreamExtractor
Super Reviewer
½ February 27, 2011
Bad sequel, it was boring, unoriginal, and Stillers performance was forgettable
michael e.
Super Reviewer
½ January 2, 2011
another great sequel
Super Reviewer
½ September 2, 2008
A fairly good follow up to the first. Lacking some of the charm of the first and some of those characters have smaller parts this time round. Idea was good of the tablet going to the biggest collection of museums in America, bringing even more exhibits to life. More of the same really and good for all ages.
thmtsang
Super Reviewer
½ May 23, 2009
This is a great sequel and it's not often that a sequel is better than the original movie. I think this movie has a better and more involved storyline. Larry (Ben Stiller) has left the museum and has become a successful inventor. Meanwhile the museum exhibits have been moved to Washington DC museum archives. Larry has a race against time to rescue them. On the way he meets Amelia Earhart (Amy Adams). She's fab. There are new characters like Al Capone, Napolean, Enstein, Lincoln and more interesting storyline with a fight against good and evil. The museum really comes to life. My faves are still there Jed (Owen Wilson) and Teddy (Robin Williams). Even Ricky Gervais is back as the mumbling nonsensal director of the museum.
Super Reviewer
½ August 2, 2009
this one was so easy to forget it ..I didn't like it like the first one
Super Reviewer
½ September 19, 2010
I found the first film to be a big disappointment and it nearly put me to sleep the first time I watched it, but this one I enjoyed a good bit more and was interested throughout.
Super Reviewer
March 21, 2009
The story move to a new location... but it is just as much fun!
Super Reviewer
July 29, 2010
C
Super Reviewer
½ July 6, 2010
it's a good movie, fun. i just didn't think it was as good as the first one. the first one had a great plot. this one was all your favorite characters battling one villain instead of making ben stiller's life miserable and amy adams is kinda annoying. anyway, its worth a rent.. you can even wait till it's on tv.
3niR
Super Reviewer
June 12, 2010
"Gods of love would you shut up!"

This was hilarious and much better than the first one. I enjoyed this a lot. Really recommend this to watch.
Super Reviewer
½ May 18, 2009
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 truely 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.
Super Reviewer
June 8, 2009
I enjoyed the first one because it was sheer dumb fun, and this was a relatively worthy sequel, if not a little sillier.
Page 1 of 1387