Night at the Museum (2006)

Wonderful character development!

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

This film had all the preconditions to be a masterpiece of the genre: an excellent, fairly original idea, a big budget and an incredible cast. Unfortunately, the realization is just slightly above the average.The idea was developed in a decent story, but it could have been much better. The effects are good, but not breathtaking, and the acting team is literally wasted. Ben Stiller almost alone carries the entire film, while top actors who surround him are totally unused. Robin Williams, one of the greatest names of the comedy, who turns even a bad role into gold, has such a small and uninteresting role that he simply did not have the opportunity to shine, and even that little time he was given he did not use well. In my opinion, this was his worst role. Enchanting Carla Gugino has no purpose in this movie. She was thrown into the story for the element of romance with Ben Stiller, but neither romance was given the chance to happen, nor did her character have any other function in the film, so her role is completely redundant. The same goes for Jake Cherry, because the relationship between father and son, which should have been one of the backbones of the film, was so superficially shown that they could easily leave it out completely. Trio Bill Cobbs, Mickey Rooney and Dick Van Dyke was an unexpected but pleasant surprise in this film. These three veterans, with their appearance alone, raise the rating of the movie at least one star. Ricky Gervais seems to be improvising all the time and, although he plays a very small role, he greatly contributes to the entertainment of the film. There are many more interesting characters in the film, but I will mention only Patrick Gallagher, Steve Coogan and Owen Wilson, because they left the strongest impression on me.The disadvantages of this film are, in my opinion, quite big, but its qualities and the fantastic cast not only compensate for, but also overcome its flaws, so the film is very watchable, quite entertaining and at times hilarious.7/10

This is seems like my totally my type of film, so it's weird that I saw it so belatedly, 11 years after it came out. Where was I in 2006?! Anyway, if you see Ben Stiller these days, he still looks the same - he's hardly aged at all. Still handsome, and still worthy of being a "really, really, really good-looking" male supermodel. Night at the Museum seems like one of those fun summer flicks that you go to see with your friends, family, or a date. It doesn't take itself very seriously, and it's not trying to be artsy or profound. It's not even making some minor, dumb statement, like what Ben Stiller was kind of trying to do in his supermodel films. This was made by a Quebecois director, Shawn Levy, and if you watch his commentary in the DVD, you'll see that he's overly articulate and formal. He's a no-name director, and maybe it's because his films are not serious, and they're overshadowed by a big-name cast, like Ben Stiller. It's a feel-good, fun film. But Sacajawea in the film takes herself too seriously. The part-Native actress, Mizuo Peck, has remained F-list these days; no one has heard of her. Stiller's love interest in the film seems very innocuous. You might've heard of her - Carla Gugino. You've probably suspected she's the love interest very early on, since the first shot of her, because she seems sweet and pretty, and she's dressed so modest and sexy at the same time. A low-cut cardigan, pencil skirt, and heels - overly dressed up for a mere museum docent job, yet teacherly at the same time. Films are stupid, and they like driving in the beauty-and- brains thing too much. It's slightly pathetic that they made her a very pretty geek girl who's going for her PhD and writing a dissertation on Sacajawea. It just seemed a bit insulting and patronizing, in some way. Stiller seems like a fairly smart guy, but not that smart. It's like he might have a decent IQ and appreciation of all things cultured LA people are into. But then, he hasn't experienced much of life or of the human condition, so he really doesn't know that much. He's like a late Gen Xer - cool, but uncool at the same time. Anyone remember The Ben Stiller Show? Maybe not. It was from the early Gen X days in the 90s, when 20-somethings thought they were the coolest and most badass people on the planet. But I guess every 20-something generation thinks it's that. Stiller is guilty of Asian stereotyping, and he obviously has no close Asian friends in his A-list Hollywood royalty circle. It's so minor, but I can see that he doesn't like the "Asian representation" in the film - the Huns. Attila the Hun was played by a no-name Eurasian Canadian actor, Patrick Gallagher - a character actor, obviously, due to his big build and lack of leading-role looks. Every fantasy character in the museum was non-white-American - and yet, when Stiller was faced with an angry mob of "Asians" (Attila the Hun's crowd), he asked, stupidly, "Do you speak English?" He didn't ask that to Sacajawea, or the pretty Egyptian mummy, or the little monkey, any of the other characters, who were just as unlikely to speak English as Attila the Hun, if not more so. This reflects the "no speak English" stereotype, and so many other wrong stereotypes that are pervasive in American films and American culture in general. Stiller is a major player in Hollywood, and he has plenty of major films under his belt, so he has tons of influence. Even something as minor as asking ONLY the Huns if they speak English, and no one else, is driving in foreign, stereotypical singling out, something that Asian Americans suffer from on a daily basis. Anyway, the film is fun, but it's not totally innocuous. As always, it reflects the stupidity, stereotypes, and limited worldview of its filmmakers and actors. Films drive and influence the perception of the masses, so they have a very important role. Stereotype and degrade, even in s subtle way, and that's causing the stereotyped to be degraded and to suffer in real life, in their everyday lives.

Night at the Museum (2006): Dir: Shawn Levy / Cast: Ben Stiller, Robin Williams, Carla Gugino, Owen Wilson, Steve Coogan: Embarrassing mess that plays like a chemistry experiment gone wrong. It regards facing fears as if viewing the film wasn't a big enough task. Ben Stiller is newly employed at a museum of natural history where everything miraculously comes to life. The special effects are about as fetching as guessing what food someone upchucks when sick. Setup is rushed into a routine structure consisting of Stiller dealing with mishaps. Director Shawn Levy can do better as he did with Just Married. He also directed Cheaper by the Dozen and The Pink Panther. Stiller is basically a subject for target practice as he struggles to maintain order. Robin Williams plays 26th President Teddy Roosevelt whom comes to life to give Stiller words of wisdom, none involving torching this film unfortunately. Carla Gugino is wasted as a museum historian who is basically seen as a potential romantic prop. She is also the museum tour guide who wasn't lucky enough to give these people a tour of a better film set. Owen Wilson plays a miniature cowboy in a miniature role. Similar to Jumanji only much worse. The norm is the special effects, which is hardly a complimentary element in the film. Despite the imagination, this film is about as boring as History class. Score: 2 / 10

Ben Stiller plays Larry Daley, an unemployed father to son Nick (Jake Cherry). He's not been very successful in previous jobs and is about to start a new life in Queens. However, before Larry leaves he makes one last attempt to find a job. Larry ends up securing employment as a night watchmen at a local museum - but this is no ordinary museum and Larry discovers that the statues and museum pieces come to life between sunset and sunrise due to an ancient tablet that has been placed in the museum. This means that Larry's evenings at work are 'eventful' to say the least.This to me is much more than just a special effects extravaganza. It's actually very funny and also contains some great acting performances. There are occasional cheap sight gags and once or twice it does get a bit crude, but these elements aren't over-done and a lot of the jokes are actually clean and tasteful - Larry's feud with the monkey Dexter was a personal highlight for me. There are a few gags that are a bit crude and there is some very minor violence in this film so it's probably not suitable for younger children (although teenagers should be OK with this).It's not just the animals that come to life, but many of the cast do as well - Rooney for me was the scene stealer and was a blast in this. Stiller was excellent and gave the film a nice manic edge when required. Stiller is well-supported by an excellent cast including Bill Cobbs, Dick Van Dyke, Owen Wilson, Steve Coogan. In fact, all the cast were great apart from one person......RICKY GERVAIS; I'm sorry but whenever I saw him on screen I didn't see a Museum Director in a New York Museum - what I actually saw was a camp David Brent playing a Museum Director in a New York Museum. Anyone who has seen the UK version of The Office will know what I'm talking about. His mannerisms and the way he speaks just reminded me of David Brent. This would have been OK if his character would have been funny, like his David Brent character was in The Office, but the writers probably gave Gervais the weakest material to work with and for me he was a pointless character in the film. I can just imagine him repeating "Assistant to the museum director" if he'd had an assistant. I'm probably being a bit harsh, but it did bother me slightly when watching this film. Thankfully, Gervais isn't given much screen time so it wasn't a huge problem.Although I had an issue with the casting of Gervais, this is still an absolute laugh riot from start to finish. The script is mostly sharp and funny and it very rarely loses momentum. In summary, it's a very funny film and highly enjoyable.