Review of Night at the Museum (2006) by Chads. — 13 Mar 2007

If you thought the remake of "The Stepford Wives" was severely flawed at the conceptual stage(were they humans or androids?), "Night at the Museum" manages to be even more befuddling as to the nature of such fantastical beings.

Why are some museum pieces aware of their true selves(Teddy Roosevelt as played by Robin Williams), while other seem to believe that they're actual historical figures(or animals)? It's just a comedy, I know, but you need to establish some rules and abide by them.

Take the mummy for instance; he either should have a face that indicates it's of very, very, very, very mature vintage(if the mummy is genuine), or possess no face whatsoever; just a blank slate of a visage(if the mummy is merely a wax display, why bother with a face at all underneath those bandages?).

These lapses in logic would be forgivable if "Night at the Museum" was entertaining. It's not. There's no awe factor that these inanimate objects are injected with life. Worst of all, the film doesn't build any suspense in leading up to Larry's supposed-to-be-grand-discovery.

"A Night at the Museum" shoots its load too early by stupidly going jurassic on us as a way of introduction. It also rips off "Field of Dreams"(people do indeed come), and "Cocoon"(Dick Van Dyke & Mickey Rooney remind me of the Orbitz ads with Wink Martindale; they're old men so old, you would believe that a magic tablet revived them).

And no self-proclaimed history geek alive writing a nine-hundred page book on an "Indian" princess looks like Carla Gugino. When she's ready to interview Sacajawea(Mizuo Peck), you wonder(well, you should wonder) how a wax body learned about its representational self.

"Night at the Museum" has got to be a candidate for worst film to ever gross more than two-hundred million dollars at the box office. It should've tanked.