BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

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

areatw 'Night at the Museum' is a creative and crowd-pleasing film with an imaginative storyline. In many ways, it's like a bigger and better version of Jumanji - a feast of special effects and an entertaining plot to go with it.This is a funny film that features some great comedic talents, including Robin Williams and Ricky Gervais. Ben Stiller is very good as lead character Larry and provides plenty of laughs. I've seen 'Night at the Museum' a few times and it's a film I'm always happy to watch.

Horst in Translation (filmreviews@web.de) "Night at the Museum" is an American 105-minute film from 10 years ago. It was directed by Shawn Levy and written by Robert Ben Garant and Thomas Lennon based on Milan Trenc's children's book. The premise is simple. A night watchman discovers that the exhibits at a museum come to life at night. This is actually enough to construct a convincing and entertaining film around, but they failed to do so for the most part. Instead, this film got lost quickly in unrealistic and pretentious relationship drama (especially father-son) and spectacular (yet empty) special effects. The cast includes a couple actors I like (Stiller, Williams, Coogan, Gervais, the old guys and rising star Rami Malek is in here too very early in his career), but it proves once again that it is always all about the script. The way they were written they did not manage to stay interesting for a couple scenes regardless of their comedic talent and/or range.In terms of commercial success, this film was a huge hit ending as number 2 of 2006 behind the newest "Pirates of the Caribbean" movie. This is certainly also the reason why 2 more "Night at the Museum" films followed, one very recently. Looking at the quality of this original movie, no sequel was justified and I can only shake my head at the awards attention this film received. The only thing I kinda liked about it were the historic references, the fact that it takes a while to figure out the main antagonists and very rarely the humor. But both these aspects were overshadowed by the cringeworthy attempts of the makers to make this film a lot funnier than it actually turned out in the end. I have not read Trenc's base material, but there's no way he can be happy with how this turned out.All in all, even as a Ben Stiller fan, I cannot recommend the watch here. Very bad in terms of the dramatic scenes and moral impact the film is trying to make and weak in terms of the comedy. Yet, it would have been better if this would have been a 100% comedy movie, with another writer however please. I really hope the sequels are better if I watch them at some point, but I do not have a lot of hope. "Night at the Museum" is only a film for people who are easily impressed by intriguing special effects and do not need much of a story or intelligent humor. Looking at the audience numbers, this is probably more than it should be really. However, I personally urge you to stay away from this weak film we have here. Thumbs down. This could have been so so much more.

kosmasp Well most kids dream. I had a similar thing story that I wrote for class when I was younger and I can imagine that I wasn't alone with a fantasy like that. Wouldn't it be nice if ... this happened? And you don't need a time machine to go places or get a feel for things that are out of reach for you.The movie is aimed at kids then, but that doesn't mean that adults can't enjoy the movie. Just find the inner child and get with the movie, you'll be fine and watch a movie with (your) kids. The story is simple of course and lives off the main idea. You kinda wish it stays night forever ... maybe they should've gone to the North- or South Pole with the Museum ... just an idea ...

Armand a film who seduces. all type of public because it has the chance to represent more than a silly series comedy. first for presence of great actors like Mickey Rooney, Dick Van Dyke or Bill Cobbs. than- for the cultural games. it is a childish explosion of imagination. and it is enough. because nothing could be realistic, the clichés are not rare, the situations are crazies but, after its end, not the smile is the prize but a sort of happiness. one of comedies about childhood dreams. not memorable, not complicated but comfortable at all. a nice film for the courage to not give only fun but a form of introduction in humanity's history chapters. a nice film, in same measure, for the science to represent celebration of imagination. a nice film, first, for the small lesson about life. so, a not bad show.