Night at the Museum: Kahmunrah Rises Again
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Night at the Museum: Kahmunrah Rises Again | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Disney's devastating return to traditional animation since 2011.
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
Night at the Museum: Kahmunrah Rises Again (also known as Night at the Museum 4: Kahmunrah Rises Again) is a 2022 animated film directed by Matt Danner and written by Ray DeLaurentis and William Schifrin. The sequel to Secret of the Tomb (2014), is the first animated film in the Night at the Museum film series and the fourth installment overall, as well as the first animated feature film produced by Atomic Cartoons. The film follows Nick Daley, the son of Larry Daley, as he becomes a night guard at the Museum of Natural History. In addition to Nick Daley, it also features Kahmunrah, the antagonist of the second film (2009).
Unlike live-action films, 1492 Pictures is not involved with the film. Night at the Museum: Kahmunrah Rises Again was released on December 9, 2022, on Disney+.
Plot
Nick Daley, son of Larry Daley, is hired to be the new night guard at the American Museum of Natural History, as Larry is now working at a History Museum in Japan, and all the previous nightguards had lost their jobs after finding out the Museum is alive, but an old foe comes back in the form of Kahmunrah, who was previously banished from the real world and was the main antagonist of the second film, Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian, and wants to seek revenge on the Museum Artifacts by taking over the world, and it's up to Nick and Museum Artifacts to stop him once and for all.
Bad Qualities
- The main problem with this film is that it has no reason to exist other than money, since Secret of the Tomb ended the series on a high note and served as the finale for the franchise, and Larry became a teacher at the end of the film, and the tablet was now located in London, but this film decided to reboot the entirety of the continuity since nearly everything from the previous films is ignored and it was only made just for the sake of nostalgia and for Disney to milk more content on Disney+ due to the popularity of the service and trying to make films just for money's sake.
- Development hell: The film first began off as a television series, but when Disney acquired 20th Century Fox, they decided to make it a film for no reasons.
- It is way too short, only lasting for a total of 77 minutes, as a lot of scenes are usually rushed and have moments that are way too short and don't get enough build-up after it has finished, and almost everything in the film gets resolved way too quickly with very little time in the slightest, with added salt to the wound amounding to the fact that this is the shortest film in the series, whereas the older films last around almost two hours per maximum, which is typical for a live-action kids movie. This is likely due to Disney rushing the film out in an unfinished state to ship it out for the holiday season, thus explaining why the film doesn't last very long and not in a good way.
- The animation looks very jagged and faulty, as nearly all of it looks way too stylized and pointy considering that it was animated by Atomic Cartoons who have done better shows with much more quality animation than this film and it feels like something from The Guava Juice Show, or a TV Cartoon based on Night at the Museum since it's considered a feature film yet it has animation that looks like it was made straight to DVD at best with terrible character designs and wonky movements that feel cheap and overall disjointed in general.
- Many of the characters were butchered in terms of their personalities and traits as characters such as.
- Nick Daley was flanderized to being from a smart and adorable kid to an annoying, clumsy, and whiny teenager who keeps making mistakes and is afraid of nearly everything around him, which is the main reason why Kahmunrah managed to steal the tablet very easily due to him getting scared by the artifacts down in the attic that were trying to get a laugh out of him just from his timidness alone, when in Secret of the Tomb, he was at least mature enough to handle any situation he was put into and knew what to do when things went wrong, and he always gets embarrassed by nearly everything he does, such as the failed music exam and being insecure about his job as a night guard, which wasn't a character flaw that his original, younger counterpart had, and due to bad writing, it makes him the weakest character in the film. He is also quite jerky and not as kind as he used to be.
- Another example of a flanderized character is Kahmunrah, as he acts way more childish and silly than he did in Battle of the Smithsonian, and he is sadly treated like a major joke in the movie which is ironic since he's meant to be the main villain of the picture, yet the writers always treat him as a butt-monkey who gets scalded for no reason other than to make bad jokes about his personality and that's it.
- Even the Museum Artifacts (despite them all still being likable) are out of character since they scared off a random night guard only because they thought he wasn't a good fit even though it was his first day as a night guard and was only hired just recently, which makes them very immature and unable to accept change. There's also a new Exhibit called Joan of Arc who doesn't get a proper backstory and isn't that much interesting when compared to the other ones from past films.
- Several plot holes and it can't be decided whether it's a reboot or a sequel:
- How did Kahmunrah get unsealed from a box when in the second film, he was banished from existence?
- The fact that Larry is still a night guard despite him leaving his role and job as a night guard in Secret of the Tomb to become a teacher!
- Why is the tablet back at the American Museum of Natural History when it was now staying at the British Museum in London and was only going to come to the New York Museum occasionally?
- Where is Teddy's horse that serves as his companion at the New York museum?
- Kahmunrah refers to the king of Egypt as his daddy, when he is actually his step-father, which contradicts his speech in the second film to his new tropes that were intended to hunt down Larry and Amelia. Did he just forgot that speech?
- How does Theodore Roosevelt knows who Kahmunrah is?, despite staying in New York with Ahkmenrah and never meeting Kahmunrah at all in the entire film, and the Smithsonian only had a Gold Statue of Theodore Roosevelt who by the way, was unfamiliar with both Larry and Ameila Earhart, and Theodore was unaware what Larry did when he was in Washington. In fact, this film is the first time that he has encountered Kahmunrah and Kahmunrah just shrugs it off, making this a pretty questionable continuity issue.
- In fact, Larry nor the other exhibits that were there at the Smithsonian itself during the second movie, didn't even tell Theodore or Ahkmenrah anything about Kahmunrah, and yet Teddy already knows about him, and the film never explains to it's audience about who told him about Kahmunrah and the despicable actions he had done that night, which makes this plot hole even more obvious.
- The movie is filled to the brim with atrocious comedy and humor since most of it consists of generic slapstick and pop-culture references, which not only makes the movie dated, but also comes off as cringeworthy since while the live-action trilogy had these jokes, it made sense since they were traveling through a museum with different themes, where most of this movie is set in Ancient Egypt, and some of the jokes have mostly poor timing or become tiresome after awhile it has been used, and some gags from previous films are reused and have been downgraded drastically from what they used to be, such as the joke where Kahmunrah's speech is interrupted which wasn't as funny as it was in Battle of the Smithsonian, due to how annoying Kahmunrah is in this movie.
- The film also uses mean-spirited jokes to poke fun at Kahmunrah for having daddy issues, which get old very fast.
- The new voice cast is inferior to the old voice cast from the live-action trilogy, especially Joseph Kamal as Kahmunrah, who's performance as the titular villain is just awful since he sounds way too young and doesn't suit Kahmunrah at all, considering how many had praised Hank Azaria for his performance as the guy, since he gave the character tons of energy and made him sound imitating yet funny at the same time, whereas in this movie, he sounds way too campy and annoying and makes his performance come off as jarring and forced
- Even the voice acting for the new characters is awful, such as Seth having a terrible accent thanks to the misdirection of Akmel Saleh trying to do a campy voice for the character but it comes off as bad due to him sounding way too Transylvanian and overall cringy in general.
- Unlike all of the other actors, Frank Welker is the only actor to reprise his role as Rexy.
- The soundtrack is extremely generic since it has none of the charms that the previous films had and instead uses more cartoony and softer melodies, when compared to the live-action trilogy which was cinematic, orchestral, and Boombastic that fit the tone of the movie and the setting itself, where this movie doesn't have any of that, which is a shame since it was composed by John Paesano, who did the score for Daredevil and The Defenders which were acclaimed by many alike.
- Aside from a few references and nods here and there, this film has almost nothing to do with the live-action trilogy in terms of continuity and lore, as many aspects have been revamped or retooled to the point where it doesn't feel like a Night at the Museum sequel and instead feels more like a reboot of the series, as proven with the numerous plot holes and continuity errors mentioned below and above in the other pointers of this page. In fact, many have confused this entry for being a soft-reboot instead of a sequel like the previous two sequels, and it's also clear by the fact that it features characters from the third film with elements from the first and second film, since none of the original writers and staff from the live action trilogy came back for this film aside from Shawn Levy and it shows.
- The rules of the tablet are broken in this movie, since when Kahmunrah is holding the tablet, he can bring the Museum of Natural Arts to alive even though the tablet technically comes to a night on demand when you flip one of the metal pieces, which Kahmunrah doesn't even do at all, which contradicts the lore and worldbuilding of the previous films, since the tablet is meant to be magical, and the way how it's treated in this movie is like a random device despite being created beyond 2,000 years ago, making the entire film feel like a random fanfiction rather than an official sequel because of this random plot-hole.
- The action scenes aren't as exciting nor memorable as the live-action trilogy, since they often rely more on comedy and less on fun and quick timing since the previous films featured many more major battles between both Museum artifacts and some of the chase scenes helped bring the magic and whimsy of the worldbuilding to life such as in the first film where Larry is chasing Cecil to obtain the Tablet to stop the museum artifacts from dying and Larry getting fired. This movie on the other hand handles most of its action scenes with rushed pacing and nearly all of them have cartoony slapstick and unfunny gags littered throughout all of them, which ruins the anticipation and overall hype of said scenes.
- Some of the characters look nothing as they did in the live-action trilogy due to being animated and trying to translate the series into animation, such as Attila the Hun who has had a major redesign to the point where he bears zero resemblance to his original counterpart from the live-action movies and appears to be more bulky and muscular in comparison to his live-action counterpart, or Laaa who doesn't even resemble Ben Stiller anymore and instead looks like a generic caveman that's meant to be resembling Larry himself, which isn't the case anymore.
- Seth is a pretty weak secondary villain since he is only used as a sidekick for Kahmunrah and doesn't do anything in the film aside from distracting Nick and the Museum exhibits stopping Kahmunrah from unleashing his army from the underworld, or supplying a few jokes in the film, most of which aren't funny at all and come off as either cringe-inducing or just plain bad.
- Characters from past installments such as Ahkmenrah and Amelia Earhart are noticeably absent in the film, and only get mentioned a few times in this film, despite both characters being an important part of the franchise and being the most popular characters amongst fans, and since Kahmunrah appears as the main villain, it was a big missed opportunity to not have Ahkmenrah as one of the main characters since he and Kahmunrah are half-siblings, and it was mentioned in Battle of the Smithsonian that Kahmunrah was jealous of his little brother when he was made the king instead of him due to them being half-siblings through their mother's side and not sharing the same father who was a throne in Ancient Egypt at the time.
- Joan of Arc, while an okay character, didn't get a proper backstory or an actual reason why she became apart of the New York Museum, and the film never explains to the audience how she became friends with the other exhibits or why they know her and she knows them, making matters worse is that she never appeared in the live-action trilogy at all and was never mentioned once in any of the films, so her character feels like a random inclusion to the cast, and serves as a replacement for Ahkmenrah, who doesn't appear at all, making her rather pointless in general.
- Missed Opportunity: Nick has a crush on Mia, one of the students from his high-school, and se only appears during the beginning and end of the film and nowhere else, technically limiting her as a minor character, which makes her presence in the film pointless, since she could've joined Nick and exhibits to stop Kahmunrah from taking over the world, or Nick could've gotten her into the situation he dealt with when he and the exhibits were facing off against both Kahmunrah and Seth when they stole the tablet. Heck, she could've visited Nick during his job as a nightguard, but that doesn't happen, and instead is used as a plot device for Nick to have a love interest which gets abandoned immediately he becomes a nightguard, thus making her a pointless addition to the film.
- Another example is with Kahmunrah's step-father, King Shepseheret, whose only appearances are relegated to unfunny jokes about Kahmunrah not being the heir to the throne, which is just horrible usage of the character, and he only appears in paintings, pyramid sculptures and pictures that come to life with the tablet, which is the same problem that Battle of the Smithsonian with the plot-hole surrounding how Al Capone and his mafia came to life despite being literal cardboard cut-outs.
- In fact, he could've helped Nick and the exhibits to tell them where Kahmunrah and Seth went, but he never does that throughout the whole film and never interacts or meets up with the main gang at all, making his appearances relegate to nothing but lame jokes mocking Kahmunrah not being the heir to the throne.
- Another example is with Kahmunrah's step-father, King Shepseheret, whose only appearances are relegated to unfunny jokes about Kahmunrah not being the heir to the throne, which is just horrible usage of the character, and he only appears in paintings, pyramid sculptures and pictures that come to life with the tablet, which is the same problem that Battle of the Smithsonian with the plot-hole surrounding how Al Capone and his mafia came to life despite being literal cardboard cut-outs.
- Some elements of this film are rehashed from previous instalments, such as Kahmenrah's defeat, the aforementioned recycled jokes, the beginning scene where the new Nightguard being terrorised by the Museum exhibits being way too similar to the second act of the first film, and the adventurous tone from Secret of the Tomb with the whole gang going on an adventure together. It even features the typical dance party ending from the first and third films, and it's nowhere near as exciting nor memorable due to how short it is, and the weak soundtrack in general.
- The film lacks the imagination and creativity of the franchise's unique premise of Museum Artifacts coming to life, since the film uses 2D animation instead of using live-action (which is understand since filming technology has gotten a lot more expensive over the years, and trying to replicate the CGI of the live-action trilogy would likely have been very hard for Disney in general) like the original trilogy did, which is a massive downgrade since 2D isn't very well-suited for a film like this and the exhibits look like normal people in costumes instead of living exhibits brought to life by a magical tablet, and both Jedediah and Octavius look more like 2D animated Toy Story rejects rather than miniature exhibits, and the characters don't look any different when they're inanimate since they look like they're making a silly pose instead of being actually inanimate, and this is due to the abysmal animation from Atomic Cartoons.
- In fact, it's actually very hard to tell that the exhibits are even hand-made at all since they act and are animated the same way as the humans, and move like proper, where as in the live-action trilogy, the exhibits had limitations and in the first film, they're shown to still be alive when they're torn in half with Theodore getting run over by Cecil and still being alive since he was clearly a wack work figurine doll and was created to replicate Theodore Roosevelt, where as in this movie, most of the film doesn't do a good job at trying to portray the exhibits as being objects and instead decipts as regular humans (or toys in the case of Jedediah and Octavius) in terms of looks, which is proof why Night at the Museum works better in live action instead of animation.
- Weak direction from Matt Danner, who completely misunderstands the biology and lore behind the Night at the Museum franchise and retcons the events of the third film, and doesn't do a great job at directing an animated feature in general, due to his directing roles being related to TV Shows like the Legend of the Three Caballeros and the Muppet Babies reboot on Disney Junior, in fact, this is the first time he's directed a movie in general, and has had zero experience with the series overall, which explains the poor grasp of the source material that his film suffers from for being a Night at the Museum film.
- It also wastes his talent since he did an amazing job at directing the Legend of the Three Caballeros, so it's sad to see what he did with this movie.
- Overall, it is a downgrade from the live-action trilogy and is an example of a cash grab due to not featuring any of the staff who worked on the previous films aside from Shawn Levy, and only being made just to expand the library of Disney+, and Disney trying to cash in onto nostalgia since ever since they brought 20th Century Fox, considering that they done the same thing with Ice Age and Home Alone, and since there are no plans for a sequel or a TV Series, it sadly killed the series and left it on a sour note.
Good Qualities
- Some characters are still likeable and entertaining, and weren't flanderized unlike others from past films. This includes:
- Larry Daley, who is still a supportive and caring father to Nick, and while nowhere near as witty or hyperactive as his live-action counterpart, is still a voice of reason and rightly scalded the exhibits of scaring a new nightguard away.
- Laa is still a funny comic relief character and actually had no intention of scaring the new nightguard away unlike the other exhibits did.
- Nick's Love Interest, despite rarely being in the movie, seems very nice and kind, and does later become his girlfriend at the end of the film.
- Nick's Music Teacher is also a decent character and actually didn't mind his mediocre music lesson and was fine with it, sadly Nick is such an unlikable character in this movie that he ignored her advice and left the lesson for no reason at all.
- Some of the jokes can be pretty funny, such as Octavius trying to open a candy bar for him and his best friend Jedediah to eat and the scene where Laa accidentally puts his hand in a burned package of microwaved popcorn.
- It's the first entry of the Night at the Museum franchise to be entirely animated, which is amazing since the franchise could work amazingly within the realm of animation due to its theme of creative media and natural history, and some of the ideas brought forward do work in the film's favor, despite being extremely poorly-executed.
- The designs of most the characters also stay very faithful to how they are in the live-action films. Especially the titular Kahmurah.
- Some of the voice acting is good and spot-on, like Thomas Lennon, who is great as Teddy Roosevelt, since his impression of the late Robin Williams (Due to his death on August 11, 2014 from suicidal hanging) is amazing and shows that he is great doing the role of the iconic president of America.
- Speaking of which, Joshua Bassett was an excellent casting choice for Nick, and he does a splendid job voicing Nick, mainly due to having more lines than his dad.
- Some elements from the live-action trilogy are still intact, such as Jedediah and Octavius having a relationship, and the Museum exhibits treating each other like a family.
- Speaking of the exhibits, although they are slightly out of character here, they still do treat each other as a family and obviously care a lot about Nick and his mental health and wellbeing, despite how awful he is as a character and person in the film. They even help out each other in the worst of situations and still do care for one another whenever they're in danger or need help, making the relationship between all of them feel genuine and sweet, although not as much as the live-action trilogy sadly.
- Instead of reusing Larry, the film instead has Nick as the main character, which is a nice change of pace and a good idea since Larry had a whole trilogy and having to pass the role of main protagonist onto his son is very unique since Nick was aware of how things worked at the Museum, and seeing him as a nightguard is admittedly wholesome, even if the execution was bad though.
- It does remove some of the worst aspects of the live action trilogy, such as overuse of toilet gags and forced padding that made the scenes drag on for a bit too long, though this is only the expectation however.
- It's nice to see Erica again since she only appeared in the first film and was absent after that, which is a nice bit of continuity, something that is lacking in most of the film itself.
- Despite the movie being completely unnecessary, it is great to see another Night at the Museum film since 2014's Secret of the Tomb.
- It's also great to see Walt Disney Pictures finally return to making a real traditionally-animated feature film after 2011's Winnie The Pooh.
Reception
The movie received mixed to positive reviews from critics but mixed to negative feedback from fans for ignoring the continuity of the live-action trilogy, weak animation, and deciding to continue the series after the ending of Secret of the Tomb, which was meant to be the finale of the franchise due to Robin Williams passing away the same year it was released due to suicide. And it was also planned to be a trilogy in general, but praised the performances of Lennon, Levi, Bassett, Issaz and Kamal.
Marcus Haaksma, who is a fan of the franchise, was highly critical of this film and criticized it for its numerous continuity errors and several plot holes to past films in the series, and the fact that it contradicted the entire lore of the series and felt like it was nothing but a joke.
When the film was released, it wasn't very successful, as the film didn't get a lot of streams as Disney hoped since Disney+ contained more widely marketed shows and movies that audiences chose over Kahmunrah Rises Again, also adding to the fact that it had been eight years since Secret of the Tomb released and not many people were interested in the series anymore, thus resulting the film to fade into obscurity and the franchise being put on hold for an infinite amount of time due to the negative feedback from fans and low streaming numbers on Disney+.
Trivia
- It is the only film in the series to be fully animated in traditional 2D animation, whereas the previous films were filmed in live-action with numerous CGI special effects.
- Kahmunrah Rises Again is also the only film in the series where there is no original villain this time around, as it reuses the same villain from the second film despite being banished in said movie.
- Unlike the other films, it received a fresh score on Rotten Tomatoes within the 70s category, with a general of 71 despite being loathed by numerous fans of the franchises.
- It is the first 2D film released under the Walt Disney Pictures brand since Winnie the Pooh in 2011, which was 11 years before this film came out.
- 1492 Pictures, who produced the live-action trilogy, weren't involved with Kahmunrah Rises Again, which is the reason why it was panned by fans of the series.
Videos
Comments
Loading comments...