REVIEWS

Ken's Review: National Treasure: Book of Secrets - Poorly Done But Still Enjoyable

by
December 22, 2007

  • US Release Date: December 21, 2007
  • Genre: Action, Adventure
  • MPAA: Rated PG (for some violence and action)
  • Running Time: 124 minutes
  • Directed by: Jon Turteltaub
  • on IMDb
  •    6.5/10

Let's start off by stating exactly what National Treasure: Book of Secrets is: a fun family film. It is certainly not a complex film. It's a very simple story that has no depth so you don't have to spend much time thinking and can spend more time watching. To be honest, I have no problem with this. That doesn't mean it was all that great either, but for the audience it is trying to reach, made up of parents and their kids, it succeeds. If you're going by yourself, like the guy who was sleeping next to me, this one might not be for you.

National Treasure: Book of Secrets is the continuing story of Ben Gates (Nicolas Cage) trying to clear his family name from embarrassment. This time Ben's great grandfather, Thomas Gates, is accused of being the mastermind behind the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln. Mitch Wilkinson (Ed Harris) brings forth evidence that points to Thomas Gates' involvement in the assassination, a missing page of John Wilkes Booth's diary. Patrick Gates (Jon Voight) is disheartened by the news and so Ben sets off to find historical evidence that will prove the Gates family innocent.

Ben Gates and Abigail Chase are back on the historical hunt for even more long lost treasure in National Treasure: Book of Secrets.National Treasure: Book of Secrets Review

Doesn't that plot sound really familiar? It should, because it's just about the same film as the first National Treasure. Cage has to follow historical clues to find a treasure whose existence will clear their family name. I guess they assumed that since it worked for the first one they might as well try it again. The problem is that the story is much less clever and intriguing as the first film. In the first film they delved into history much more and were able to tie all the clues together in interesting ways. Knowing your history in the first film was the only way you would be able to find the treasure. In this second film, the historical explanations for clues are spit out quickly, and frankly just don't make sense. I have no idea how they got from Chinese puzzle desks to needing to kidnap the President of the United States. Plus, the "book of secrets", which is in the title of the film, barely has anything to do with the plot. This is unfortunate because it was the coolest concept of the movie.

They end up rushing from clue to clue so quickly that it's like the director doesn't want to give the audience time to catch all the holes in the story. If the holes aren't enough, they also deal with a struggling relationship between Ben Gates and Abigail Chase (Diane Kruger). Watching a separated couple argue with each other about what he said or she said while trying to escape from Buckingham Palace is just annoying and frustrating.

Other friends from the first film are brought back: sidekick Riley Poole (Justin Bartha) and FBI agent Sadusky (Harvey Keitel). Obviously, Bartha is there to provide some comic relief and for Cage to bounce clever one-liners off of, while Keitel is again on the pursuit of Cage to provide an extremely weak sense of urgency in finding the treasure.

In this sequel, Ben Gates goes as far as to get the President of the United States involved in his treasure hunt in National Treasure: Book of Secrets.National Treasure: Book of Secrets Review

The acting was only ok on the whole. Cage seemed to jump between his recently boring wooden side and his yelling, overacting-trying-to-be-passionate side. This is a shame as I know he can be a great actor from movies like Adaptation, Matchstick Men, and Lord of War. His last few performances in Ghost Rider, The Wicker Man, and Next were just plain bad. Jon Voight was also off his game in this. I can't really put my finger on it but he came across as very awkward. The only person I really liked (but wasn't in it much) was the President (Bruce Greenwood).

Obviously, I didn't think this movie was done very well. It's a film that consists of poor performances, plot holes, and regurgitated ideas from the first film. Did I still enjoy it? Yes, I did enjoy it, just not immensely. You have to take this one for what it is and what I said at the beginning, a fun family film. Other critics are going to pick it apart like I did and then tell everyone to skip it. What I will tell you is that if you're looking for a fun, wholesome film that you can take your family to this Christmas weekend, then National Treasure: Book of Secrets won't let you down. There is something for everyone whether you're looking for some laughter or a bit of suspense. Just because a movie might not be Oscar worthy doesn't mean that you still can't enjoy it. I wonder what the sleeping guy next to me thought.

Find more posts in Movie Reviews

Discover more around the web:

Loading...
  • avoidz
    I'm one of those who really quite liked the first National Treasure. The middling reviews so far for "Book of Secrets", however, are putting me off catching this one 😐
  • Taylor
    I cant wait!
  • Mark
    I would totally agree with this review, very fun and enjoyable to watch, however kind of ridiculous on how fast the story moves and how Cage's character knows all the answers to clues in a matter of seconds without second guessing. But if you liked the first one, don't hesitate to see this one, its the same fun ride.
  • bublu&bwyn
    hi viewers of this thingymajiggerydopatootybabdoobalagnoey... :) bublu: i made that impressive word you read. HA! i thought it was good. confusing to the point of nonunderstanding, but great! bwyn:good movie, bad plot. they never explained how finding a city of gold and kidnapping the president really helped prove thomas gates's innocence. once you got past that stuf, you really got into the movie. the thing that bothers me to the point of maddness is that mitch was.....lost. once they OBVIOUSLY drained the golden place, why in the world wouldnt they at least mourn? poor mitch. poor poor mitch. we honor you. :p bublu: i agree. POOOOOOOR MITCH! SAVE MITCH! SAVE MITCH! still, mitch died in the drain, which we didnt actually see get drained. we only saw the city but they should have retrieved him! bwyn's brother was also bothered that we dont know if mitch got pulled by the current and smushed by the door/rock stuff, or just drowned. disturbed little guy... I MOURN FOR MITCH! still, good movie... MMMMMMMIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTTTTTCCCCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHH! :(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:( we hope you will join us at mitch's honoring...
  • these trees cutting off or burnt, I'd surprise caught it exploring I confessed snapping still there. adventures. a pair
  • Rigo
    first one was better, second one dissapointing.

FEATURED POSTS

POPULAR COMMENTS

LAST YEAR'S TOP 10

Alex's Top 10 - 2016
1. La La Land
2. Paterson
3. Arrival
4. Captain Fantastic
5. 20th Cent. Women
6. Pete's Dragon
7. Jackie
8. Kubo & Two Strings
9. Everybody Wants
10. Wilderpeople
Click Here for Thoughts

Jeremy's Top 10 - 2016
1. Moonlight
2. The Handmaiden
3. High-Rise
4. Elle
5. Arrival
6. Kubo & Two Strings
7. 13th
8. Jackie
9. Toni Erdmann
10. The Witch
Click Here for Thoughts

FOLLOW US HERE

Subscribe to our feed or daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main profile on twitter:
For the news posts only, follow this acct:
Add our feed to your Feedly: follow us in feedly

FS.NET ON FACEBOOK