User Reviews

*****Spoiler Ahead STOP Now*****

This was a classic case of sequel trying to live off the fervor of the original but had gone bad in horrible ways.

So if you want to view this pathetic excuse for a movie stop reading now, go see it, then finish this slash and burn review.

The movie speed was a dreadful snooze for many minutes at a time. I found myself actually more entertained looking around the theater to see if other people were doing the same.

The story started out plausible and there may even be a tiniest shred of actual history to support the artistic privileges the story writers embarked on. Let me think.. Lincolns assassination and a letter from the French to the Confederate Union, 3 statues of Liberty, 2 identical desks (Oval office and in the Queens of England's Office), and Mount Rushmore _IS_ located in South Dakota and not in South America.

I have a SERIOUS beef with this Disney Production on that last one. Everybody who watched this movie left there dumber than they entered. The gullible people out there probably think there is a lake on the top (or within walking distance of the top) of Mount Rushmore. Even WORSE people may actually believe that an ancient Mayan culture lived in South Dakota, built caverns, and then transported and lined them with tons of gold. Sure why not, it's a movie!

The story leaped from Dad's house, to the Gates' mansion, to Paris, to London, to University of Maryland, to the White House, to a Presidential retreat, to the Library of Congress, to Mount Rushmore, to a Lake *on* Mount Rushmore... all seemingly in a span of a day or two. I guess it is technically possible to zip around the world like that but jet lag would have surely taken its toll... yet everybody seemed fine. The one place they did not get even remotely close to was South America. Hello! The major story line leaned heavily on the Mayan civilization. WTF?

Seems the story writers (perhaps in response to the critics) wanted to liven up the snooze screen play so they injected a ridiculous car chase. Complete with self repairing cars, drifting sequences, bullets at point blank range that hit everything but the target, and my new favorite... using the red light camera to take a photo (then getting that photo back later) of Mayan writing at high speeds. Yeah... right.

Ed Harris should have stayed out of this one. His performance mechanics were fine but the story writers simply didn't know what to do with him. Seemed as if the original plot had him doing more but huge chunks of character development were left on the cutting room floor.. well, we can hope that. This might have been the best the writers could have mustered.

Abigale was useless. Oh, she had her 60 seconds of lines but that was about it. The story writers made a horribly obvious "fix" to the story using her. She just magically appeared in the right place (she was in the States earlier) and the right time without any coordination to help Benjamen sneak into the Queens office. Plausibility... Zero.

Riley was cute and lovable as before. The writers tried overly hard to capitalize on this comedic charm. What the heck... he's pretty handy with an IPod and a laptop.

Benjamen, as a positive role model for a _Disney_ film, should go to jail. Let's count the offenses: Speeding, reckless driving, theft, trespassing, destruction of property, conspiracy to kidnap, and kidnapping. Disney thinks this is all fine since he's the "hero" after all. Thanks Disney!

I have no idea why the Feds were in this film. They didn't do anything until the very end... but that was only after Benjamen called them.

The "book" was a pathetic story prop. They could have used a spoon or pile of play dough. If only the book had been used throughout the movie... Nope, that would take real story writing skills.

Nitpicks... 1) I doubt "duplicated" cell phones really allow you to receive a call in two locations at once. 2) The story title "Book of Secrets" relates to a book that had a total of 30 seconds relevance (I am being generous here) to the whole story. 3) Cliché, the bad guys hijack ridiculous vehicles in a high speed chase. In this case a truck loaded with kegs of beer. 4) Security in the Queens Office seems laughable. Just walk in, take what you want and walk out. 5) Riley can remotely unlock security gates and set off fire alarms from a restroom. Seems the Disney group has a low opinion of British security. 6) Riley also has super human strength. He picked up a block of gold and by the look of it should have been about 400lbs. 7) Cliché, "let's turn this spinner/lever thing and see what happens"... not once.. but 5 freaking times.... yawn. 8) Hey.. didn't they have one of those rolling doors in Indiana Jones? 9) Oh sh*t we're all going to drown... panic!!! Let's all go to the lowest point in this crisis and speed up the drownings. What's that? A glimpse of sunlight from above? How about treading water until things fill up so you can walk out. Nope can't do that. Got to have another unnecessary plot complication to wipe out the useless bad guy.

Summing up. The "National Treasure: Book of Secrets" will join the ranks of sequel movie blunders. Story writers never made clear why chasing after this lost city of gold would prove that Gate's great great grandfather was not a Confederate collaborator. WTF is up with this lake on Rushmore and this Mayan culture. Generally, the story was fragmented, slow, clichés everywhere, gross leaps from plausibility, and a disgustingly irresponsible display of story telling by Disney.

I had seen the previous National Treasure, and armed with that memory and the knowledge that this was a Disney movie, I watched its sequel without a great deal of expectations---predictable adventure drivel, Indiana Jones with more modern special effects, is what I expected. But this movie manages to disappoint even fairly modest expectations such as those.

In the end it really comes down to two problems: (1) It doesn't make any sense. (2) The acting is awful.

On (1), I really don't mean to nitpick on historical minutiae---hell, I'd be happy to suspend disbelief for two hours on stuff such as Lincoln's assassination, Mayan treasures, Mount Rushmore geography, and all that other nonsense. No problem there. But the point of a treasure hunt movie is the ability to follow the main character in his struggle, perhaps struggle with him, see him figure things out and perhaps guess with him. For this to work, the universe of the movie doesn't have to be consistent with the world we live in, but it has to be consistent with itself. But the universe of this movie is like a great big fairy tale, with the central character pulling white rabbits out of his sleeve whenever he needs them. Yes, the movie tries its hand at some drama, but it just doesn't work. Things go pretty smoothly for the most part---into the Queen's office, out of it again, oops, we are being chased, heck, let's take a photo, oh no camera, ah, there is a traffic camera, yep and by the way, can you just hack into the computer and download the pic, and on to the next event (same thing with the oval office, then kidnapping the president). While the hero thus McGyvers his way through an increasingly preposterous story, the whole thing just starts to feel stale, and you get the feeling that it might have been better if he had not stolen the Constitution in part 1, so the writers would not have to top this. The villain is lame and for the most part useless, not to speak of somewhat incoherent ("I am not going last, so I might as well go first"---say what?).

None of the story really makes the slightest bit of sense, including the motivation of the hero (to clear the name of his great-great-grandfather---that's why he risks his life, the life of friends and loved ones, not to speak of his own good name by kidnapping a president!). It's all just a steaming pile of nonsense aimed at people who really do not give a damn about story and stuff, but who just want to see a lot of movement/action, high-tech gobbledygook, explosions, and cheap patriotism.

However, as bad as the story was, (2), the bad acting was even worse. Everybody in this movie was disappointing, even a non-actor like Kruger. Her career should end with this movie, over, out, finito. She cannot do it, and it's not been for a lack of opportunity. If you had a consistent record of failure like hers in any regular job, you'd find yourself with a lot of spare time very soon. But even the real actors here just make you cringe---Greenwood, Harris, Mirren, Voight, they all deliver horrible performances that seem to betray their lack of passion and their paycheck mentality. We know they *can* act, we have seen it before, but they just don't in this movie. Keitel comes away without much harm---his part is so tiny, there just isn't a lot of opportunity to screw things up too badly.

Why oh why do they keep making this fluff? Because for some reason we attend it. We go there, drop our cash, and watch this nonsense. I am guilty as charged. But if you haven't seen it, you and your money can still make a difference. Watch a good movie. There are plenty out there.

This time around in "National Treasure: Book of Secrets" Benjamin Gates (Nicholas Cage) and his father Patrick (Jon Voight) exonerate the good name of Great Grandfather Gates for the heinous assassination coup of Abraham Lincoln. Ed Harris's Mitch Wilkinson makes this startling allegation along with possessing incriminating evidence of a long held family letter. Also in prescribed convoluted fashion clearing the Gates family name explicably leads to the search for the mythical City of Gold thought to be built by Native American Ancestors. Go figure. Clues to The City of Gold are uncovered from the desks of the Queen of England and the Oval Office itself. The key to The City of Gold and the Lincoln Conspiracy is concealed in the ubiquitous Book of Secrets—an urban legend of sorts. The Book of Secrets originated in the Hayes Administration, and consequently handed down to each succeeding President. Apparently, this Book documents all of our National Secrets running the gamut from Area 51 to the final Warren Commission Report. To obtain The Book of Secrets, Ben must kidnap the President of the United States. No problem.

Director Jon Turteltaub's "National Treasure: Book of Secrets" takes a while to throttle into overdrive, and it is the story set up that is most captivating. "Book of Secrets" has one of the most complex writing credits involving The Wibberleys among at least 4 other writers. This kluge of writers wildly veers in story coherence; however, they context some of the most amazing facts from American history. Or at least I think they do. Then again this is an entertaining action movie, so pointing out this failing is rather pointless.

Personally the highlight of the movie was not the chase car scenes or the deadly balancing stone platform, rather the conversation between Gates and the awesome Bruce Greenwood as the President in the hidden tunnels of Mount Vernon. Cage and Greenwood are compelling and smart in their discussion of The Book of Secrets. And as my bud Peter pointed out, there is perhaps a clue leading to the movie's sequel. The rest of "Book of Secrets" is cookie cutter action albeit excellently executed. The acting is impeccable. Joining Oscar winners Cage and Voight is Helen Mirren as Professor Emily Appleton, who is Ben's mother. The scenes with Voight and Mirren are classic and amazing.

Returning in "Book of Secrets" are Diane Kruger as Abigail Chase and Justin Bartha as Riley Poole. Abigail (Chase) and Ben apparently did not live happily ever after since "National Treasure". We learn that Abigail has asked Ben to move out of their estate. Riley suffers an income tax debacle since obtaining his share of the last treasure. He has written a book of his exploits, but still remains in the shadow of big Ben. However, all band together to clear the Gates family name and determine the location of the mysterious City of Gold. Cage, Voight, Kruger, and Bartha are good here, but do not lend any insight or depth to their characters. Again, this may not have been a priority for this movie. Cage has the right balance of smart ass and hero that works. He does so with ease and humor. Jon Voight and Helen Mirren nearly steal the movie.

"National Treasure: Book of Secrets" will not win any award. However, it is a wild ride, very entertaining, and visually stunning. Yes, it is needlessly convoluted. Just enjoy the ride.

When it comes to unnecessary sequels. This film directed by Jon Turtetaub & produced by Jerry Bruckheimer takes the prize. It didn't really need to be made. Everybody in the original film, 2004's 'National Treasure' truly did lived happy ever after. At least, that was the climax of that Disney movie made it seems. However, I guess, that wasn't the case, as this sequel; has the crew of renowned treasure hunter Benjamin Gates (Nicolas Cage) partake, yet another adventure. This time, in order to erase, Gate's family's ties of being a con-conspirator in President Lincoln's assassination. Without spoiling the movie, too much, while, the action sequences were compelling. The conflict & drive, for those scenes seemed a little forced. Look, I can understand, some people ostracizing Ben if one of his immediate family members done something wrong, somewhat recently; but judging his character, over something, his ancestors did over 100 years ago, is really stretching it. It's like hating an innocent modern day American, because his or her family, once own slaves in the 19th century. They have no control on who, they would be related to. Even if, Gate's forefather was indeed one of the con-conspirators, I really doubt, most Americans would bat an eye to continue to hold a social stigma, against the family. If some, of them, did, at least, they would be somewhat understandable & sympatric; as there are plenty of examples of living descendants of notorious figures from the past, just trying to live life as patriotic Americans. One such example is, Edwin Booth, the real-life brother of assassin, John Wilkes Booth. He just continued to do his job, becoming one of the most famous Shakespearean actor of the 19th century, following Lincoln's assassination. He was so beloved by the public, he even befriended, Lincoln's son, Robert at a very early age. Likewise, most people would see, past tragic events, like that, as 'water under the bridge'. Surely, it wouldn't make any current generation of Gates seem anymore un-American. Nevertheless, I do understand, why Ben was driven by a fierce desire to clear their family name of infamy, even if it's highly unhealthy exaggerating behavior. The value of good reputation is characterized as something worth preserving, even going to great lengths to protect and honor. However, it's not something, worth risking, life & limb for, if the grumbles are from a bygone era. I find it, highly ridiculousness, that Gates, is willing to break multiply federal and international laws, just to prove long dead 19th century people wrong. Honestly, besides one out of place kid, it seems like the majority of people in the film, don't really care, that he was related to a co-conspirator, if they continue to invite him, into White House, Buckingham Palace, and other famous social events. People still acclaim him for his treasure hunting skills than anything else, during the course of this movie. His name isn't really cover in mud, as part of the film, make it out to be. Because of that, I find his action to be jarring. Like really, what was his goal, anyways? How does finding a long lost city of gold absolve his forbearer from the crimes, he was accuse of? The movie made the quest seem a bit too vague, but if it's my guess, it seem like the crew bribe the government with enough gold, that, the federals look away or cover up theirs past crimes. If anything, Gates & his crew seem more like the villain than the heroes. Their willingness to lie, manipulate, assume false identities and trespass is bit troublesome. Nevertheless, moviegoers will surely, just be tempted to dismiss their actions completely because they were made in the service of an honorable end-and because the Gates family didn't intend to mean no harm. Still, I found their good nature request to be somewhat morally flawed. After all, it could had easily been resolved, in more quiet way, but I guess, we wouldn't have a movie if it was that simple. Regardless of that, the crew is mostly still mostly likeable. I just didn't like the subplot romantic argumentum elements that came with most of them. I found it, highly annoying. Still, most of the performers did fine work here, even new comers, like Ed Harris as the antagonist, Mitch Wilkinson. The villain was a huge improvement from the first movie. At least, Mitch was murky & creepy. Still, his heel to face turn in the climax was really jarring. The only flaw in what was otherwise, a compelling ending. Along with that, the music by composer, Trevor Rabin really adds to the suspense of that sequence. I love how the puzzles & heist elements wasn't as predictable. You really didn't know the twist & turns, the clues would led. It made the film a little more fun. This movie prove that smart, entertaining live action, adventure PG films, are still possible, even without a lot of harsh language, violence, & sex appeal to prompt people to take an interest in history. Still, it is necessary to suspend your disbelief at times, as nobody should take this movie as a legit American History lecture. After all, it is an action adventure film that claims that France & Britain knew about a Mesoamerican City of Gold in South Dakota for years & still gave up, those lands to the United States for cheap in 1803 with the Louisiana Purchase. Despite the imperfections with real-life history & its many plot-holes. I do have to say, the movie was compelling enough to look past its flaws. It really got you, into the sense of treasure hunting. Hopefully, a third installment will one day, come to fruition. Overall: With 4th of July celebrations, just around the corner, as of this writing. This is one sequel worth watching on Independence Day. It was a blast.

National Treasure: Book of Secrets will always be known as the film that prevented Helen Mirren from meeting Queen Elizabeth after the success of The Queen. I mean really, I would have made the same choice, because this film is truly high art. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the first installment for its poor-man's Indiana Jones feel mixed with glossy effects and convoluted plot lines (Bruckheimerisms as I like to call them) and for the most part had fun with this one. Well that is until the discovery was complete, then the film just dragged on and on for what seemed like hours. This is a Disney film people, you know they will find the treasure and all will be well with the world. Therefore, all the intrigue and the discoveries to find the location of their desire, complete with massively annoying cross cuts between four different locales and ten different characters every five minutes, was totally subverted by the ending's adventure nonsense with no stakes because we all know how it would turn out. There were two things going for it though, I became real nostalgic for "Legends of the Hidden Temple" and found out that yes, Lyle Lovett is still alive.

I give director Jon Turteltaub and screenwriters The Wibberleys credit for coming up with some real interesting set pieces and situations for our adventurers to partake in. Weaving the Lincoln assassination with ancient Native American lore and United States historical mythology and rumor is quite a feat and it is successfully handled in my opinion. What goes wrong here is the whole mentality that sequels need to be bigger and better. The first film achieved a sort of balance with its amount of characters, but this one just goes too far. We have to now work in the President and our hero's mother, who just happens to be one of a handful of people that can decipher the language needed to complete their quest, not to mention throwing Harvey Keitel a bone by giving him five minutes of screen time just so we have continuity with a friendship from the previous story. Honestly, while I enjoyed National Treasure, I never asked for a part two, and I don't think too many people did. Unfortunately, however, it appears we will probably be seeing a part three in the future if the setup here means anything.

The movie is if nothing else a good time. I admit to being a big Nicolas Cage fan and enjoy his over-the-top shenanigans—they are in full force here and I loved the scene at Buckingham Palace that showcased them. Also, Justin Bartha is priceless as the hapless and under-appreciated partner. His expressions and one-liners really add a much-needed dimension here. The rest of the cast is adequate if very underused. There are a lot of familiar faces with thankless roles and many famous ones with little to do. Diane Kruger looks gorgeous as usual, but her role is more female in distress than really adding anything necessary to finding the treasure, unless you count watering rocks.

So, in the end, this film is going to be huge regardless of quality. If you liked the first, you will have a good time. It is not an Oscar winner or any Nobel Prize winning commentary, it's just a good old-fashioned mindless romp. As far as action/adventure goes, you could do much worse. With some great laughs and some really fascinating connections from history, you may actually learn something on the journey. Never preaching its intelligence, you are allowed to glean nuggets of truth at the same time as the characters that are still in the dark do. Fun is fun, and as far as that goes this one succeeds, despite the fact that it doesn't in any other cinematic category.

A sequel is something that is never needed, unless continuing a specific story arc, so a sequel to 2004's National Treasure is without a doubt an unnecessary venture. Basically, this film is a take it or leave it kind of entertainment, though if you enjoyed the original, this one won't disappoint.

Picking up a few years after the events of National Treasure, we find Ben Gates (Nicholas Cage) living with his father (Jon Voight) after being booted out of his own house by girlfriend Abigail Chase (Diane Kruger). Riley Poole (Justin Bartha) has written a book that no-one wants to read and has had his beloved Ferrari towed. Life is hard for our characters, but you can be sure that a new treasure hunt will take place sometime in the next two hours to give them a new equilibrium to look forward to.

From the rousing opening scene depicting the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln, we are thrown into a non-stop whirlwind of globe trotting and treasure seeking. We find out that a man named Wilkinson (Ed Harris) is in possession of a lost page from the diary of John Wilkes Booth which suggests Thomas Gates' involvement in the conspiracy. Thomas Gates is great, great grandfather to Benjamin Gates so naturally Gates will do anything to clear his family name.

There are quite a few familiar faces from the first film in this second outing, right down to Harvey Keitel and Jon Voight, and all seem to be having a great deal of fun with this enjoyable nonsense. Cage is at his crazy best, be it running from rival treasure hunters or staging a hilarious argument with his ex girlfriend in the middle of Buckingham Palace, he's unrestrained and is allowed to go wild which is exactly the kind of thing this movie needs. It saved Ghost Rider from being anything less than diverting, anyway. Justin Bartha's return as the wisecracking sidekick, still cracking wise, is either annoying or charming, depending which way you lean. Diane Kruger is still beautiful and has great timing, the only thing that really elevates her from her eye-candy position. Helen Mirren also makes an appearance here in a role that she didn't really need, but she looks like she's enjoying herself anyhow. She serves simply to squabble with Jon Voight as Cage squabbles with Kruger, which doesn't amount to anything more than a few extra comedic elements. Ed Harris plays a carbon copy of Sean Bean's role in the original, which in itself was a cardboard cutout bad guy role. It's not essential for the antagonist to be particularly formidable in these movies, sneering will do, but Harris' supposed ambiguity is a real weak point in the script. It's a waste considering Harris has experience in this area, what with The Rock and A History of Violence under his belt, but here he doesn't manage to be a particularly memorable or well drawn character.

It feels like the two films were made back to back. The energy is still the same, all the actors seem like they never took a break, right down to the musical score, shooting style and Cage's toupeé. If it ain't broke, don't fix. It's maybe not as tight as the first film, allowing a little flab to get in, mainly towards the middle and again during the finale, but it doesn't last very long and soon we're back in full flow again. The outcome of the clues is of course preposterous and on too large a scale to simply dismiss, the contrivance of the treasure resting place too familiar, but this at least doesn't diminish the overall fun of the flick.

Of the two treasure hunting movies to come off the back of Dan Brown's novel The Da Vinci Code, National Treasure was always the more fun, beating the other movie hands down, even though it was directed by Ron Howard and actually was The Da Vinci Code. This second instalment doesn't want to do anything more than the same and, against all the odds, they churned out a crowd pleasing thrill ride of pure entertainment. It's a tad smarter, funnier and more endearing than the average blockbuster (especially when looking back at 2007) and the action, while by the numbers, doesn't disappoint either. For a fun night out, it's a sure thing, if almost instantly forgettable. If this movie does well, a loose end in the plot promises yet another sequel. Do we need it? No. Will it be as good? Probably not. Will we see it? Quite possibly, because we never learn.

The Book of Secrets is entertaining more for the Indiana Jones-style booby traps and the amusing bickering between Gates' estranged parents than the lackluster plot. The concept of a villain is seriously underdone. The bad guys are willing to shoot people and wreak havoc on the streets of London to get what they want, but towards the end the villain agrees to self-sacrifice as long as he "gets credit" for the find? Please. Any personality so motivated by greed would have forced more of a confrontation than we see here - a Lara Croft or James Bond sort of duel is in order.

I realize that conspiracy theories are the "in" plot line lately, and they do provide an intriguing element beyond any special effects or the supernatural. But the Book of Secrets poses other believability problems than just whether the viewer accepts the idea of secret inscriptions on the Statue of Liberty or coded writings in a Civil War diary. For example, the Secret Service would not allow an uninvited Gates walking past them at the dinner party just because he's dressed like a waiter - Secret Service screen everybody in attendance at such events. Similarly, sneaking into Buckingham Palace was amusing, but it would not be as simple as depicted. Hidden tablets in desks locked by ancient tumblers and a book concealed by the presidents in the Library of Congress were interesting, but far-fetched. Top it all of with a few Indiana Jones-style devices such as rock carvings that one turns to open secret doors and a lever that one pulls to reveal a tunnel in a boulder, and we have the makings of a completely preposterous story. While entertaining, I never forgot I was watching a movie.

Judging by the amount of websites devoted to them, everyone seems to enjoy a good conspiracy theory (well, everyone except for the 'people in charge'); Disney's National Treasure movies take this obsession with all things secret, throws in some Indiana Jones style action and some pretty preposterous hypothesizing, and delivers a healthy dose of lightweight entertainment that it's difficult not to enjoy, no matter how silly it all gets.

A star studded cast joins Nicholas Cage as he once again takes the role of treasure hunter Ben Gates, who this time must unravel all manner of hidden clues in order to discover the location of a lost city of gold and clear his family's name (which has been besmirched by rival treasure seeker Mitch Wilkinson, who links the Gates with the plot to assassinate Abraham Lincoln).

This half-baked plot merely serves as an excuse for more far-fetched problem-solving and adrenaline-packed adventure, the likes of which made the first National Treasure so much fun: Ben and pals break into Buckingham Palace and the Oval Office, kidnap the President of the USA, career through the streets of London in a car whilst being chased by the bad guys, and ultimately uncover a lost temple laden with booby traps.

Jon Turteltaub directs with gusto, ensuring that the story whips along from scene to scene at breakneck speed, and the excellent cast all do a great job, obviously having loads of fun in the process.

My only minor gripe is that the character of Mitch Wilkinson (Ed Harris) is poorly defined: at first he is shown to be a ruthless villain, attempting to shoot the heroes and endanger the innocent; by the end of the film, he is portrayed as a misunderstood adventurer who is willing to lay down his life to save his rivals. Still, with so much else to enjoy, I'm willing to be a tad forgiving (at least no fridges get nuked in this film!!!).

I'm generally a fan of these kinds of topics that include history and some puzzle riddles. I enjoyed reading Da Vinci Code and a variety of Clive Cussler/James Rollins books. I also saw the first National Treasure and though I wasn't thrilled, it wasn't a horrible movie.

*SPOILER WARNING* Then Disney had to do a sequel.

The good: As pretty much everyone has mentioned, the best part was the Goofy cartoon. Truth be told, the concept of hunting for Cibola was a decent concept too. I'll also give Helen Mirren some props for being a bit of an interesting character.

The bad: The problems I had with the first National Treasure are even more prevalent in this one. Here you have a father (Voight), son (Cage), and a museum curator (Kruger) all for protecting history and yet have a habit of destroying historical artifacts. Fold up the Declaration of Independence? Sure. Throw an example of rare Native American hieroglyphs into the river? Yep, you bet.

Of course, before tossing the hieroglyphs, it took a 5+ minute car chase where _nothing_ happens except repeated shots of a certain automobile maker's logo being pictured on every single turn and captured by the traffic camera.

Also, it makes me feel safe knowing that the Queen's study, the Oval Office and the Library of Congress are so easy to break into. And if I ever get the chance to kidnap the president, it's nice to know he's the kind of guy who will allow me unescorted and unrestricted access to see the nation's secrets. Yep, that "Book of Secrets", the title of the movie, takes up as much screen (and plot time) as the opening credits... and much less than the car chase. But it provides a convenient segue to a sequel around page 47 of the book of secrets. Maybe it was the plot summary? So now, off to Mt. Rushmore which was built to obscure some landmarks (which weren't hinted at in any of the clues) on a map (which also wasn't in any of the clues, nor found)... OK, so our intrepid adventurers are in the middle of the Black Hills, though it's not quite clear whether they're actually on top of Mt. Rushmore or not. Let's assume they are on Mt. Rushmore, narrowing the search area from around 600 sq miles (the area of the Black Hills) to Mt. Rushmore which is a few square miles. So, they become enlightened when they realize water turns rocks darker... (not to mention clothes, and pretty much everything else) Lo and behold, they happen to find the exact spot. Some puzzle solving, huh? They're now on their way to Cibola. (That's assuming, of course, that no one had read a 6th grade history textbook about how Cibola wasn't that far north).

Then, after some funky physics on a huge stone platform built inside a carved-out mountain by Stone Age tech Native Americans, a bit of flooding, one of our "defenders of history" rips up a 5 ft by 5 ft gold brick out of the ground _with_one_hand_ and tosses it in his backpack.

Seriously, this movie made Sahara look plausible (even if you hadn't read the book).

Enough about the plot... as far as acting goes, I remember a time when Nicholas Cage was the future of acting. I just don't see how a guy can go from 8mm or Lord of War, to movies like this and Ghost Rider. You could almost hear the drum roll before and after Justin Bartha delivered one of his zillion one-liners, but it was pretty silent. Kruger's character behaves exactly opposite of how an educated lady who has an ex-boyfriend break into her house should... then again, considering how roughly she treated the Declaration of Independence in the first movie, I shouldn't be surprised about her make-out session on the floor of the Oval Office. The one I feel worst for is Ed Harris, whose character had multiple personalities and all of them were bland. It was almost like the writers were trying so hard not to use a villain similar to the first National Treasure... but then they'd occasionally realize they needed a villain to keep the plot moving. Ed Harris should know better than to take these kinds of roles... maybe that's why he dropped his accent by the end of the movie.

If you made it this far, perhaps you think I obsessed too much about the plot holes, the blatant disrespect of historical artifacts. That should be a sign that the movie did not catch my attention. Hey, the movie "300" isn't historically accurate, but not only was it entertaining, it also didn't try to pass itself off as legit with monsters and golden-skinned Persian emperors.

The scary thing about a movie like National Treasure 2 is that people will watch it and think that's how historians, archaeologists and even private treasure hunters act. They'll probably spout off the same cliché one-liners too.

This movie was pathetic. I'm glad I only used my Christmas gift cards to see it and not my own money. Let me set the stage for you: The theater was pretty packed for a New Year's day 8:00 p.m. showing. The audience was in a good mood to start. I could feel the energy with the laughter coming from the Goofy cartoon that preceded this dreck of a film. The group synergy was great and it lasted until about half-way through the film. Once we all realized what a complete waste of time and money this movie was, we immediately stopped laughing at Justin Bartha's quips and started laughing at Diane Kruger's acting... which was far more humorous. Seriously, the only thing she was good for was that scene in the oval office where she was wearing that skimpy little dress. The movie was full of lousy punch-lines delivered by an even lousier combined effort from some A-list actors. Based on the first National Treasure movie, I didn't expect this to be a masterpiece in cinematic eloquence, but I did expect the likes of Voight, Mirren, Keitel and Harris to give a little more than this. Harris' performance was particularly awful mainly because of the complexity of the way his character was written. First, he's a shrewd southern business man who wants nothing more than to find this city of gold. Then, he turns into somewhat of a hero and sacrifices himself. WTF?!? Then he says "All I wanted to do was find the city and help you to clear your name." That's ALL HE WANTED?!? Again, WTF?!? This coming from the same character who said no more than two scenes prior "Well, if I'm not going last then I might as well go first," when it came to a perilous situation. Uhhh, ookkaaayyyy. Mirren's performance wasn't all that bad. Her character was poorly introduced and her first scene when arguing with Voight's character was pretty hard to swallow. Keitel's performance was okay as well, but I think that is only because he didn't have enough time on screen for the writers to screw it up too. Honestly, the movie as a whole was not worth the time. It was so far fetched that it really just became incredibly unbelievable in every way. Government agencies infiltrated at the ease of entering a Wal-Mart, International government Web sites hacked like they were a link from Google. The Secret Service as inept as a group of security guards at a Foghat concert. This was just lame. Poorly written, poorly acted and a poor choice on my behalf. Should've known better.