← Back to Reviews
in
National Treasure
WHY'D I WATCH IT?
It's reassessment time and this time we take a look at an old favorite of mine and see if it still deserves it's spot among my personal collection. This is gonna be a tough one since this is to determine whether it stays or leaves and I've been avoiding it for a while so let's find out.
National Treasure
Adventure / English / 2004
WHY'D I WATCH IT?
It's reassessment time and this time we take a look at an old favorite of mine and see if it still deserves it's spot among my personal collection. This is gonna be a tough one since this is to determine whether it stays or leaves and I've been avoiding it for a while so let's find out.
WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
First off, I gotta say I don't know who in their right minds can say they dislike National Treasure. It's a fun popcorn flik that while YES it takes creative liberties and YES at times pushes beyond that boundary between fiction and realism, it's pretty darn good.
It's also the biggest argument I have against Nicolas Cage haters. He's just a charismatic guy. And I thought he was great in Lord of War.
Anyway, National Treasure, A.K.A. That Absurd Movie With The Absurd Premise That Got An Absurd Sequel With An Even More Absurd Premise posits that throughout all of early United States history, various historical relics are actually secret clues towards an ungodly sum of treasure.
Common legal tender and Aquafina water bottles are some of the rarest of legendary relics.
It's dumb, but come on, isn't this an awesome "What If" scenario? I've always had a certain fondness for history and the march of time so this sort of thing fascinates me.
The movie is equal parts action, adventure, and even comedy with a totally unnecessary romance splashed in (go ahead and count that as a strike). It's well-paced, it's well-acted, it's writing is more than serviceable and I really do feel that it's realistic enough to buy, at least as any sort of Indiana Jones veteran.
Nicolas Cage, Justin Bartha, and Sean Bean are highlights in the movie as the first and second protagonists and main antagonist respectively, but Diane Kruger as the third protagonist disappoints. She's hardly a source of the movie's humor and her historical background seems to exist purely to validate Cage's character and serve as incredibly unsubtle Love Interest to him.
And yes they kiss (count that as a strike too).
The narrative developments are interesting and the character interplay is amusing, but if you haven't already gleaned already the movie overall just lacks a certain... luster. Something to really make it shine and stand out.
The soundtrack is arguably the strongest thing the movie has going for it so if nothing else I totally recommend you give it a listen, but the rest?
Eeeeehhhhhh, I gotta admit it's not all that exceptional. I mean, how did it get into my personal collection to begin with? Again, I'd say the premise and historical elements appeal to me even though I'm BY NO MEANS any sort of fan of United States history, or hell even the United States in general (*massive understatement*), but there is an appeal to the retcon.
Is it strong enough to warrant full marks from me?
As of today I've decided, no. I still enjoy the movie and I certainly recommend it, especially to fans of adventure fliks, but there are definitely one or two lulls in the movie's momentum where I get bored. The comedy is okay, but nothing special, and altogether the emotional stakes are preeetty low since that sense of hollowness kicks in when you realize there's very little in the way of subverting your expectations.
Of course no one's ever gonna to get shot, the guy is gonna get the girl, and the movie's gonna end with the comedy relief saying something humorous. Hardy har har.
By no means a bad movie, but lacking that essential something to make it a great one. One I'd really wanna watch again.
Final Verdict: [Pretty Good]
It's also the biggest argument I have against Nicolas Cage haters. He's just a charismatic guy. And I thought he was great in Lord of War.
Anyway, National Treasure, A.K.A. That Absurd Movie With The Absurd Premise That Got An Absurd Sequel With An Even More Absurd Premise posits that throughout all of early United States history, various historical relics are actually secret clues towards an ungodly sum of treasure.
Common legal tender and Aquafina water bottles are some of the rarest of legendary relics.
It's dumb, but come on, isn't this an awesome "What If" scenario? I've always had a certain fondness for history and the march of time so this sort of thing fascinates me.
The movie is equal parts action, adventure, and even comedy with a totally unnecessary romance splashed in (go ahead and count that as a strike). It's well-paced, it's well-acted, it's writing is more than serviceable and I really do feel that it's realistic enough to buy, at least as any sort of Indiana Jones veteran.
Nicolas Cage, Justin Bartha, and Sean Bean are highlights in the movie as the first and second protagonists and main antagonist respectively, but Diane Kruger as the third protagonist disappoints. She's hardly a source of the movie's humor and her historical background seems to exist purely to validate Cage's character and serve as incredibly unsubtle Love Interest to him.
And yes they kiss (count that as a strike too).
The narrative developments are interesting and the character interplay is amusing, but if you haven't already gleaned already the movie overall just lacks a certain... luster. Something to really make it shine and stand out.
The soundtrack is arguably the strongest thing the movie has going for it so if nothing else I totally recommend you give it a listen, but the rest?
Eeeeehhhhhh, I gotta admit it's not all that exceptional. I mean, how did it get into my personal collection to begin with? Again, I'd say the premise and historical elements appeal to me even though I'm BY NO MEANS any sort of fan of United States history, or hell even the United States in general (*massive understatement*), but there is an appeal to the retcon.
Is it strong enough to warrant full marks from me?
As of today I've decided, no. I still enjoy the movie and I certainly recommend it, especially to fans of adventure fliks, but there are definitely one or two lulls in the movie's momentum where I get bored. The comedy is okay, but nothing special, and altogether the emotional stakes are preeetty low since that sense of hollowness kicks in when you realize there's very little in the way of subverting your expectations.
Of course no one's ever gonna to get shot, the guy is gonna get the girl, and the movie's gonna end with the comedy relief saying something humorous. Hardy har har.
By no means a bad movie, but lacking that essential something to make it a great one. One I'd really wanna watch again.
Final Verdict: [Pretty Good]